One of the more interesting questions in technology is how to know when it’s time for it to change. David Habib writes today about a concept he calls Technology Vendor Stockholm Syndrome, which occurs when technologists have worked so long with a vendor that they develop what he calls an unhealthy partnership with them. I’d argue it goes even deeper: there’s such a thing as a Technology Stockholm Syndrome that can develop around any sort of technology, even in the absence of vendor advocates.
The most obvious and easy example to quote would be those who have accepted Steve Jobs as their personal savior: Mac users. I’m not talking about the iPod buyers who swoon over silouettes dancing to indie tunes, but the dyed-in-the-wool Macheads who keep arguing that their migration from 68000 to PowerPC was an “investment.” Yup, you know who I’m talking about.
Full Disclosure: I use a Mac Laptop and a Mac workstation. I also use a PC desktop and a PC laptop. And I like FreeBSD. And Linux. I can still call bullshit, right?
Yes, there are obviously great things about that platform. But even things I’d see as serious drawbacks (low-single-digit market share means limited commercial software) get spun as a positive (low-single-digit market share means limited malware). They tolerate wildly out of spec pricing (examine the cost of a Mac Pro, the desktop, Scandalous!) as justified due to good design cues. And they put up a hue and cry if anyone doubts the superiority of their technology. They’d seem just like Linux users, except some people listen to them.
Within AOL (or any large company which builds its own software), we get the same sort of syndrome. It goes like this: we have a technology problem, we build a technology solution, others have the same problem, an industry standard to solve that problem emerges, and we’re left with our highly prioprietary fix. There is then tremendous resistance to giving up our known, loved, and trusted solution for what the rest of the crowd is doing. Either a wrenching change happens, or we remain permanently out of step with the rest of the world. It isn’t that the solution itself is necessarily better, but having lived with it over our heads for so long, we’ve begun to emphathize with that solution.
So, what’s the solution here? Recognize that there’s some value in familiarity, but also that familiarity should also breed some contempt. Continually re-evaluate key decisions to make certain they’re still appropriate. Challenge technology creators, be they vendors, internals, or “the street” to prove their value against the competition. And, remember always that going your own way doesn’t make you a pioneer so much as it makes you a loner. Don’t be the last angry user of, say, NeXT — the final phase of this syndrome is the one where you become a joke.
Very interesting take Jacob. I’ve seen quite a bit of this here at AOL and elsewhere where individuals and even groups get too attached to a particular piece of software and that attachment leads to unhealthy or poor decision making. Now I have a name for it!