This message was deleted.

That's a great article. I think the model is a useful thought exercise. As Peter says in the article, it probably lines up to the stage they were at (still very much weeding). It would change if you started earlier to stop things getting overgrown.

i do suspect there's some advantage before 100 engineers, but maybe not at 10 -- it's hard to know what to bother making better.

Yes, you're right about 10 being too soon. It's unlikely you'll be solving a "visible" problem at that stage, so you'll be inventing problems to solve. 100 is probably too late. I don't think we'll create a great number that works for everyone, though the "5 teams" rule of thumb has caught on.

that rule of thumb makes a lot of sense, +/- one -- have you seen it written up anywhere?

I am trying to work at it as well in an essay that starts maybe more qualitatively and then tries to add numbers to it around potential "friction" and inefficiencies... this is just a draft while I think through the buckets: https://platformproductmanager.com/how-to-identify-platform-opportunities/

I added it to my decision tree on Platform Engineering, but it has come up during most conference talks by smarter folks than me. @Luca Galante said "as soon as your organization grows past the 20-30 developers mark" in this post.

I interviewed Peter on my podcast recently. The “formula” he shares is awesome and I’ve seen a lot of others approach the problem similarly (including myself). Putting it into practice is tricky, though. I discuss several of the shortcomings of that model from my perspective, here: https://abinoda.com/devex-dollars

I agree it’s easier to grasp FTE savings. I wrote an article on TTM as having significant impact on company valuations if they meet certain conditions of the market.

@Timothy Fong I’d love to read your article if youve got a link!

@Abi Noda https://platformproductmanager.com/why-platform-product-managers-impact-valuations/

Love this -thank you for sharing!

Cool thanks @Marco Abis Do you relate? Or have thoughts?

The intro of this article has some good info why a team size of 4-6 People makes sense: https://www.forbes.com/sites/eriklarson/2017/03/23/3-best-practices-for-high-performance-decision-making-teams/?sh=4a66484af971 @Rebecca Murphey

here are some (drafty) words i wrote on the topic https://docs.google.com/document/d/14PwNNRlga7Q-U5IdSWYoj-E66qgAVGbKFYUPbzbEq2I/edit#