General

“Recognize leadership behavior early. Sometimes people don’t even realize it in themselves…” Kelly Vaughn on Product Leadership, Creating Pathways for Women in Tech, & Conferences

Published Apr 4, 2025

Updated Apr 4, 2025

3 min read

Some leaders build products. Some lead engineering teams. Kelly Vaughn is doing both.

As Director of Engineering at Spot AI—a company building video intelligence software—Kelly recently expanded her role to oversee both Product and Engineering for their VMS offering. That shift means juggling strategy, execution, and team development, all while helping others step confidently into leadership themselves.

And yes, she still finds time to speak at conferences and answer DMs from people navigating the same transitions she once did.

We spoke with Kelly about spotting leadership potential early, why ambiguity doesn’t have to feel chaotic, and the lesson she learned the hard way about managing up.

Stepping into Product Leadership

Kelly’s new title might look like a promotion on paper, but the shift is more philosophical than anything.

“Engineering leadership is about execution,” she says. “Product leadership is about defining why we’re building something in the first place.”

Now leading Product and Engineering for Spot AI’s VMS product, she’s talking to customers, researching market trends, and making smart bets on where to invest next.

It’s a role she’s clearly energized by.

“I’m really looking forward to dedicating time to shaping our product’s future.”

Thriving in Ambiguity

Some people panic when problems are fuzzy or undefined. Others use it as fuel.

“There are two key traits I see in people who handle ambiguity well,” Kelly says. “They stay calm under stress, and they know how to form a hypothesis from a vague problem statement.”

That means asking the right questions, taking action quickly, and being totally okay with pivoting when something doesn’t pan out.

It’s no surprise that these same traits overlap with great product thinking—a mindset she’s now leaning into more than ever.

“I do some of my best work when navigating uncertainty,” she adds.

Read Kelly’s blog on embracing ambiguity in Product!

Creating Leadership Pathways for Women in Tech

When asked how leaders can create more leadership pathways for women in software engineering, Kelly stressed that it is not a passive process.

“Senior leaders need to be proactive,” Kelly says. “That starts with identifying and addressing bias across hiring, promotions, and day-to-day interactions.”

She emphasizes psychological safety—so women feel confident advocating for themselves and others. But she also knows not everyone feels ready to raise their hand.

“Don’t wait for someone to ask for a title change or a growth opportunity. Recognize leadership behavior early. Sometimes people don’t even realize it in themselves yet.”

On Stage, In Real Life

Kelly’s no stranger to the tech conference circuit—often giving talks on engineering leadership and team growth.

Her biggest source of inspiration? Conversations with people trying to make the leap into leadership.

“I might use the same slide deck at three conferences,” she says, “but the talk itself will be different every time.”

Rather than sticking to a script, she likes to share recent examples from her own work, tailoring the delivery to the audience in front of her. It keeps things relevant, grounded, and never too polished.

Between setting product strategy, mentoring the next generation of leaders, and hopping from one tech conference to the next, Kelly Vaughn is showing what it means to lead with clarity—even when things are unclear.

She’s not here to tell you it’s easy. But she will tell you it’s worth it.

Connect with Kelly Vaughn on Bluesky.

Sticker Illustration by Jacob Ashley.

This Dot is a consultancy dedicated to guiding companies through their modernization and digital transformation journeys. Specializing in replatforming, modernizing, and launching new initiatives, we stand out by taking true ownership of your engineering projects.

We love helping teams with projects that have missed their deadlines or helping keep your strategic digital initiatives on course. Check out our case studies and our clients that trust us with their engineering.

