Software teams often reach for Kubernetes or similar prepackaged answers as default solutions to complex problems. But Kubernetes isn’t a strategy—it’s a tool. Using it prematurely can bury your team in unnecessary complexity and unwanted consequences. These ‘default’ answers reflect a deeper issue: we don’t understand the problem we're solving.

Through real-world examples, we’ll discuss how to think critically about the way decisions are being made in your company. We’ll introduce concepts like participation theater—when people perform the rituals of decision-making without making real decisions—alongside problem restatement as a tool to uncover the real challenge at hand. We’ll also examine different types of decisions (reactive vs. proactive, reversible vs. irreversible) and why recognizing them early changes how you should approach them.

This talk is a call to slow down to speed up your decision-making. Whether you're an engineer, architect, or tech lead, this session will challenge you to pause before reaching for Kubernetes (or other technologies) and instead ask: what problem am I really trying to solve?

About Gien

Gien Verschatse is an experienced consultant and software engineer that specialises in domain modelling and software architecture. She has experience in many domains such as the biotech industry, where she

specialised in DNA building. She's fluent in both object-oriented and functional programming, mostly in .NET. As a Domain-Driven Design practitioner, she always looks to bridge the gaps between experts, users, and engineers.Gien is studying Computer Science at the OU in the Netherlands. As a side interest, she's researching the science of decision-making strategies, to help teams improve how they make technical and organisational decisions. She shares her knowledge by speaking at international conferences.And when she is not doing all that, you'll find her on the sofa, reading a book and sipping coffee.

When it comes to giving software teams the autonomy to make their own decisions, trust can be a delicate thing. This is particularly true when those decisions can have a wider impact on other teams and the overall system. If organizations are shifting towards decentralized decision-making, how do they replace the safety net of authority with trust through practices that put accountability closer to where the work happens?

In this session, we'll explore the paradox between centralized and decentralized decision-making. We'll discuss how a centralized approach aims to prevent mistakes but can also block teams from developing business-centric solutions, while a decentralized approach can lead to more sustainable decisions and empowered teams.

This will be an interactive, 1-2-all session. Andrea and Kenny will each present for ten minutes on their practices and experiences, followed by a ten-minute dialogue. The session will then open up to everyone for a broader conversation. We'll use a Miro board for sense-making exercises to help us model and explore these ideas together.

In this talk, we’ll explore quality as an emergent property of our teams, tools, and processes—not just something we test at the end. We’ll look at challenges like speed to market and enshittification(1), and how they impact our approach to quality.

We’ll introduce practical ways to think about quality through attributes like testability, observability, and recoverability. Most importantly, we’ll explore why a quality strategy—not just a testing strategy—is key to building better products.

(1) “Enshittification is a pattern in which two-sided online products and services decline in quality over time” by Cory Doctorow source

I’m an electronic engineer by trade, but software testing found me while I was working on Layer 4 protocols—and I’ve been hooked ever since. In the past, I taught software testing as an adjunct professor at UTS. These days, I work in engineering leadership, consult with teams on quality I bring a systems thinking lens to building quality in products, shaped by years working across startups, enterprises, and tech companies. I also wrote The Quality Coach’s Handbook, which you can find on Amazon or Leanpub.

"I would have killed that if it was just me, 100%,” said Spotify founder and CEO Daniel Ek about Discover Weekly, a feature that would become one of Spotify’s most loved product features, almost a brand in itself.

Designers and senior engineers were equally skeptical, but the team was still able to ship the feature.

In this talk, you’ll learn how Spotify’s organisational culture of Agile management and autonomous teams enables innovation, using the Discover Weekly feature as an example.

Joakim Sundén is a founding partner of Better Product Work,

where he helps visionary leaders challenge the conventional way of

building products. From 2011 to 2017, he worked as a Senior Agile Coach

at Spotify, where he was part of a team collaborating with the CTO to

develop the company’s approach to customer-focused product development

at scale. This model would later become world-famous as ‘the Spotify

Model’ of Tribes, Squads, Chapters, and Guilds. He now assists leaders

in transforming and improving their organizations into models where

employees are empowered to create innovative solutions that not only

customers love but also drive business success.

