Autonomy and loose coupling are not only an important characteristic for a software architecture

Autonomy in software design refers to the ability of a system or component to operate independently, making decisions and performing tasks without requiring other components or systems. Autonomy goes hand in hand with loose coupling, limiting the number of dependencies between components. These concepts are crucial for creating systems that are resilient, adaptable, and capable of handling complex tasks in dynamic environments.

But could we apply the same concepts outside software design? Let's find out...

Some observations

If I showed you the following component diagram; what would be some observations, you could make?

Here are some of mine:

Information is flowing up from components B, C and D to A.
Probably there is some centralized decision making where most of the power is residing in component A.
There is a high dependency on component A inside the system.

Although without extra details we can misinterpret this diagram, but the risk exists that the components in this system are neither autonomous nor decoupled. There could be a chance that a refactoring is needed to improve the efficiency and resiliency of this system.

Now what if I replace these components by people, what are now your observations?

I think the same observations still apply, although in a different context.

Remark: Last week I was in a meeting discussing a possible target operating model where (almost) exactly the diagram above was presented. A lot of operational meetings where suggested were the only goal of these meetings was to move information up so that the decision could be made at the highest level.

This is an example of a traditional hierarchical organization structure where information flows from the bottom to the top and authority only exists at the highest level. And as we learned from software design, this has a big impact; slow decision-making, innovation and responsiveness to change (no decoupling), lack of accountability and ownership (no autonomy).

What if we refactor our organization hierarchy?

What if we refactor our organization hierarchy and go to an organization where authority flows in the direction of where the information already is? An organization where we empower our employees, foster a sense of ownership and encourage innovation…

The result is an organization that can scale more effectively, adapt to changes, and empower teams to deliver outcomes without being slowed down by external constraints.

Time to refactor!

More information

Why Great Leaders Push Authority Down, Not Information Up | Dotneteers.net

Podman– Command execution failed with exit code 125

After updating WSL on one of the developer machines, Podman failed to work. When we took a look through Podman Desktop, we noticed that Podman had stopped running and returned the following error message: Error: Command execution failed with exit code 125 Here are the steps we tried to fix the issue: We started by running podman info to get some extra details on what could be wrong: >podman info OS: windows/amd64 provider: wsl version: 5.3.1 Cannot connect to Podman. Please verify your connection to the Linux system using `podman system connection list`, or try `podman machine init` and `podman machine start` to manage a new Linux VM Error: unable to connect to Podman socket: failed to connect: dial tcp 127.0.0.1:2655: connectex: No connection could be made because the target machine actively refused it. That makes sense as the podman VM was not running. Let’s check the VM: >podman machine list NAME ...

Cache stampede: when our cache turned against us

While investigating some performance issues, we ran into an ASP.NET Core API that cached a fairly expensive aggregation query for 60 seconds. Under normal load, that was fine: one request rebuilds the cache, everyone else reads from it. Under peak load, dozens of requests would arrive in that same expiry window, all see a cache miss, and all fire the same expensive query in parallel. The database didn't like that. That was the moment when our caching layer stopped helping and started hurting. A burst of requests comes in at the same time, all miss the cache, and all go hammer the database or the downstream API at once. That's a cache stampede . The cache was supposed to protect our backend, and for a few hundred milliseconds it did the opposite. Why this happens IMemoryCache.GetOrCreate (and its async sibling) looks like it protects you, but it doesn't add any locking on its own. Look at the naive version: public async Task<Report> GetReportAsync(string key) ...

A complex system designed from scratch never works

A few years ago, I worked as an architect on a big mainframe rewrite. I still count it as one of my failures. Not because the technology was wrong, but because I couldn't convince the management team to simplify the approach. Years later, the organization is still struggling to get the new system up and running. I left the project at the time, because I couldn't put my name behind an approach that would take very long and cost a lot of money without a working system to show for it along the way. Gall’s Law That memory keeps coming back to me, because it's a textbook case of Gall's Law playing out in real life. Gall's Law , from John Gall's Systemantics , states it plainly: A complex system that works is invariably found to have evolved from a simple system that worked. A complex system designed from scratch never works, and it cannot be patched to make it work. You have to start over with a simple system that works. What does that mean in practice,...

The art of simplicity

Search This Blog