How to build an AI assistant with OpenAI, Vercel AI SDK, and Ollama with Next.js

In today’s blog post, we’ll build an AI Assistant using three different AI models: Whisper and TTS from OpenAI and Llama 3.1 from Meta. While exploring AI, I wanted to try different things and create an AI assistant that works by voice. This curiosity led me to combine OpenAI’s Whisper and TTS models with Meta’s Llama 3.1 to build a voice-activated assistant. Here’s how these models will work together: * First, we’ll send our audio to the Whisper model, which will convert it from speech to text. * Next, we’ll pass that text to the Llama 3.1 model. Llama will understand the text and generate a response. * Finally, we’ll take Llama’s response and send it to the TTS model, turning the text back into speech. We’ll then stream that audio back to the client. Let’s dive in and start building this excellent AI Assistant! Getting started We will use different tools to build our assistant. To build our client side, we will use Next.js. However, you could choose whichever framework you prefer. To use our OpenAI models, we will use their TypeScript / JavaScript SDK. To use this API, we require the following environmental variable: OPENAI_API_KEY— To get this key, we need to log in to the OpenAI dashboard and find the API keys section. Here, we can generate a new key. Awesome. Now, to use our Llama 3.1 model, we will use Ollama and the Vercel AI SDK, utilizing a provider called ollama-ai-provider. Ollama will allow us to download our preferred model (we could even use a different one, like Phi) and run it locally. The Vercel SDK will facilitate its use in our Next.js project. To use Ollama, we just need to download it and choose our preferred model. For this blog post, we are going to select Llama 3.1. After installing Ollama, we can verify if it is working by opening our terminal and writing the following command: Notice that I wrote “llama3.1” because that’s my chosen model, but you should use the one you downloaded. Kicking things off It's time to kick things off by setting up our Next.js app. Let's start with this command: ` After running the command, you’ll see a few prompts to set the app's details. Let's go step by step: * Name your app. * Enable app router. The other steps are optional and entirely up to you. In my case, I also chose to use TypeScript and Tailwind CSS. Now that’s done, let’s go into our project and install the dependencies that we need to run our models: ` Building our client logic Now, our goal is to record our voice, send it to the backend, and then receive a voice response from it. To record our audio, we need to use client-side functions, which means we need to use client components. In our case, we don’t want to transform our whole page to use client capabilities and have the whole tree in the client bundle; instead, we would prefer to use Server components and import our client components to progressively enhance our application. So, let’s create a separate component that will handle the client-side logic. Inside our app folder, let's create a components folder, and here, we will be creating our component: ` Let’s go ahead and initialize our component. I went ahead and added a button with some styles in it: ` And then import it into our Page Server component: ` Now, if we run our app, we should see the following: Awesome! Now, our button doesn’t do anything, but our goal is to record our audio and send it to someplace; for that, let us create a hook that will contain our logic: ` We will use two APIs to record our voice: navigator and MediaRecorder. The navigator API will give us information about the user’s media devices like the user media audio, and the MediaRecorder will help us record the audio from it. This is how they’re going to play out together: ` Let’s explain this code step by step. First, we create two new states. The first one is for keeping track of when we are recording, and the second one stores the instance of our MediaRecorder. ` Then, we’ll create our first method, startRecording. Here, we are going to have the logic to start recording our audio. We first check if the user has media devices available thanks to the navigator API that gives us information about the browser environment of our user: If we don’t have media devices to record our audio, we just return. If