Business Operations – Tech Stack
about.gitlab.com
about.gitlab.com
If you've ever worked for a company 10-100X that size, you'll find this list quite small.
To be honest, I clicked on the comments of this post to check my thesis that HN users would be astonished and was immediately validated.
It's always amusing to me how people who only work in one area of the company (ie. engineers, designers, sales, etc.) think they are the only ones doing "real" work. Everybody else is doing bullshit and wasting money. Without fail, every single time, if you give rank-and-file the opportunity to express this, they will.
Very few people in larger companies understand how the sausage is actually made, how leads are generated for the sausages, how sausage deals are closed, and how the sausage customers are nurtured for continued sausage business.
Same here. I've spent my career hopping between functionally different areas - supply chain, IT, business operations, marketing, BI/Analytics, and a few hybrid/in-between roles.
As you said, every single time, each group tends to trivialize the contributions and efforts of the others.
They also tend to have very little awareness of their own unique privileges. When I'm on a business team, even if I'm doing technical work it takes an absurd amount of effort and approvals to even get local admin access to my computer, whereas when I'm on a technical team it gets rubber stamped and is usually part of the onboarding process. Same with infrastructure - if I need to set up a recurring process/script, it's pretty trivial finding/accessing infrastructure somewhere that I can plop that onto when I'm on a technical team. But god forbid I have the same need while working on a business team - you have to move mountains and requisitions to be able to accomplish the same thing.
There are privileges in the other direction, too. In particular, sales/marketing/account people expense an absurd amount of stuff in the daily happenings of their job, and can choose to do so with little fanfare. Whereas on the IT side, it can be near impossible to spend $10/month on something if there isn't a clear business unit to charge it back to and wasn't in the annual IT budget.
At the end of the day, every group tends to have different internal skillsets and organizational capabilities and restrictions. And all are working just as hard as the other to keep the sausage flowing, within the capacity of their abilities and role. The number of posts and comments on HN about devs struggling with marketing/selling their single person SaaS should be an indicator that you shouldn't trivialize any group's contributions before taking the time to fully understand them.
This is one of the (many) reasons it's good for techies to get out of their bubble. In many cases, knowing someone in another department makes it as easy as "hey, Susan, when you have time could you please..." and it's done tomorrow with zero paperwork.
I worked for a large corp for 17 years and I saw this a lot. After being there for a while I knew a lot of people. People would struggle to figure out how to get something done and my answer was usually something like, "come with me. I'll introduce you to Charlie in Technical Publications and he'll get it done for you."
A personal hunch of mine is that it's also one of the implicit strengths of technical people starting companies. Software engineering teaches you to develop mental frameworks around systems and integrations and abstractions. And once someone with that experience walks a mile on the business side of the house, they're able to develop organizational structures that maximizes the organizational effectiveness as a whole rather than the local maximums within each group that are traditionally found.
Although that's not always what happens, it's an outcome that's unique to such circumstances.
I work for a company the same size, and we have many more applications than this, with lots of overlapping and competing products.
Kudos to management at Github.
Your comment has been my learning in the last six months. Holy mother of god there's so many things that keep the company running.
If you’ve never worked in sales, you’d be surprised at how many different SaaS products and services can go into running a successful sales department.
Sales people tend to be more sticky to their preferred SaaS products than engineers. You may end up with a lot of duplicated functionality across sales tools just because the VP of sales has always used certain tools for certain operations and has no desire to change that.
Maybe sales get to choose their (SaaS) tools while engineers are forced into it by the sales department to a greater extent?
At my last gig Perforce was changed to Gitlab to "save money". Gitlab didn't work too well the legacy mess of 100s of scripts and 1000s of release branches so we got stuck with both. A really industry specific tool was deprecated by IT to save money with a cheaper replacement that did something else, that ofcourse didn't work out so we got stuck with both.
Etc.
Even with only a few dozen employees the inventory is confusingly-large.
Someone complained about a bill from IT and we told the vendor to suspend the account for 1 month... it took three days before that same person had to come to us and ask why it wasn't working.
I'm sure. It's made for some painful discussions that I've just given up trying to have, and now I just point back to all of the saved email chains when interrogated for answers by superiors.
