Just because systems get faster doesn't mean they get more productive

You know that I'm ambivalent about the use of AI. I use AI for "dumb" tasks like summarizing or analyzing documents, but also for more complex tasks like Vibe Coding (e.g. that's how Cylenivo was created - more on that in the linked article). At our company, we also keep discussing where there's potential for using AI - just like everyone else. But that's not what this article is about.

We are (still) experiencing an acceleration through the use of AI when we look at pure output. There are even companies that, completely incomprehensible to me, use consumed tokens as a goal or metric for evaluating devs - and it even has a name: Tokenmaxxing (Oh dear). That alone would be worth another article. In my estimation, this acceleration will continue for now.

What we see far too little of, however, is the measurement of the value of this output. Is your product, which is being developed at this increasing speed, also getting better at the same speed or with the same acceleration? I continue to doubt that.

I deliberately spoke of output above and not of Outcome. For me, outcome is strictly tied to value. What value have we added to the product through the change?

To answer this question, I like to turn to my Work-Feedback Loop. The fundamental thesis of the WFL and of agile work is: The product must prove itself in reality and respond to real feedback in a short time. In the Work-Feedback Loop, we have a cycle for this that puts it simply but concisely, as described here:

A system only learns reliably from reality if all four steps are actually coupled:

1. Work creates a real effect (not just internal activity),
2. that effect becomes visible as feedback (as a signal, not an opinion),
3. it leads to a decision (priorities/assumptions/resources change),
4. and that decision changes future work.

If AI now accelerates us on the work side and is meanwhile capable of doing so fairly error-free, then Feedback must be accelerated too. Specifically, feedback from reality. Only then do we have a closed loop. But I strongly doubt that the majority of product development/product management receives and/or can process this feedback at that speed.

If that's not the case, we end up in the "Actionism" quadrant of the Diagnosis Matrix. We invest without knowing whether the result actually creates value. A startup can do that, but not an insurance company or a bank. And if an insurance company does it anyway, we end up in Enshittification land, which all users famously love.

And that's where the myth of system acceleration through AI breaks down - the one that the Sams and Darios of this world preach to us.

I have a wonderful quote from ThePrimeagen from a Talk for you:

If the cost of a line of code has dramatically dropped, then the cost of the right line of code has dramatically increased.

I think that makes it clear that a system doesn't necessarily become more productive just because it becomes faster.

I would wish that all of us - especially in the agile bubble - talk more about the Feedback Loop again when we discuss AI adoption and how to deal with it.