4 ms·

Interesting point, and to be honest I'm not sure what would I do at this point, so far my main philosophy was that deep understanding of fields that you special

Interesting point, and to be honest I'm not sure what would I do at this point, so far my main philosophy was that deep understanding of fields that you specialize in + years of experience would pull you through whatever has to come. This is why I asked the question, wasn't sure if that holds true or not.

sokoloff 10y ago
Years of experience is completely over-played by a lot of people (and in my experience, it does seem specifically overplayed in the case of programmers from India, possibly because of the strong influence of Wipro and similar shops in that market, possibly because of cultural influences or other factors that I don't understand). A Java dev with 7 years experience and a Java dev with 12 years of experience are "utterly the same" in my book. Without any other information, I'd be willing to flip a coin between the two. That might even hold true for all values 4 or greater; I'm not sure. I'd much rather have someone with 2 years Javascript, 3 years .Net, and some hobby work in Haskell or Go, even if I was hiring for a Java project. That person shows they have passion for programming, not about getting a programming job. (Yes, someone on the team would need JVM experience.) There are other hiring managers and many recruiters who just want "N years or more in X tech", so if you are more comfortable getting N+1 years in X tech, you'll probably be able to keep finding jobs, but to me "finding jobs" isn't the only (or even primary) point of working in our field. To be clear: deep understanding of a specialty and able to work effectively on a team is great and should always bring value. Years of experience (once over a pretty low threshold) is mostly irrelevant IMO. See: http://chiefexecutive.net/ideo-ceo-tim-brown-t-shaped-stars-the-backbone-of-ideoae%E2%84%A2s-collaborative-culture/ http://chiefexecutive.net/ideo-ceo-tim-brown-t-shaped-stars-...
- brianwawok 10y ago
  > A Java dev with 7 years experience and a Java dev with 12 years of experience are "utterly the same" in my book Most people will hire the 7, as he is generally about 10-20k cheaper... (see ageism problems)
  - sokoloff 10y ago
    Why would they be 10-20K cheaper, especially if that was 1 year of experience 7 vs. 12 times in a row? I don't think this is an ageism problem at all. (I'm 45 by the way, supposedly squarely in the crosshairs of ageism in our industry.) Ceteris paribus, I think we can all agree that someone with 2 years of industry experience is more valuable than a fresh college grad. Most would think that 4 years is more valuable than 2. Thus, it's appropriate that people in that stage of their career are getting promotions and raises in excess of inflation/CoLA increments, as this reflects a fair price for their increasing value. At some point, if that same person stops really learning, growing, and differentiating themselves, their value stops going up (except for modest inflationary raises). If that 12 year veteran is no better than the 7 year veteran but won't take a job offer at the same wage, then they damn well deserve to not get the job, IMO. That's not ageism; that's simple, proper, natural market forces. Companies pay programmers to create value, not to be old or young. If I can create the same value as someone older or younger, I should be paid the same as them, regardless of age or years of experience.
    - brianwawok 10y ago
      Except you are missing how salary works. It is never "You create X value. We will pay you .5x" (Outside of very niche places like Trading). 99% of the world is "Oh you made X at your last job? We can pay you X + 10k. Hence the older dev tends to make slightly more salary than the younger dev, even if the skillset was similar. And by older, I mean years of coding not physical age. If a guy was a chef for 20 years and a programmer for 3, he is the same programmer age as a 3 year out of college guy.
      - sokoloff 10y ago
        I agree that many places work that way, particularly if they have no idea how much value a dev creates. I don't know if it's 99% or not; that seems high to me, and even at such places, if I go in with proof/truth that I made $500K at my last job, I'm not getting an offer for $510K as a dev...
        10y ago
- flukus 10y ago
  Depends on the person too. The one with 7 years could be more experienced than the one with 12. I've seen some terrible coders (would struggle with FizBuzz level) with 10+ years experience.

sokoloff 10y ago

Years of experience is completely over-played by a lot of people (and in my experience, it does seem specifically overplayed in the case of programmers from India, possibly because of the strong influence of Wipro and similar shops in that market, possibly because of cultural influences or other factors that I don't understand). A Java dev with 7 years experience and a Java dev with 12 years of experience are "utterly the same" in my book. Without any other information, I'd be willing to flip a coin between the two. That might even hold true for all values 4 or greater; I'm not sure. I'd much rather have someone with 2 years Javascript, 3 years .Net, and some hobby work in Haskell or Go, even if I was hiring for a Java project. That person shows they have passion for programming, not about getting a programming job. (Yes, someone on the team would need JVM experience.) There are other hiring managers and many recruiters who just want "N years or more in X tech", so if you are more comfortable getting N+1 years in X tech, you'll probably be able to keep finding jobs, but to me "finding jobs" isn't the only (or even primary) point of working in our field. To be clear: deep understanding of a specialty and able to work effectively on a team is great and should always bring value. Years of experience (once over a pretty low threshold) is mostly irrelevant IMO. See: http://chiefexecutive.net/ideo-ceo-tim-brown-t-shaped-stars-the-backbone-of-ideoae%E2%84%A2s-collaborative-culture/ http://chiefexecutive.net/ideo-ceo-tim-brown-t-shaped-stars-...

brianwawok 10y ago
> A Java dev with 7 years experience and a Java dev with 12 years of experience are "utterly the same" in my book Most people will hire the 7, as he is generally about 10-20k cheaper... (see ageism problems)
- sokoloff 10y ago
  Why would they be 10-20K cheaper, especially if that was 1 year of experience 7 vs. 12 times in a row? I don't think this is an ageism problem at all. (I'm 45 by the way, supposedly squarely in the crosshairs of ageism in our industry.) Ceteris paribus, I think we can all agree that someone with 2 years of industry experience is more valuable than a fresh college grad. Most would think that 4 years is more valuable than 2. Thus, it's appropriate that people in that stage of their career are getting promotions and raises in excess of inflation/CoLA increments, as this reflects a fair price for their increasing value. At some point, if that same person stops really learning, growing, and differentiating themselves, their value stops going up (except for modest inflationary raises). If that 12 year veteran is no better than the 7 year veteran but won't take a job offer at the same wage, then they damn well deserve to not get the job, IMO. That's not ageism; that's simple, proper, natural market forces. Companies pay programmers to create value, not to be old or young. If I can create the same value as someone older or younger, I should be paid the same as them, regardless of age or years of experience.
  - brianwawok 10y ago
    Except you are missing how salary works. It is never "You create X value. We will pay you .5x" (Outside of very niche places like Trading). 99% of the world is "Oh you made X at your last job? We can pay you X + 10k. Hence the older dev tends to make slightly more salary than the younger dev, even if the skillset was similar. And by older, I mean years of coding not physical age. If a guy was a chef for 20 years and a programmer for 3, he is the same programmer age as a 3 year out of college guy.
    - sokoloff 10y ago
      I agree that many places work that way, particularly if they have no idea how much value a dev creates. I don't know if it's 99% or not; that seems high to me, and even at such places, if I go in with proof/truth that I made $500K at my last job, I'm not getting an offer for $510K as a dev...
      - 10y ago
flukus 10y ago
Depends on the person too. The one with 7 years could be more experienced than the one with 12. I've seen some terrible coders (would struggle with FizBuzz level) with 10+ years experience.