We're talking in the tens of thousands of dollars for email signatures.
The execs think email signatures are obviously important because that's in front of their nose more often? Or why are they ok with paying a lot for that
It could very well be negligible lift, but if it stops a large sales team from having inconsistent, inaccurate, and off-brand signatures, automating and centralizing that could be worth it on its own merits.
Be cautious about being so quick to dismiss a tool just because it's expensive.
How much caution, expressed in dollar amounts is warranted? If you had the visibility into our accounting that I do, would it change your mind?
But if it’s more of a shallow, knee-jerk reaction like ”this much spent on EMAIL SIGNATURES!? This has to be a waste of money!”, then perhaps you’re wrong to jump to conclusions quite so fast. You haven’t really elaborated, so we don’t know which one it is.
Please elaborate as to why considering the return of the tool in question instead of just its cost is not relevant.
You mean Bizible, GA, AND every other SAAS marketing attribution tool under the sun
We don't use one (just have folks copy over the new signature to Outlook every couple weeks), but it means we have a highly manual process that is prone to error for non-technical users. It's definitely worth some money to get right.
This isn't some sort of idealistic view of the "way the world should be", it's just people doing stuff to optimize for their marketing & sales funnel, whether or not it annoys you or is a "waste of bytes"
I'm just explaining the world how it is, not necessarily how it should be.
"I want everyone's signature to look like mine"
It then costs $x/month so it gets approved. As a bonus they get link tracking etc.
This was probably submitted to Hacker News after someone saw my tweet https://mobile.twitter.com/sytses/status/1319325053217992704 which has some questions and answers in the replies.
John already linked to the architecture of GitLab the application in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24869339 in case you are interested in that.
Happy to answer any questions about either.
Some of these applications appear to span both.
Interesting, I thought "back office" was a super-set including both those (ie. CRM-y) tools and coded backend logic when a user makes a requests.
But to your point, there's some grey area here.
I'm a huge fan of GitLab. Their managed service in particular is worth every penny. The sales people I've interacted with were mediocre and left a bad taste in my mouth though. Sadly typical for enterprise sales. Luckily the product sells itself.
From CDN, transactional mail, eSignature and more.
I wonder why they don’t standardize in tools more.
For CDNs we switched from Fastly to Cloudflare because we needed support for SSH (port 22)
And for email sending I think you want multiple providers so you have a hot one (already know on the internet to send a large volume of mail in your name) in cause a provider has problems with delivery.
Could fairly easily collapse all of the following into your SFDC stack if you add their Marketing Cloud (fka ExactTarget) module:
MailChimp
MailGun
Mandrill
Marketo - basically a CRM like SFDC
Outreach.io
Sigstr - believe SFDC is building (or already has) similar functionality in their CRM
SurveyMonkey & Qualtrics - both survey tools that you could consolidate or potentially migrate to built in SFDC/MC survey tools
There are entire consulting practices - big ones! - built just around helping companies standardize applications.
The point I am trying to make is that all the tools for a business should interoperate and work with some degree of cross-programmability.
A list this long feels like it has broken past this concept.
It's not that gitlab does it get value from these but that there is more value in a programmable API level.
I think I mean that there should be a way to :
x = get_hr_people_from_hrsaas()
for p in x:
use_sales_saas.calculate_commission(p)
It's still a stretch but i feel there is something there beyond IFTTThe link to a BCP plan is 404 https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/business-ops/gitlab-busine...
You can see the BCP here: https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/business-ops/gitlab-busine...
Yesterday someone showed us the new tech stack page in a meeting. We're all proud because it replaces a bunch of spreadsheets where each department (finance, security, people) tried to maintain the same list of apps with a single yml file. I ask if anyone has a concern if I tweet it, everyone is OK with it since it is already public anyway.
That takes a value of transparency https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/values/#transparency which has us be public by default https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/values/#public-by-default even when it is hard https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/values/#transparency-is-on...
And it takes us reinforcing these values now in 17 different ways https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/values/#how-do-we-reinforc...
Mux serves billions of requests a month and supply one of the largest video APIs in the world.
That episode is at: https://runninginproduction.com/podcast/31-mux-is-an-api-bas...