3 ms·
That doesn't contradict Pournelle's observation. The balance of power tends towards those who work for the organization in most firms. The bigger question in
by someguydave 8y ago
That doesn't contradict Pournelle's observation. The balance of power tends towards those who work for the organization in most firms.
The bigger question in my mind: why firms at all? If individual PMs are so great, why bother with employees? Wouldn't you rather just contract all the elements of a technical project to other folks for a fixed fee?
I do wonder what portion of good ol' boys and good ol' fashion nepotism tend to fill out the "PM" position on big firm's org charts.
- slsii 8y agoThere's a ~long history of people attempting to answer that question: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_the_firm https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory_of_the_firm From the article, "Firms exist as an alternative system to the market-price mechanism when it is more efficient to produce in a non-market environment."
- someguydave 8y agoIf that "theory of the firm" is true, then engineering is much less commoditized than stated by the top-level commenter.
- xapata 8y agoI believe that was the evidence provided by the great outsourcing experiment of 1996-2006. Turns out programming can't easily be turned into a low-skill job.
- someguydave 8y agoI agree. So why have so many programmers in Silicon Valley? Why don’t they leave and demand independent contracts? Perhaps that kind of “unbundling” of technical talent is the future.
- xapata 8y agoIt's the problem of being paid enough. My wife asked me the same question recently, "Why don't programmers unionize?" They could demand more through collective action, but they don't feel the need. Also, programmers are (often) worth more in teams. Two programmers who work well together are far more productive as a pair than the sum of what they'd do in isolation.