5 ms·

This industry spends way too much time thinking about top producers (IE, the mythical 10x developer) and not enough about the support to turn one of those compe

This industry spends way too much time thinking about top producers (IE, the mythical 10x developer) and not enough about the support to turn one of those competent but humble developers into a top producer. Are there a few legitimate "The One" developers in the world? Yes, I'm sure there are. But you can take an average player, put them in a super supportive environment with good tools and make them look like a super star way easier than you can find or pay, or in some cases put up with the prima donna antics of a "super star." Put in the wrong environment too, you can turn a super star into a lemon super quick.

corporateslave5 6y ago
Honestly, the longer I work in this industry the more I think the 10x developers are real and just so valuable. 90% of devs just aren’t worth that much.
- poulsbohemian 6y ago
  >Honestly, the longer I work in this industry the more I think the 10x developers are real and just so valuable. 90% of devs just aren’t worth that much. I don't disagree with this, but I also came to the conclusion that it is just raging against the machine to think that it is fixable. So long as there is money to be made, no barriers to entry, and no economic incentive to improve the situation, it will only continue to get worse. I'm of the same opinion now that I was in the 90s - the fix is to mature the discipline to a true profession of licensed, qualified, software engineers. But, it's a pipe dream to think that will ever happen in a meaningful way.
- throw73744 6y ago
  I think current corporate culture is just toxic. It requires people to work in inadequate environment, in large dirty cities, without basic infrastructure like transportation, security and accomodation. 90% people would not be productive in this job.
ponker 6y ago
Nah. There are some people who can fix any bug and build any system from scratch. You can’t manufacture those people.
- fxtentacle 6y ago
  I disagree with your statement but agree with your point. I believe that's due to being curious and slightly introverted when young, so these people just have lots and lots of experience. Such people could be manufactured by training them on many different programming disciplines over many years. It's just that for almost any company, investing so much into training is not feasible. That employee might leave once training is over.
  - siscia 6y ago
    What if the company does not train them, and they stay?
    - fxtentacle 6y ago
      Then they'll be regular employees, but not 10x-ers?
  - poulsbohemian 6y ago
    In my own career, I've had moments where everything just flowed and I was incredibly productive. I've also had moments where I was absolutely worthless. The difference was all about the constraints of the environment. For example - yes, if you have great tooling that makes it easy to produce, then that's cool. But, if you don't have great tooling but you have the organizational support to bring in the tools and processes you need, then you are halfway there. On the other hand, if you don't have the organizational support - which often isn't about budget so much as actual verbal, emotional, political, psychological kinds of support - then your productivity will likely be very low. When I've been in places with management or clients that were repressive in their behaviors, well... they reaped what they sowed and out the door I went asap. Normally someone will pop up and say something about the risks or the security or something driving that kind of behavior or process - yes, I've worked in some high-risk environments, but there is a difference between a process designed to minimize faults and one that is just repressive because of ignorance, egos, etc. If you treat people badly, they will not produce at a high level.
taneq 6y ago
Your last point is a huge one too. I read something ages ago which stuck with me ever since - a scalpel is sharper than a bread knife, but that doesn't mean it's better. Sometimes you just need to cut bread. A lot of companies chase highly skilled, creative, motivated developers and then stick them with routine, grindy jobs until they quit or lose the will to live. It doesn't matter how sharp your scalpel is if they're being wasted maintaining some enterprise CRUD app.
- shostack 6y ago
  Without trying to push the analogy too far, I think the point holds without ascribing superiority to any particular job (or cutting tool). Case in point, I have a nice Japanese knife set. My chef's knife (your scalpel) sucks at cutting bread compared to the set's serrated bread slicing knife. Both of those knives such at spreading peanut butter and jelly to make a sandwich. The right tool (or person) for the job is what matters.
- ivanhoe 6y ago
  All jobs turn into a routine after a while, but IME when it becomes a problem is usually not because of the job itself, but because you loose motivation to do it anymore. And that (to me at least) usually happens because of the bad management and/or unpleasant team environment, not the work itself. Give me the sense of purpose and I'll fix CRUD api for the rest of my life, no problem. That's what adult life is about anyway IMHO, not everyone gets to launch rockets or cure cancer, some of us work to pay bills and that's OK... and beside launching rockets and curing diseases includes a lot of grindy work, too. But if I feel unappreciated or the work seems pointless then I just disconnect from the project and don't care anymore, and then any work becomes just grinding, until you're ready to quit.
