I try not to mention that I studied for a master’s degree in marketing.
And yet, I continue to think in those categories, so programming now-just an additional tool within my general approach.
What does that mean?
I was born in the USSR, on the remnants of a socialist system, but I live in a capitalist world now. My first degree in economics introduced me to concepts like the free market, competition, and return on investment. But as I started my career, I realized that wasn’t enough, and I began to read a lot about business and entrepreneurship. I wanted to understand how money works—not in the context of financial markets, but in the realm of producing goods and services. Around that same time, I heard a saying: in the CIS, top salespeople are made into company executives, while in the West, it’s the top marketers.
For me, back then, marketing was synonymous with advertising.
As it turned out, the term is much broader, though it does include advertising. For several years, I ran a business in the made-on-demand furniture industry. After that, for about a year and a half, I helped an e-commerce business with a dropshipping model to grow. Both initiatives failed. But it was then, while testing many of my theoretical ideas and gaining practical experience, that I noticed I was spending a lot of time on what was called “digital marketing”. Realizing the gap between the digital and physical worlds, I thought it would be useful to expand and structure my knowledge, which is why I enrolled in a master’s program. The most interesting part was the intensive preparation period, where I read several marketing books in 2 months, including the classic by Philip Kotler.
My master’s thesis was on the topic “The Evolution of the Marketing Mix in Internet Marketing,” where I analyzed the transition from the early internet’s 4Ps to the expanded 7P model. To be honest, I never defended that thesis, because I left the program.
Without getting lost in the details, I often remember that a company has both internal and external marketing. That beyond the traditional elements—product, price, promotion, placement—one must also consider people, process, and physical evidence. Value-is another crucial concept I took from marketing.
What problem are we solving and for whom?
Now, we can mix those concepts. Working in a startup, a corporation, or any team, we work for a result—that is, we must create value. But for whom?
A business typically works to attract and retain customers. From an external marketing perspective, value is created for the customers—they pay to have their needs satisfied, thus generating profit (oversimplifying here). From an internal marketing perspective, I usually look at the interactions between people and teams. Do I (and my colleagues) understand for whom we are solving a specific task? Who is the recipient? What are their expectations and requirements? How can we make their life easier? How can we increase their job satisfaction? For example, when I prepare a Pull Request with code, I am not just solving some technical problem; I am handing over code for shared maintenance. This means I have to consider: are my changes understandable? Is there enough context, or is more information needed? Is my solution overengineered? At least, I try to take these things into account within the constraints of limited time and competing priorities. Or, when a manager (any stakeholder) has a question, I try to start from the assumption that they want to do their job well and right now they need my help, not “just an answer”—whether it’s an update on progress since task turns out to be not complex but complicated, a clarification of some points, or a discussion with another team about how we will solve a specific problem. Even a simple, sincere “how are you?” to a colleague can be valuable. Usually, the answer is brief, but maybe this time, the person is having problems of any kind, and needs to talk, to discuss it with someone, but didn’t dare to initiate the conversation themselves. This is also a form of help; we are solving a problem and thereby improving the emotional climate of the team. This is valuable.
That is to say, when solving a problem, whether technical or otherwise, it is important to understand for whom you are solving it and to try to put yourself in that person’s shoes, to understand what result is needed. You can go a step further and also answer the question “why”—this allows you to work from “first principles,” which solves the root cause, not just the symptoms. But this requires much more time and attention to detail, which has become a luxury in the modern world.
This is how I typically apply interdisciplinary knowledge to solve business problems, both internal and external.