5 ms·

Eh, the language makes a bit more sense than that. It's a bit too euphemistic for my taste, but it's reasonable. "Meets expectations" — which expectations? The

by adrusi 7y ago

Eh, the language makes a bit more sense than that. It's a bit too euphemistic for my taste, but it's reasonable. "Meets expectations" — which expectations? The expectations for the role of for the employee? If we're talking about the expectations for the employee, then obviously it makes no sense for meeting expectations to be a bad thing. But if instead we're talking about expectations for the role, it's perfectly consistent to say that an employee who perpetually merely meets the expectations for their role is subpar, if employees are expected to continually improve. Now what's less clear is why companies care about the derivative of their employee productivity in a labor market where employees stay with a company for just a few years.

paganel 7y ago
A bus driver that “meets expectations” is the perfect bus driver, I don’t want him to “continually improve” thinking that he’s the new Ayrton Senna, I don’t want to be driven around by drivers who think that they’re Formula 1 drivers. How are programmers different from bus drivers?
- viscanti 7y ago
  > A bus driver that “meets expectations” is the perfect bus driver By what standards are Bus Drivers evaluated? Near accidents are OK as long as they're lucky enough to not be involved in a real accident? If so, I'd prefer they actually improve and decrease their odds of being in a future accident. Does efficiency matter? Maybe one that's on time more often is actually better? Maybe customer service matters, and they can get better at helping people who need to buy tickets for the first time? > I don’t want to be driven around by drivers who think that they’re Formula 1 drivers It seems like there are multiple dimensions that a bus driver can improve on that aren't "become a race car driver". Given that, it seems like the bus driver analogy already isn't a good one. > How are programmers different from bus drivers? It doesn't even seem like we need to answer this one. You started with the false assumption that there are no dimensions that a bus driver can improve on other than becoming a race car driver. One could argue that there are much wider ranges of value creation in programming between average and above average programmers, but that's irrelevant given your initial premise is obviously flawed.
  - edw 7y ago
    No, I think this is a fine metaphor. If an engineer can understand a problem, identify a solution, and then implement, document, deploy, and support it in production for project after project, it’s completely legit to say they’re good engineers, and are not necessarily improving in any relevant way. Similarly, a bus driver that consistent drives without causing accidents, doesn’t spill the passengers’ coffee, doesn’t burn too much gas or wear out the breaks too quickly is a good driver. What you say to either of these people is “Great job, we love you, keep doing what you’re doing!” Encouraging growth and improvement as an end in itself can be destructive: How many projects amount to rewriting something that works in some new language or framework because an engineer wants to pad their resume or just learn something new? Craig Mod recently wrote Fast Software, the Best Software; I’m hoping he follows that up with Software That Already Exists and Works Fine Using an Unsexy Suite of Technologies, Software that Doesn’t Need to Be Rewritten.
    - viscanti 7y ago
      > No, I think this is a fine metaphor. If an engineer can understand a problem, identify a solution, and then implement, document, deploy, and support it in production for project after project, it’s completely legit to say they’re good engineers, and are not necessarily improving in any relevant way. We agree. If someone has maxed out all the relevant dimensions then there's no room for improvement. The problem is that there's a difference between that and average. The other problem is that there's continual room for being even better at identifying solutions. > How many projects amount to rewriting something that works in some new language or framework because an engineer wants to pad their resume or just learn something new? Unneeded re-writes and getting better are orthogonal concepts. That you're confusing them here underlines the logical fallacy that you're making. If there's legitimate room for improvement (and there generally is in bus driving and in software engineering), and if that improvement makes you substantially better at your job, then it's worth it. In neither of those areas is the "average" employee completely topped off in where they can grow.
- doesitmatterwho 7y ago
  "How are programmers different from bus drivers?" How does this guy have 7621 karma on HN? lol
- coldtea 7y ago
  >How are programmers different from bus drivers? In that programmers are supposed to be creative, over-deliver, etc. You'd worry if a bus driver got from A to B in half the time driving twice as fast suddenly. But you'd be OK if a programmer you've asked to design system with features A, B, C and performance P, also delivers features D, E, F and performance 2*P without being asked!
  - paganel 7y ago
    > In that programmers are supposed to be creative, over-deliver, etc. Like I said, I don't want the programmer in charge of the software that manages my financial or health records to be creative or over-deliver, quite the contrary. I'd add personal-data to the mix, and now I've covered a huge chunk of SV companies. I think that the era of "move fast and break things" should be over by now, unfortunately relatively paltry $5 billion fines won't stop the creativeness of some companies.
    - coldtea 7y ago
      >Like I said, I don't want the programmer in charge of the software that manages my financial or health records to be creative or over-deliver, quite the contrary. Sure, but most programmers don't program systems that manage financial or health records or write the software for the ISS. For the majority working on enterprise backoffice stuff, CDUD, web services, mobile and desktop apps, websites, and so on, being creative and over-delivering is OK, and even encouraged.
    - kragen 7y ago
      You'd like your financial and health records to be managed by average-quality software? That is, software that's full of bugs, confuses its users into making lots of eyes, and is insecure? I'd rather have them managed by file clerks on paper if that's what's on offer on the software side.
      - kragen 7y ago
        Lots of errors, not lots of eyes. This error brought to you by my failure to successfully use well-above-average software written by Googlers.