- cbsmith 6y ago
  ...except you have to ask yourself, if you had a team of talented software engineers, how is it that their primary work remains building the same CRUD apps time and again? A good software engineer would recognize they're doing the same thing over and over again and write some software so that they didn't have to. Maybe there'd still need to be some minor adjustments to get things right, but it'd take up a modicum of their time.
fxtentacle 6y ago
You probability just never met one of the 10x-ers. To the outside, them enforcing a productive environment might look like diva behavior. For example, I know someone who insists on having the exact same chair, screen, keyboard, mouse, and IDE at every job. I believe he's been called arrogant for that. But his explanation was that all of that is necessary to make past muscle memory translate. Like this, he can type fully blind at an impressive speed and navigate every project purely with shortcuts. If thinking is not your bottleneck, then it makes a lot of sense to optimize for typing speed.
- poulsbohemian 6y ago
  >You probability just never met one of the 10x-ers. You might be right. But I spent 23 years in industry and can think of just a couple people who I might consider to be 10xers... and that's not enough to build all the software that has to be built in the world. >To the outside, them enforcing a productive environment might look like diva behavior. Your examples of chairs, screens, etc - I don't have any beef with that; that's not what I mean by prima donna behavior. What I've tended to see are people who definitely are not 10xers who have somehow got the organization in a stranglehold of toxicity.
  - fxtentacle 6y ago
    In my opinion, most software these days looks like it's built with a lot of duct tape and the bare minimum level of skill necessary. For example, the Slack client could probably be built at 10% the RAM usage, 1% the disk space, 20% the CPU usage, and still be twice as fast. But I totally understand that Slack didn't want to "waste" their A team on an app that's already good enough. Try arguing at FAANG that you'll need your own quiet office for your stuff plus a window and some potted plants to help you stay awake and concentrate. I think you'd be thrown out for "refusing to be a team player". And yes, in my 18 years in IT I have also met toxic hostage keepers. But my impression was that those were people who were highly skilled and have in-depth knowledge of the system. And then somewhere along the way they had a fallout with management and wanted to leave, but the company couldn't hire any suitable replacement. So now both company and employee are stuck in an abusive relationship, for fear of being alone otherwise.
quickthrower2 6y ago
"10x developer" is meaningless and unmeasurable. We have to try and measure somehow so we know what grade people are and what to pay. But really most people are working for a business not research. And in such cases the productivity could be measured in affect say revenue or profit. That's hard to measure for a lot of things. And it takes teamwork, and a lot of human factors. I doubt typing speed really comes into it. If you can do 40wpm or more it's fine IMO. Hunt and peck is OK. An "idiot" using NodeJS writing it all in one big ugly index.js file might make the company a million with an idea or subtle change that the Linux Kernel genius missed. Not really sure how you measure 10x. The only way to do it is to confine what it means. "Can they implement this given problem in 1 hour? Then they are 10x" But... software by it's nature is about implementing problems that are even hard to define in the first place and spotting opportunities. The right decisions - what NOT to develop, or what tech to use could make such a big difference. It might be hidden in an inane looking decision to use C# for example, that doesn't make you "look" like a 10xer.
- quickthrower2 6y ago
  Thinking about this a bit more, I think a 10x is like one of those maths proofs that says "I can prove it exists, but I can't tell you what it is!" I "10x" was originally intended as a hypothetical talking point. There probably are 10x people in a team. The 10x status could change rapidly as circumstances change, team dynamics and company goals change. Someone else might take the invisible 10x crown once they get to work on a project that aligns with their strengths. At any time you don't know who to 10x is. You need some system to decide what is a fair salary and who you want to try hard to keep. A good manager should have a feel for who that is in their team. If that person moves into another company they may not be that person anymore in the new team. So 10x probably exists (as defined as ratio of best to worse). If it didn't exist it means that most people are pretty much performing the same, which I don't believe. But I doubt anyone is permanently a 10x contributor, and I doubt many people (include the 10x-er themselves) can tell who it is.

corporateslave5 6y ago

Honestly, the longer I work in this industry the more I think the 10x developers are real and just so valuable. 90% of devs just aren’t worth that much.

