<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"><channel><title>DORA on rtnpro</title><link>https://rtnpro.com/tags/DORA/</link><description>Recent content in DORA on rtnpro</description><generator>Hugo -- gohugo.io</generator><language>en-us</language><lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Jul 2026 09:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://rtnpro.com/tags/DORA/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>You Don't Need a Platform Team to Have a Platform (But You Do Need Golden Paths)</title><link>https://rtnpro.com/post/2026-07-24-platform-without-a-platform-team/</link><pubDate>Fri, 24 Jul 2026 09:00:00 +0530</pubDate><guid>https://rtnpro.com/post/2026-07-24-platform-without-a-platform-team/</guid><description>&lt;h2 id="overview"&gt;Overview&lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Two posts in, and both have been about a trap. Build an internal platform you can&amp;rsquo;t staff, or rent a hosted one you eventually outgrow. The most common reply I got was the fair one:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;If the constraint is headcount, and I&amp;rsquo;m not getting headcount, what exactly am I supposed to do on Monday?&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;That question contains the mistake, and I made it too for years. It treats &amp;ldquo;platform&amp;rdquo; and &amp;ldquo;platform team&amp;rdquo; as the same noun. They aren&amp;rsquo;t. &lt;a href="https://dora.dev/research/2025/dora-report/"&gt;DORA&amp;rsquo;s 2025 research&lt;/a&gt; found adoption close to universal — &lt;a href="https://dora.dev/capabilities/platform-engineering/"&gt;&lt;em&gt;&amp;ldquo;90% of organizations reporting the use of an internal developer platform and 76% establishing dedicated platform teams&amp;rdquo;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/a&gt;. The interesting part isn&amp;rsquo;t the gap between those two numbers. It&amp;rsquo;s that neither one predicts whether the platform is any good.&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>