by adrusi 7y ago

paganel 7y ago

A bus driver that “meets expectations” is the perfect bus driver, I don’t want him to “continually improve” thinking that he’s the new Ayrton Senna, I don’t want to be driven around by drivers who think that they’re Formula 1 drivers. How are programmers different from bus drivers?

viscanti 7y ago
> A bus driver that “meets expectations” is the perfect bus driver By what standards are Bus Drivers evaluated? Near accidents are OK as long as they're lucky enough to not be involved in a real accident? If so, I'd prefer they actually improve and decrease their odds of being in a future accident. Does efficiency matter? Maybe one that's on time more often is actually better? Maybe customer service matters, and they can get better at helping people who need to buy tickets for the first time? > I don’t want to be driven around by drivers who think that they’re Formula 1 drivers It seems like there are multiple dimensions that a bus driver can improve on that aren't "become a race car driver". Given that, it seems like the bus driver analogy already isn't a good one. > How are programmers different from bus drivers? It doesn't even seem like we need to answer this one. You started with the false assumption that there are no dimensions that a bus driver can improve on other than becoming a race car driver. One could argue that there are much wider ranges of value creation in programming between average and above average programmers, but that's irrelevant given your initial premise is obviously flawed.
- edw 7y ago
  No, I think this is a fine metaphor. If an engineer can understand a problem, identify a solution, and then implement, document, deploy, and support it in production for project after project, it’s completely legit to say they’re good engineers, and are not necessarily improving in any relevant way. Similarly, a bus driver that consistent drives without causing accidents, doesn’t spill the passengers’ coffee, doesn’t burn too much gas or wear out the breaks too quickly is a good driver. What you say to either of these people is “Great job, we love you, keep doing what you’re doing!” Encouraging growth and improvement as an end in itself can be destructive: How many projects amount to rewriting something that works in some new language or framework because an engineer wants to pad their resume or just learn something new? Craig Mod recently wrote Fast Software, the Best Software; I’m hoping he follows that up with Software That Already Exists and Works Fine Using an Unsexy Suite of Technologies, Software that Doesn’t Need to Be Rewritten.
  - viscanti 7y ago
    > No, I think this is a fine metaphor. If an engineer can understand a problem, identify a solution, and then implement, document, deploy, and support it in production for project after project, it’s completely legit to say they’re good engineers, and are not necessarily improving in any relevant way. We agree. If someone has maxed out all the relevant dimensions then there's no room for improvement. The problem is that there's a difference between that and average. The other problem is that there's continual room for being even better at identifying solutions. > How many projects amount to rewriting something that works in some new language or framework because an engineer wants to pad their resume or just learn something new? Unneeded re-writes and getting better are orthogonal concepts. That you're confusing them here underlines the logical fallacy that you're making. If there's legitimate room for improvement (and there generally is in bus driving and in software engineering), and if that improvement makes you substantially better at your job, then it's worth it. In neither of those areas is the "average" employee completely topped off in where they can grow.
doesitmatterwho 7y ago
"How are programmers different from bus drivers?" How does this guy have 7621 karma on HN? lol
coldtea 7y ago
>How are programmers different from bus drivers? In that programmers are supposed to be creative, over-deliver, etc. You'd worry if a bus driver got from A to B in half the time driving twice as fast suddenly. But you'd be OK if a programmer you've asked to design system with features A, B, C and performance P, also delivers features D, E, F and performance 2*P without being asked!
- paganel 7y ago
  > In that programmers are supposed to be creative, over-deliver, etc. Like I said, I don't want the programmer in charge of the software that manages my financial or health records to be creative or over-deliver, quite the contrary. I'd add personal-data to the mix, and now I've covered a huge chunk of SV companies. I think that the era of "move fast and break things" should be over by now, unfortunately relatively paltry $5 billion fines won't stop the creativeness of some companies.
  - coldtea 7y ago
    >Like I said, I don't want the programmer in charge of the software that manages my financial or health records to be creative or over-deliver, quite the contrary. Sure, but most programmers don't program systems that manage financial or health records or write the software for the ISS. For the majority working on enterprise backoffice stuff, CDUD, web services, mobile and desktop apps, websites, and so on, being creative and over-delivering is OK, and even encouraged.
  - kragen 7y ago
    You'd like your financial and health records to be managed by average-quality software? That is, software that's full of bugs, confuses its users into making lots of eyes, and is insecure? I'd rather have them managed by file clerks on paper if that's what's on offer on the software side.
    - kragen 7y ago
      Lots of errors, not lots of eyes. This error brought to you by my failure to successfully use well-above-average software written by Googlers.