Seeing how Microsoft does things now, and how they did things in the past, I'm beginning to think the key to success with a proprietary model of development is to have someone at the top overseeing everything. Not just anyone though, this person has to be someone of a high caliber of expert knowledge, with demanding tastes and an exacting sense for detail. We'll call this person the charismatic leader.
But even that's not enough, because between that person and all the various projects handled by the company there has to be a very shallow layer of management. Make it more than one or two people deep, and everyone starts stepping on each others feet, but make it too shallow, and our charismatic leader gets overwhelmed and important details get overlooked.
And the reason you want it shallow is that it allows the charismatic leader to know his subordinates, to question them, to demand of them the utmost of their talent and skill, and to trust them to follow through with it all. That way, all the details get handled by competent people, and no detail goes overlooked.
I also think this is where Microsoft used to have it right, but then got it wrong. Meanwhile, Apple started to get it right again when they brought back Steve Jobs, and has been building momentum ever since. But not being an amazing engineer like his old partner Woz or real computer scientist like Bill, Steve Jobs has his weaknesses. After all, you can only get so much right with just good taste and a knowledge of industrial design.
Anyway, what does all this discussion of the tech industry have to do with anything or anyone here at the Compendium?
Well, to be honest, I think this subject provides a good number of parallels for fan project leaders to think about. Instead of looking for the best talent you can team up with, take a moment to ask yourself, "Can I be the charismatic leader? Do I have enough knowledge, taste, and sense of detail to know what I want, what will matter, and when someone's BSing me?"
And if the honest answer to that is no, then maybe you should assume the role of a modest assistant. Find someone whose skills or experience you want to match, or someone whose sense of taste you admire, and work with them for a while. Try to see their project through to the finish, and reflect on why it worked. Then try some small projects by yourself that provide a basic example of your raw ideas before you go on to recruit people for the big project.
That way, you get the practice and the experience you need to make your own big project come to fruition, and you'll have the charisma that only comes from having shared a bit of ones vision already.
After all, to this art form of logic and machinery, what is a manager but expertise and taste, with a dash of vision? Not a manager at all.
Rather, to make, to build, to create... we must instead be leaders, and that's the difference between success and failure.
What do you think the key to successful development is?