they do, then let us create a stream using their audio media device. ` Finally, we go ahead and create an instance of a MediaRecorder to record this audio: ` Then we need a method to stop our recording, which will be our stopRecording. Here, we will just stop our recording in case a media recorder exists. ` We are recording our audio, but we are not storing it anywhere. Let’s add a new useEffect and ref to accomplish this. We would need a new ref, and this is where our chunks of audio data will be stored. ` In our useEffect we are going to do two main things: store those chunks in our ref, and when it stops, we are going to create a new Blob of type audio/mp3: ` It is time to wire this hook with our AudioRecorder component: ` Let’s go to the other side of the coin, the backend! Setting up our Server side We want to use our models on the server to keep things safe and run faster. Let’s create a new route and add a handler for it using route handlers from Next.js. In our App folder, let’s make an “Api” folder with the following route in it: We want to use our models on the server to keep things safe and run faster. Let’s create a new route and add a handler for it using route handlers from Next.js. In our App folder, let’s make an “Api” folder with the following route in it: ` Our route is called ‘chat’. In the route.ts file, we’ll set up our handler. Let’s start by setting up our OpenAI SDK. ` In this route, we’ll send the audio from the front end as a base64 string. Then, we’ll receive it and turn it into a Buffer object. ` It’s time to use our first model. We want to turn this audio into text and use OpenAI’s Whisper Speech-To-Text model. Whisper needs an audio file to create the text. Since we have a Buffer instead of a file, we’ll use their ‘toFile’ method to convert our audio Buffer into an audio file like this: ` Notice that we specified “mp3”. This is one of the many extensions that the Whisper model can use. You can see the full list of supported extensions here: https://platform.openai.com/docs/api-reference/audio/createTranscription#audio-createtranscription-file Now that our file is ready, let’s pass it to Whisper! Using our OpenAI instance, this is how we will invoke our model: ` That’s it! Now, we can move on to the next step: using Llama 3.1 to interpret this text and give us an answer. We’ll use two methods for this. First, we’ll use ‘ollama’ from the ‘ollama-ai-provider’ package, which lets us use this model with our locally running Ollama. Then, we’ll use ‘generateText’ from the Vercel AI SDK to generate the text. Side note: To make our Ollama run locally, we need to write the following command in the terminal: ` ` Finally, we have our last model: TTS from OpenAI. We want to reply to our user with audio, so this model will be really helpful. It will turn our text into speech: ` The TTS model will turn our response into an audio file. We want to stream this audio back to the user like this: ` And that’s all the whole backend code! Now, back to the frontend to finish wiring everything up. Putting It All Together In our useRecordVoice.tsx hook, let's create a new method that will call our API endpoint. This method will also take the response back and play to the user the audio that we are streaming from the backend. ` Great! Now that we’re getting our streamed response, we need to handle it and play the audio back to the user. We’ll use the AudioContext API for this. This API allows us to store the audio, decode it and play it to the user once it’s ready: ` And that's it! Now the user should hear the audio response on their device. To wrap things up, let's make our app a bit nicer by adding a little loading indicator: ` Conclusion In this blog post, we saw how combining multiple AI models can help us achieve our goals. We learned to run AI models like Llama 3.1 locally and use them in our Next.js app. We also discovered how to send audio to these models and stream back a response, playing the audio back to the user. This is just one of many ways you can use AI—the possibilities are endless. AI models are amazing tools that let us create things that were once hard to achieve with such quality. Thanks for reading; now, it’s your turn to build something amazing with AI! You can find the complete demo on GitHub: AI Assistant with Whisper TTS and Ollama using Next.js...

