3 ms·
>This applies to scientists, not to software engineers working in a team. And that'w why no software engineers working on teams will ever win a nobel prize. I
by gerbilly 9y ago
>This applies to scientists, not to software engineers working in a team.
And that'w why no software engineers working on teams will ever win a nobel prize.
I don't mean to be disingenuous, but did you ever stop to think why team work is so drummed into us?
It's not because teamwork produces better results, it's so corporations can treat us as interchangeable cogs. They want knowledge spread across a whole team to 'de-risk' their projects in case someone leaves.
They know full well that the best work is done by expert individuals, but they choose to promote teamwork anyway.
- marcosdumay 9y agoThere's a spectrum. Teams can certainly achieve things that are too large for an individual. And yes, what you said do exist (and on some projects it is even a good thing). I don't think there are easy general answers, except that all the energy promoting team working is there because nobody likes it. If it's a good or a bad thing, that will probably change every time.
- interfixus 9y agoI wish I had more upvotes to give you.
- nejenendn 9y agoThankfully people actually using the software is more meaningful than awards :) Also why is it so weird to see your company wants you to be replaceable? It’s up to YOU to differentiate yourself.
- gerbilly 9y agoIt doesn't bother me personally, and of course I know I am replaceable even though I do differentiate myself. I was just pointing out that they over-promote the 'effectiveness' of teamwork. They sell it based on improved problem solving, when they really want it for operational reasons.