Being proud of your work and truly loving what you do is definitely positive. However, getting too attached to your work can lead to negative effects, especially when the code in question is flawed.
As developers, we’ve all found ourselves in such scenarios. It might be that the project was a challenge or that we’ve invested a lot of time and effort into it. Even though we end up battling our own code, we still find it hard to let go. This phenomenon, known as the Sunk Cost Fallacy, is a common trap.
The concept of the Sunk Cost Fallacy originated in economics, describing the tendency to continue a venture after investing resources, despite potential negative outcomes, and has been applied across various fields, including software development. Remember, the time spent on a project is already spent, and it’s not coming back. However, we can still make the best of the situation by learning from our mistakes and moving forward.
Avoiding the Sunk Cost Fallacy starts with acknowledging its existence and understanding it’s a common mistake. The next step is self-honesty and the ability to critique your work. Taking a step back for an objective review of your progress can help you decide whether to continue your current path or explore other strategies.
Quite often, as programmers, we find ourselves learning on the job, and while we manage to get the job done, the code was built with a lot of trial and error. By the end of it, we have some working code, but we learned many lessons along the way that we never got to apply.
Getting an external review of your work can be incredibly useful. An outsider’s perspective might offer new insights and help you see things differently, leading to necessary adjustments and enhancements.
The final step is being ready to start afresh, and this is the hardest part. It can be tough to let go of projects we have poured our heart and soul into, but I promise, as you start rebuilding, the benefits of experience and lessons learned will make the process much smoother and more efficient, and the end result will be much better.
This doesn’t mean we should take an axe to every project at the first hint of trouble. Often, we can refine the design without going back to square one, and this possibility should always be thoroughly investigated, especially when the code in question is part of a larger system. But sometimes, when the project’s foundation is so flawed, the best course is to begin again because the cost of fixing and maintaining it is so much higher than the cost of starting over.
Striking a balance between the costs of rebuilding and the advantages of an improved project is tough. Sometimes, the effort involved in rebuilding is not worth the few benefits it might bring. Starting afresh might bring extra costs, like learning new technologies or making financial investments. Other factors, such as team morale and the time needed for reconstruction, also play a significant role. It’s essential to consider all these factors before deciding on the best outcome for the project.
Ultimately, the Sunk Cost Fallacy is a trap that can be avoided with self-awareness and a willingness to learn from our mistakes. And the earlier we can identify flawed systems and designs, the better we can address them and the less time we’ll waste on them.