Sep 27, 2024

8 mins

AINextJSJavaScript

The Importance of a Scientific Mindset in Software Engineering: Part 1 (Source Evaluation & Literature Review)

The Importance of a Scientific Mindset in Software Engineering: Part 1 (Source Evaluation & Literature Review) Today, I will write about something very dear to me - science. But not about science as a field of study but rather as a way of thinking. It's easy nowadays to get lost in the sea of information, fall for marketing hype, or even be trolled by a hallucinating LLM. A scientific mindset can be a powerful tool for navigating the complex modern world and the world of software engineering in particular. Not only is it a powerful tool, but I'll argue that it's a must nowadays if you want to make informed decisions, solve problems effectively, and become a better engineer. As software engineers, we are constantly confronted with an overwhelming array of frameworks, technologies, and infrastructure choices. Sometimes, it feels like there's a new tool or platform every day, each accompanied by its own wave of hype and marketing. It's easy to feel lost in the myriad of information or even suffer from FOMO and insecurity about not jumping on the latest bandwagon. But it's not only about the abundance of information and making technological decisions. As engineers, we often write documentation, blog posts, talks, or even books. We need to be able to communicate our ideas clearly and effectively. Furthermore, we have to master the art of debugging code, which is essentially a scientific process where we form hypotheses, test them, and iterate until we find the root cause of the problem. Therefore, here's my hot take: engineering is a science; hence, to deserve an engineer title, one needs to think like a scientist. So, let's _review_ (pun intended) what it means to think like a scientist in the context of software engineering. Systematic Review In science, systematic review is not only an essential means to understand a topic and map the current state of knowledge in the field, but it also has a well-defined methodology. You can't just google whatever supports your hypothesis and call it a day. You must define your research question, choose the databases you will search, set your inclusion and exclusion criteria, systematically search for relevant studies, evaluate their quality, and synthesize the results. Most importantly, you must be transparent about and describe your methodology in detail. The general process of systematic review can be summarized in the following steps: 1. Define your research question(s) 2. Choose databases and other sources to search 3. Define keywords and search terms 4. Define inclusion and exclusion criteria a. Define practical criteria such as publication date, language, etc. b. Define methodological criteria such as study design, sample size, etc. 5. Search for relevant studies 6. Evaluate the quality of the studies 7. Synthesize the results Source: Conducting Research Literature Reviews: From the Internet to Paper by Dr. Fink I'm pretty sure you can see where I'm going with this. There are many use cases in software engineering where a process similar to systematic review can be applied. Whether you're evaluating a new technology, choosing a tech stack for a new project, or researching for a blog post or a conference talk, it's important to be systematic in your approach, transparent about your methodology, and honest about the limitations of your research. Of course, when choosing a tech stack to learn or researching for a blog post, you don't have to be as rigorous as in a scientific study. But a few of these steps will always be worth following. Let's focus on those and see how we can apply them in the context of software engineering. Defining Your Research Question(s) Before you start researching, it's important to define your research questions. What are you trying to find out? What problem are you trying to solve? What are the goals of your research? These questions will help you stay focused and avoid focusing on irrelevant information. > A practical example: If you're evaluating, say, whether to use bundler _A_ or bundler _B_ without a clear research question, you might end up focusing on marketing claims about how bundler _A_ is faster than bundler _B_ or how bundler _B_ is more popular than bundler _A_, even though such aspects may have minimal impact on your project. With a clear research question, you can focus on what really matters for your project, like how well each bundler integrates with your existing tools, how well they handle your specific use case, or how well they are maintained. A research question is not a hypothesis - you don't have to have a clear idea of the answer. It's more about defining the scope of your research and setting clear goals. It can be as simple and general as "What are the pros and cons of using React vs. Angular for a particular project?" but also more specific and focused, like "What are the legal implications of using open-source library _X_ for purpose _Y_ in project _Z_?". You can have multiple research questions, but keeping them focused and relevant to your goals is essential. In my personal opinion, part of the scientific mindset is automatically having at least a vague idea of a research question in your head whenever you're facing a problem or a decision, and that alone can make you a more confident and effective engineer. Choosing Databases and Other Sources to Search In engineering, some information (especially when researching rare bugs) can be scarce, and you have to search wherever and take what you can get. Hence, this step is arguably much easier in science, where you can include well-established databases and publications in your search. Information in science is simply more standardized and easier to find. There are, however, still some decisions to be made about where to search. Do you want to include community websites like StackOverflow or Reddit? Do you want to include marketing materials from the companies behind the technologies you're evaluating? These can all be valid sources of information, but they have their limitations and biases, and it's important to be aware of them. Or do you want to ask a LLM? I hadn't included LLMs in the list of valid sources of information on purpose as they are not literature databases in the traditional sense, and I wouldn't consider them a search source for literature research. And for a very good reason - they are essentially a black box, and therefore, you cannot reliably describe a reproducible methodology of your search. That doesn't mean you shouldn't ask an LLM for inspiration or a TL;DR, but you should always verify the information you get from them and be aware of their limitations. Defining Keywords and Search Terms This section will be short, as most of you are familiar with the concept of keywords and search terms and how to use search engines. However, I still wanted to highlight the importance of knowing how to search effectively for a software engineer. It's not just about typing in a few keywords and hoping for the best. It's about learning how to use advanced search operators, filter