Did you know that crows are better than toddlers at generating novel solutions? It's true! In the earliest days of childhood, around the globe scientists have documented that human cognition struggles to generate novel solutions. But we are adept at imitation, transmitting and teaching the solutions that we see others put into practice. What does this have to do with software, and innovation, and the cultures we want to create for the communities we love? I'm a psychologist fascinated by cycles of innovation in developer communities, and I think a simple reframe lights the way forward for our industry: in this talk, rather than focusing on what drives individual developer productivity, together we’re going to focus on the science of what drives developers’ collaborative problem-solving. We'll dive into the cognitive architecture of problem-solving, as well as what I've learned from leading empirical research with thousands of developers.

Cat Hicks is a psychologist for software teams and defender of the mismeasured. She is the author of the Developer Thriving framework, the AI Skill Threat framework, and the VP of Research at Pluralsight. Cat is the founder of the Developer Success Lab, an open science research lab that creates empirical evidence about how organisations and individuals can achieve sustainable, resilient innovation in technology and create more well-being for technologists. Cat is also the founder of Catharsis Consulting, a scientific consultancy that connects organisations to human-centred evidence strategies. Cat holds a Ph.D. in Quantitative Experimental Psychology from UC San Diego, serves on the Advisory Council of the University of San Diego Center for Digital Civil Society, and is the author of a forthcoming book on the psychology of software teams.

Have you ever wondered about what makes a good abstraction vs a bad one? Do you want to examine potential reasons why efforts to develop abstractions at a company or in a project take hold, and some don't? Or what it takes to develop an abstraction that reaches beyond the technical corner of your company or project and becomes something that helps actually shape how you think about the entire problem? Understanding the process of developing abstractions, especially as a leader, is really about understanding the process of grief. Even if you get to build the abstraction, it won't be the one you pictured, or envisioned. You're going to need to take the seeds you've born, carefully curated, and lovingly built up over time... And watch them die. To build an abstraction is to hold the heart of your humanity in your hands. Plant your soul into the ground, and be reborn. In this session, I'm going to introduce my thoughts on abstraction, how it works, why it sometimes works and why it sometimes doesn't, and how one can actually take an abstraction and flesh it out to the point where it takes on a life of its own. With that, you should be able to have a better grasp on how ideas can take root in a way that bridges people and domains together.

Hazel Weakly

Hazel spends her days working on building out teams of humans as well as the infrastructure, systems, automation, and tooling to make life better for others. She’s worked at a variety of companies, across a wide range of tech, and knows that the hardest problems to solve are the social ones. Hazel currently serves as a Director on the board of the Haskell Foundation, as a Fellow of the Nivenly Foundation, and is fondly known as the Infrastructure Witch of Hachyderm (a popular Mastodon instance). She also created the first official Haskell “setup” Github Action and helped turn it into an active community-maintained project. She enjoys traveling to speak at conferences, appearing on podcasts, mentoring others, and sharing what she’s learned with the world. One of her favorite things is watching someone light up when they understand something for the first time, and a life goal of hers is to help as many people as possible experience that joy. She also loves shooting pool and going swing dancing, both as a leader and a follower.

Systems thinking is the macro behaviour that we must understand in analyzing our world. A system always produces what it is designed to do, even if that isn't at all what we meant it to do!

Systems are self-maintaining, and contain balancing and/or reinforcing feedback loops.

We'll look at how these work, and what happens when they fail. You'll see how to apply systems thinking to the systems that are all around us.

This is an introductory talk to the world of Systems Thinking, condensed into 45 mins plus time for questions at the end.

From example mapping, to BDD, to DDD practices like event storming and domain storytelling, we're fortunate to have a wide range of tools for collaboratively building domain knowledge and creating models of those domains in software.

One gap that many organisations experience is the management of that domain knowledge over time. Domains evolve. Team members learn new aspects of the domain, or invent more useful models. Team members leave - taking knowledge with them, and new members join but never get the chance to participate in foundational collaborative modelling sessions.

Living documentation is a set of practices to help ensure institutional knowledge is reliable, collaborative and low-effort.

In this session, Chris will do some live domain modelling with volunteers from the audience to demonstrate a new approach to capturing domain knowledge as living documentation, and how to use open source tools like Contextive (https://contextive.tech) to help ensure the knowledge is absorbed, maintained, and relevant over time.