Feature estimates are often blindly used for cost benefit analysis. This was no more apparent than when I once worked with a product manager named Bethany. She was responsible for what, in hindsight, was always a doomed social network for lovers of the North American Brown Bear. Bethany would routinely ask her developers to provide implementation costs for a long list of features. The developers would grumble and complain they need more detailed requirements before they can put together detailed estimates (because they had been burned in the past on being held to commitments based on changing scope). Bethany retorts that she just needs “T-shirt sizes”, which is code for wild ass guesses, so she can do cost benefit analysis. Logically, this makes sense. Like any savvy businesswoman, the product manager wants to get a return on her investment. You wouldn’t buy a piano without first knowing the price, right?

bonnycode

A cautionary tale about the pitfalls of using feature estimates for cost-benefit analysis without considering ongoing operational costs. Through a humorous story about a failed bear-lover social network, it illustrates how product managers and developers often misunderstand the true cost of features, leading to poor prioritization decisions and technical debt management. The key lesson is that implementation cost differs significantly from total cost of ownership, and both quick-and-dirty solutions and over-engineering can be appropriate depending on context and risk tolerance.

Cost benefit analysis for bear lovers