out irrelevant results, and find the information you need quickly and efficiently. If you're not familiar with advanced search operators, I highly recommend you take some time to learn them, for example, at FreeCodeCamp. Please note, however, that the article is specific to Google and different search engines may have different operators and syntax. This is especially true for scientific databases, which often have their own search syntax and operators. So, if you're doing more formal research, familiarize yourself with the database's search syntax. The underlying principles, however, are pretty much the same everywhere; just the syntax and UI might differ. With a solid search strategy in place, the next critical step is to assess the quality of the information we find. Methodological Criteria and Evaluation of Sources This is where things get interesting. In science, evaluating the quality of the studies is a crucial step in the systematic review process. You can't just take the results of a study at face value - you need to critically evaluate its design, the sample size, the methodology, and the conclusions - and you need to be aware of the limitations of the study and the potential biases that may have influenced the results. In science, there is a pretty straightforward yet helpful categorization of sources that my students surprisingly needed help understanding because no one ever explained it to them. So let me lay out and explain the three categories to you now: 1. Primary sources Primary sources represent original research. You can find them in studies, conference papers, etc. In science, this is what you generally want to cite in your own research. However, remember that only some of what you find in an original research paper is a primary source. Only the parts that present the original research are primary sources. For example, the introduction can contain citations to other studies, which are not primary, but secondary sources. While primary sources can sometimes be perceived as hard to read and understand, in many cases, they can actually be easier to reach and understand as the methods and results are usually presented in a condensed form in the abstract, and often you can only skim the introduction and discussion to get a good idea of the study. In software engineering, primary sources can sometimes be papers, but more often, they are original documentation, case studies, or even blog posts that present original research or data. For example, if you're evaluating a new technology, the official documentation, case studies, and blog posts from its developers can be considered primary sources. 2. Secondary sources Secondary sources are typically reviews, meta-analyses, and other sources that summarize, analyze, or reference the primary sources. A good way to identify a source as secondary is to look for citations to other studies. If a claim has a citation, it's likely a secondary source. On the other hand, something is likely wrong if it doesn't have a citation and doesn't seem to present original research. Secondary sources can be very useful for getting an overview of a topic, understanding the current state of knowledge, and finding relevant primary sources. Meta-analyses, in particular, can provide a beneficial point of view on a subject by combining the results of multiple studies and looking for patterns and trends. The downside of secondary sources is that they can introduce information noise, as they are basically introducing another layer of interpretation and analysis. So, it's always a good idea to go back to the primary sources and verify the information you get from secondary sources. Secondary sources in software engineering include blog posts, talks, or articles that summarize, analyze, or reference primary sources. For example, if you're researching a new technology, a blog post that compares different technologies based on their documentation and/or studies made by their authors can be considered a secondary source. 3. Tertiary sources Tertiary sources represent a further level of abstraction. They are typically textbooks, encyclopedias, and other sources that summarize, analyze, or reference secondary sources. They are useful for getting a broad overview of a topic, understanding the basic concepts, and finding relevant secondary sources. One example I see as a tertiary source is Wikipedia, and while you shouldn't ever cite Wikipedia in academic research, it can be a good starting point for getting an overview of a topic and finding relevant primary and secondary sources as you can easily click through the references. > Note: It's fine to reference Wikipedia in a blog post or a talk to give your audience a convenient explanation of a term or concept. I'm even doing it in this post. However, you should always verify that the article is up to date and that the information is correct. The distinction between primary, secondary, and tertiary sources in software engineering is not as clear-cut as in science, but the general idea still applies. When researching a topic, knowing the different types of sources and their limitations is essential. Primary sources are generally the most reliable and should be your go-to when seeking evidence to support your claims. Secondary sources can help get an overview of a topic, but they should be used cautiously, as they can introduce bias and noise. Tertiary sources are good for getting a broad overview of a topic but should not be used as evidence in academic research. Evaluating Sources Now that we have the categories laid out let's talk about evaluating the quality of the sources because, realistically, not all sources are created equal. In science, we have some well-established criteria for evaluating the quality of a source. Some focus on the general credibility of the source, like the reputation of the journal or the author. In contrast, others focus on the quality of the study itself, like the study design, the sample size, and the methodology. First, we usually look at the number of citations and the impact factor of the journal in which the study was published. These numbers can give us an idea of how well the scientific community received the study and how much other researchers have cited it. In software engineering, we don't have the concept of impact factor when it comes to researching a concept or a technology, but we can still look at how many people are sharing the particular piece of information and how well the professional community receives it and how reputable the person sharing the information is. Second, we look at the study design and the methodology. Does the study have a clear research question? Is the study design appropriate for the research question? Are the methods well-described and reproducible? Are the results presented clearly and honestly? Do the data support the conclusions? Arguably, in software engineering, the honest and clear presentation of the method and results can be even more important than in science, given the amounts of money circulating in the industry and the potential for conflicts of interest. Therefore, it's important to understand where the data is coming