Advice to Independent Programmers: Stay young, Stay Small, Go Dancing

With the massive popularity of "apps" (short for computer applications) these days, chances are many of us have benefitted from the work of independent computer programmers operating on a small scale (either alone or in small groups). Such work is in contrast to that of mega corporations like Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Apple, etc., that employ armies of computer programmers to create and sustain flagship products (i.e. Microsoft Office, iLife, etc.). While I do appreciate the work of these larger companies, and have benefitted considerably from their "apps," I am increasingly impressed by what a single programmer or small group of programmers are able to accomplish (i.e. YummySoup by Ken Humbard, or Instapaper by Marco Arment).

It is not that the apps of independent programmers are without their glitches or that they demonstrate a perfectly complete and beautifully functional product (as we all know, even major software programs like Word fall short in that respect). Instead, what impresses me is the tremendous responsiveness and candidness I have often observed amongst many independent, small scale, computer programmers. Their apps are living creations undergoing frequent updates as new problems are discovered and new features added. Often these programmers maintain blogs or release statements explaining new updates that display a candidness that is lacking in the bureaucratic officialdom of many (though, not all) larger tech companies.

I do not doubt that there are many considerate, thoughtful, and helpful people working on app development at the larger companies, but I increasingly believe that the size of those companies combined with the intricate layers of process and procedure that becomes mandated in those environments often dampens a certain ability to meet with the users of any given app in a refreshingly smart, useful, candid, agile, and caring manner.

More and more, I want to say to small scale, independent programmers: "Stay small, you are growing too fast, enjoy your youth. Or better yet, as Death Cab for Cutie extols on their recent album (Code and Keys), 'Stay young, go dancing.'"

Am I selfish in wanting independent programmers to maintain small-scale operations? Does my advice amount to a call to refuse substantial economic profit by growing larger?

At the heart of my reflection here is this thought, how do we measure meaningful and valuable growth? Does the economic bottom line indeed capture all of the relevant variables for a good product or a good organization, in which case growing in size and profit is a sign of success. Or does growth involve something more?

Is small in fact beautiful as E.F. Shumacher proclaimed? Or can small organizations with excellent products and services in fact be giants as Bo Burlingham argues?