The "if it isn't broken, don't fix it" Mentality

Sometimes a simple but sub-optimal solution that gets the job done well enough and reliably is better than an optimized solution that includes downtime and requires extra maintenance. I don't think the person offering the advice to leave things alone is always the naïve one.

I think the position you put forward however is often a mask for fear. People don't like change, particularly when they don't understand what is going on already. It is a sunk-cost fallacy. They invested a bunch of effort in learning the old way, which they didn't fully understand, but apparently it worked, so the accepted it. Now a new way comes along, claiming to be better, but once again, they don't understand it fully, so they just see it as an attack on the way they had been doing stuff -- which in a lot of people's minds translates to an attack on them. When this happens they start justifying "It was fine the old way, I don't see why they had to change it.". Those with some foresight then start saying "if it ain't broken don't fix it" when a change is coming down the pipe. This causes people who can see the benefit of the change to write articles like the one we're commenting on.

There are good reasons why you sometimes really shouldn’t change working systems (you mentioned one), but then you shouldn’t use that phrase and leave it at that. Say something like “Changing the system in the proposed way at this time would be bad because of reasons A, B and C.” or something similar. Don’t take “If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it!” as a self-evident truth.

Too many people create poor first attempts and leave it at that (the example I used was a process which breaks once per month, indicating there is room for improvement that would save Fred time), claiming later "if it ain't broke". I think this is a recipe for disaster because it reflects an attitude that lacks a desire to improve.

However, there are times when it "ain't broken" and it is good enough, and in those situations I agree with other comments that you wouldn't want people wasting time looking to make micro-optimisations. Ultimately I am making the point that people need to have the right attitude toward improvement and quality overall.

Front-end and performance type things benefit more from continual improvement, and "If it ain't broke, don't fix it" isn't as useful.

Does it take some extra effort to reflect on a process and figure out ways to improve it? Of course it does, and that's ok. I take pride in my work, and I like to be surrounded by others that do too. I would rather have to put in that extra effort in an attempt to make something really great, than to go through life leaving a trail of mediocrity in my wake.

Can you cite one? This would be very counterintuitive if true.

Also, there was some stuff on here about basketball players who don't seem contribute anything but the team winning rate decreases when they aren't there.

That would imply either that they are contributing something or that their replacement is even worse. If they are contributing something, identifying what so it can be focused on and improved is of great value in a highly competitive arena. If the replacement is even worse, then a better replacement should be found.

So, sometimes the maxim is good when you can't pinpoint where your victory is coming from.

In cases like that, there is often great value in spending the time and thought to figure out. To Quote Sun Tzu, "If you do not know your enemies nor yourself, you will be imperiled in every single battle"