from, how it was collected, and how it was analyzed. If a company (or their DevRel person) is presenting data that show their product is the best (fastest, most secure...), it's important to be aware of the potential biases and conflicts of interest that may have influenced the results. The ways in which the results can be skewed may include: - Missing, incomplete, or inappropriate methodology. Often, the methodology is not described in enough detail to be reproducible, or the whole experiment is designed in a way that doesn't actually answer the research question properly. For example, the methodology can omit important details, such as the environment in which the experiment was conducted or even the way the data was collected (e.g., to hide selection bias). - Selection bias can be a common issue in software engineering experiments. For example, if someone is comparing two technologies, they might choose a dataset that they expect to perform better with one of the technologies or a metric that they expect to show a difference. Selection bias can lead to skewed results that don't reflect the technologies' real-world performance. - Publication bias is a common issue in science, where studies that show a positive result are more likely to be published than studies that show a negative outcome. In software engineering, this can manifest as a bias towards publishing success stories and case studies, while ignoring failures and negative results. - Confirmation bias is a problem in science and software engineering alike. It's the tendency to look for evidence that confirms your hypothesis and ignore evidence that contradicts it. Confirmation bias can lead to cherry-picking data, misinterpreting results, and drawing incorrect conclusions. - Conflict of interest. While less common in academic research, conflicts of interest can be a big issue in industry research. If a company is funding a study that shows its product in a positive light, it's important to be aware of the potential biases that may have influenced the results. Another thing we look at is the conclusions. Do the data support the conclusions? Are they reasonable and justified? Are they overstated or exaggerated? Are the limitations of the study acknowledged? Are the implications of the study discussed? It all goes back to honesty and transparency, which is crucial for evaluating the quality of the source. Last but not least, we should look at the citations and references included in the source. In the same way we apply the systematic review process to our research, we should also apply it to the sources we use. I would argue that this is even more important in software engineering, where the information is often less standardized, and you come across many unsupported claims. If a source doesn't provide citations or references to back up their claims, it's a red flag that the information may not be reliable. This brings us to something called anecdotal evidence. Anecdotal evidence is a personal story or experience used to support a claim. While anecdotal evidence can be compelling and persuasive, it is generally considered a weak form of evidence, as it is based on personal experience rather than empirical data. So when someone tells you that X is better than Y because they tried it and it worked for them, or that Z is true because they heard it from someone, take it with a massive grain of salt and look for more reliable sources of information. That, of course, doesn't mean you should ask for a source under every post on social media, but it's important to recognize what's a personal opinion and what's a claim based on evidence. Synthesizing the Results Once you have gathered all the relevant information, it's time to synthesize the results. This is where you combine all the evidence you have collected, analyze it, and draw conclusions. In science, this is often done as part of a meta-analysis, where the results of multiple studies are combined and analyzed to look for patterns and trends using statistical methods. A meta-analysis is a powerful tool for synthesizing the results of multiple studies and drawing more robust conclusions than can be drawn from any single study. You might not be doing a formal meta-analysis in software engineering, but you can still apply the same principles to your research. Look for common themes and trends in the information you have gathered, compare and contrast different sources, and draw conclusions based on the evidence. Conclusion Adopting a scientific way of thinking isn't just a nice-to-have in software engineering - it's essential to make informed decisions, solve problems effectively, and navigate the vast amount of information around you with confidence. Applying systematic review principles to your research allows you to gather reliable information, evaluate it critically, and draw sound conclusions based on evidence. Let's summarize what such a systematic research approach can look like: - Define Clear Research Questions: - Start every project or decision-making process by clearly stating what you aim to achieve or understand. - Example: "What factors should influence our choice between Cloud Service A and Cloud Service B for our application's specific needs?" - Critically Evaluate Sources: - Identify the type of sources (primary, secondary, tertiary) and assess their credibility. - Be wary of biases and seek out multiple perspectives for a well-rounded understanding. - Be Aware of Biases: - Recognize common biases that can cloud judgment, such as confirmation or selection bias. - Actively counteract these biases by seeking disconfirming evidence and questioning assumptions. - Systematically Synthesize Information: - Organize your findings and analyze them methodically. - Use tools and frameworks to compare options based on defined criteria relevant to your project's goals. I encourage you to embrace this scientific approach in your daily work. The next time you're facing a critical decision - be it selecting a technology stack, debugging complex code, or planning a project - apply these principles: - Start with a Question: Clearly define what you need to find out. - Gather and Evaluate Information: Seek out reliable sources and scrutinize them. - Analyze Systematically: Organize your findings and look for patterns or insights. - Make Informed Decisions: Choose the path supported by evidence and sound reasoning. By doing so, you will enhance your problem-solving skills and contribute to a culture of thoughtful, evidence-based practice in the software engineering community. The best part is that once you start applying a critical and systematic approach to your sources of information, it becomes second nature. You'll automatically start asking questions like, "Where did this information come from?" "Is it reliable?" and "Can I reproduce the results?" Doing so will make you much less susceptible to hype, marketing, and new shiny things, ultimately making you happier and more confident. In the next part of this series, we'll look at applying the scientific mindset to debugging and using hypothesis testing and experimentation principles to solve problems more effectively....

