> This is why hiring in software is broken. A bunch of people that don't actually want to be stewards of the craft. I've hired a few developers and have found

> This is why hiring in software is broken. A bunch of people that don't actually want to be stewards of the craft. I've hired a few developers and have found you can turn a inexperienced but relatively bright developer into a competent one with sufficient time and training. In my experience, this usually takes at least one year, and roughly one or two months of a manager/mentor's time. An experienced super-star can become productive within a month, requires just a few days of the manager's time, and can easily be >3X more productive than the merely competent engineer. The problem is that it's almost impossible to identify most super-stars, and the obvious super-stars command super-star salaries (although generally less than the 3X productivity gain). Creating a company that relies on training competent programmers may be less efficient than one that seeks out super-stars, but it's still a proven and workable model, with added benefits of higher employee loyalty and work-force stability.