Jan 10, 2025

14 mins

Software Engineering

Internationalization in Next.js with next-intl

Internationalization in Next.js with next-intl Internationalization (i18n) is essential for providing a multi-language experience for global applications. next-intl integrates well with Next.js’ App Router, handling i18n routing, locale detection, and dynamic configuration. This guide will walk you through setting up i18n in Next.js using next-intl for URL-based routing, user-specific settings, and domain-based locale routing. Getting Started First, create a Next.js app with the App Router and install next-intl: ` Next, configure next-intl in the next.config.ts file to provide a request-specific i18n configuration for Server Components: ` Without i18n Routing Setting up an app without i18n routing integration can be advantageous in scenarios where you want to provide a locale to next-intl based on user-specific settings or when your app supports only a single language. This approach offers the simplest way to begin using next-intl, as it requires no changes to your app’s structure, making it an ideal choice for straightforward implementations. ` Here’s a quick explanation of each file's role: * translations/: Stores different translations per language (e.g., en.json for English, es.json for Spanish). Organize this as needed, e.g., translations/en/common.json. * request.ts: Manages locale-based configuration scoped to each request. Setup request.ts for Request-Specific Configuration Since we will be using features from next-intl in Server Components, we need to add the following configuration in i18n/request.ts: ` Here, we define a static locale and use that to determine which translation file to import. The imported JSON data is stored in the message variable, and is returned together with the locale so that we can access them from various components in the application. Using Translation in RootLayout Inside RootLayout, we use getLocale() to retrieve the static locale and set the document language for SEO and pass translations to NextIntlClientProvider: ` Note that NextIntlClientProvider automatically inherits configuration from i18n/request.ts here, but messages must be explicitly passed. Now you can use translations and other functionality from next-intl in your components: ` In case of async components, you can use the awaitable getTranslations function instead: ` And with that, you have i18n configured and working on your application! \ Now, let’s take it a step further by introducing routing. \ With i18n Routing To set up i18n routing, we need a file structure that separates each language configuration and translation file. Below is the recommended structure: ` We updated the earlier structure to include some files that we require for routing: * routing.ts: Sets up locales, default language, and routing, shared between middleware and navigation. * middleware.ts: Handles URL rewrites and locale negotiation. * app/[locale]/: Creates dynamic routes for each locale like /en/about and /es/about. Define Routing Configuration in i18n/routing.ts The routing.ts file configures supported locales and the default locale, which is referenced by middleware.ts and other navigation functions: ` This configuration lets Next.js handle URL paths like /about, with locale management managed by next-intl. Update request.ts for Request-Specific Configuration We need to update the getRequestConfig function from the above implementation in i18n/request.ts. ` Here, request.ts ensures that each request loads the correct translation files based on the user’s locale or falls back to the default. Setup Middleware for Locale Matching The middleware.ts file matches the locale based on the request: ` Middleware handles locale matches and redirects to localized paths like /en or /es. Updating the RootLayout file Inside RootLayout, we use the locale from params (matched by middleware) instead of calling getLocale() ` The locale we get from the params was matched in the middleware.ts file and we use that here to set the document language for SEO purposes. Additionally, we used this file to pass configuration from i18n/request.ts to Client Components through NextIntlClientProvider. Note: When using the above setup with i18n routing, next-intl will currently opt into dynamic rendering when APIs like useTranslations are used in Server Components. next-intl provides a temporary API that can be used to enable static rendering. Static Rendering for i18n Routes For apps with dynamic routes, use generateStaticParams to pass all possible locale values, allowing Next.js to render at build time: ` next-intl provides an API setRequestLocale that can be used to distribute the locale that is received via params in layouts and pages for usage in all Server Components that are rendered as part of the request. You need to call this function in every layout/page that you intend to enable static rendering for since Next.js can render layouts and pages independently. ` Note: Call setRequestLocale before invoking useTranslations or getMessages or any next-intl functions. Domain Routing For domain-specific locale support, use the domains setting to map domains to locales, such as us.example.com/en or ca.example.com/fr. ` This setup allows you to serve localized content based on domains. Read more on domain routing here. Conclusion Setting up internationalization in Next.js with next-intl provides a modular way to handle URL-based routing, user-defined locales, and domain-specific configurations. Whether you need URL-based routing or a straightforward single-locale setup, next-intl adapts to fit diverse i18n needs. With these tools, your app will be ready to deliver a seamless multi-language experience to users worldwide....

Apr 11, 2025

4 mins

NextJSAccessibility

“We were seen as amplifiers, not collaborators,” Ashley Willis, Sr. Director of Developer Relations at GitHub, on How DevRel has Changed, Open Source, and Holding Space as a Leader

Ashley Willis has seen Developer Relations evolve from being on the sidelines of the tech team to having a seat at the strategy table. In her ten years in the space, she’s done more than give great conference talks or build community—she’s helped shape what the DevRel role looks like for software providers. Now as the Senior Director of Developer Relations at GitHub, Ashley is focused on building spaces where developers feel heard, seen, and supported. > “A decade ago, we were seen as amplifiers, not collaborators,” she says. “Now we’re influencing product roadmaps and shaping developer experience end to end.” DevRel Has Changed For Ashley, the biggest shift hasn’t been the work itself—but how it’s understood. > “The work is still outward-facing, but it’s backed by real strategic weight,” she explains. “We’re showing up in research calls and incident reviews, not just keynotes.” That shift matters, but it’s not the finish line. Ashley is still pushing for change when it comes to burnout, representation, and sustainable metrics that go beyond conference ROI. > “We’re no longer fighting to be taken seriously. That’s a win. But there’s more work to do.” Talking Less as a Leader When we asked what the best advice Ashley ever received, she shared an early lesson she received from a mentor: “Your presence should create safety, not pressure.” > “It reframed how I saw my role,” she says. “Not as the one with answers, but the one who holds the space.” Ashley knows what it’s like to be in rooms where it’s hard to speak up. She leads with that memory in mind, and by listening more than talking, normalizing breaks, and creating environments where others can lead too. > “Leadership is emotional labor. It’s not about being in control. It’s about making it safe for others to lead, too.” Scaling More Than Just Tech Having worked inside high-growth companies, Ashley knows firsthand: scaling tech is one thing. Scaling trust is another. > “Tech will break. Roadmaps will shift. But if there’s trust between product and engineering, between company and community—you can adapt.” And she’s learned not to fall for premature optimization. Scale what you have. Don’t over-design for problems you don’t have yet. Free Open Source Isn’t Free There’s one myth Ashley is eager to debunk: that open source is “free.” > “Open source isn’t free labor. It’s labor that’s freely given,” she says. “And it includes more than just code. There’s documentation, moderation, mentoring, emotional care. None of it is effortless.” Open source runs on human energy. And when we treat contributors like an infinite resource, we risk burning them out, and breaking the ecosystem we all rely on. > “We talk a lot about open source as the foundation of innovation. But we rarely talk about sustaining the people who maintain that foundation.” Burnout is Not Admirable Early in her career, Ashley wore burnout like a badge of honor. She doesn’t anymore. > “Burnout doesn’t prove commitment,” she says. “It just dulls your spark.” Now, she treats rest as productive. And she’s learned that clarity is kindness—especially when giving feedback. > “I thought being liked was the same as being kind. It’s not. Kindness is honesty with empathy.” The Most Underrated GitHub Feature? Ashley’s pick: personal instructions in GitHub Copilot. Most users don’t realize they can shape how Copilot writes, like its tone, assumptions, and context awareness. Her own instructions are specific: empathetic, plainspoken, technical without being condescending. For Ashley, that helps reduce cognitive load and makes the tool feel more human. > “Most people skip over this setting. But it’s one of the best ways to make Copilot more useful—and more humane.” Connect with Ashley Willis She has been building better systems for over a decade. Whether it’s shaping Copilot UX, creating safer teams, or speaking truth about the labor behind open source, she’s doing the quiet work that drives sustainable change. Follow Ashley on BlueSky to learn more about her work, her maker projects, and the small things that keep her grounded in a fast-moving industry. Sticker Illustration by Jacob Ashley....

Apr 18, 2025

3 mins

Engineering LeadershipGitHub

Let's innovate together!

We're ready to be your trusted technical partners in your digital innovation journey.

Whether it's modernization or custom software solutions, our team of experts can guide you through best practices and how to build scalable, performant software that lasts.

“Recognize leadership behavior early. Sometimes people don’t even realize it in themselves…” Kelly Vaughn on Product Leadership, Creating Pathways for Women in Tech, & Conferences

Stepping into Product Leadership

Thriving in Ambiguity

Creating Leadership Pathways for Women in Tech

On Stage, In Real Life

You might also like

How to build an AI assistant with OpenAI, Vercel AI SDK, and Ollama with Next.js

The Importance of a Scientific Mindset in Software Engineering: Part 1 (Source Evaluation & Literature Review)

Internationalization in Next.js with next-intl

“We were seen as amplifiers, not collaborators,” Ashley Willis, Sr. Director of Developer Relations at GitHub, on How DevRel has Changed, Open Source, and Holding Space as a Leader

Let's innovate together!

You might also like

How to build an AI assistant with OpenAI, Vercel AI SDK, and Ollama with Next.js

The Importance of a Scientific Mindset in Software Engineering: Part 1 (Source Evaluation & Literature Review)

Internationalization in Next.js with next-intl

“We were seen as amplifiers, not collaborators,” Ashley Willis, Sr. Director of Developer Relations at GitHub, on How DevRel has Changed, Open Source, and Holding Space as a Leader