poulsbohemian 6y ago
>Honestly, the longer I work in this industry the more I think the 10x developers are real and just so valuable. 90% of devs just aren’t worth that much. I don't disagree with this, but I also came to the conclusion that it is just raging against the machine to think that it is fixable. So long as there is money to be made, no barriers to entry, and no economic incentive to improve the situation, it will only continue to get worse. I'm of the same opinion now that I was in the 90s - the fix is to mature the discipline to a true profession of licensed, qualified, software engineers. But, it's a pipe dream to think that will ever happen in a meaningful way.
throw73744 6y ago
I think current corporate culture is just toxic. It requires people to work in inadequate environment, in large dirty cities, without basic infrastructure like transportation, security and accomodation. 90% people would not be productive in this job.

ponker 6y ago

Nah. There are some people who can fix any bug and build any system from scratch. You can’t manufacture those people.

fxtentacle 6y ago
I disagree with your statement but agree with your point. I believe that's due to being curious and slightly introverted when young, so these people just have lots and lots of experience. Such people could be manufactured by training them on many different programming disciplines over many years. It's just that for almost any company, investing so much into training is not feasible. That employee might leave once training is over.
- siscia 6y ago
  What if the company does not train them, and they stay?
  - fxtentacle 6y ago
    Then they'll be regular employees, but not 10x-ers?
- poulsbohemian 6y ago
  In my own career, I've had moments where everything just flowed and I was incredibly productive. I've also had moments where I was absolutely worthless. The difference was all about the constraints of the environment. For example - yes, if you have great tooling that makes it easy to produce, then that's cool. But, if you don't have great tooling but you have the organizational support to bring in the tools and processes you need, then you are halfway there. On the other hand, if you don't have the organizational support - which often isn't about budget so much as actual verbal, emotional, political, psychological kinds of support - then your productivity will likely be very low. When I've been in places with management or clients that were repressive in their behaviors, well... they reaped what they sowed and out the door I went asap. Normally someone will pop up and say something about the risks or the security or something driving that kind of behavior or process - yes, I've worked in some high-risk environments, but there is a difference between a process designed to minimize faults and one that is just repressive because of ignorance, egos, etc. If you treat people badly, they will not produce at a high level.

taneq 6y ago

Your last point is a huge one too. I read something ages ago which stuck with me ever since - a scalpel is sharper than a bread knife, but that doesn't mean it's better. Sometimes you just need to cut bread. A lot of companies chase highly skilled, creative, motivated developers and then stick them with routine, grindy jobs until they quit or lose the will to live. It doesn't matter how sharp your scalpel is if they're being wasted maintaining some enterprise CRUD app.

shostack 6y ago
Without trying to push the analogy too far, I think the point holds without ascribing superiority to any particular job (or cutting tool). Case in point, I have a nice Japanese knife set. My chef's knife (your scalpel) sucks at cutting bread compared to the set's serrated bread slicing knife. Both of those knives such at spreading peanut butter and jelly to make a sandwich. The right tool (or person) for the job is what matters.
ivanhoe 6y ago
All jobs turn into a routine after a while, but IME when it becomes a problem is usually not because of the job itself, but because you loose motivation to do it anymore. And that (to me at least) usually happens because of the bad management and/or unpleasant team environment, not the work itself. Give me the sense of purpose and I'll fix CRUD api for the rest of my life, no problem. That's what adult life is about anyway IMHO, not everyone gets to launch rockets or cure cancer, some of us work to pay bills and that's OK... and beside launching rockets and curing diseases includes a lot of grindy work, too. But if I feel unappreciated or the work seems pointless then I just disconnect from the project and don't care anymore, and then any work becomes just grinding, until you're ready to quit.
cbsmith 6y ago
...except you have to ask yourself, if you had a team of talented software engineers, how is it that their primary work remains building the same CRUD apps time and again? A good software engineer would recognize they're doing the same thing over and over again and write some software so that they didn't have to. Maybe there'd still need to be some minor adjustments to get things right, but it'd take up a modicum of their time.

fxtentacle 6y ago

You probability just never met one of the 10x-ers. To the outside, them enforcing a productive environment might look like diva behavior. For example, I know someone who insists on having the exact same chair, screen, keyboard, mouse, and IDE at every job. I believe he's been called arrogant for that. But his explanation was that all of that is necessary to make past muscle memory translate. Like this, he can type fully blind at an impressive speed and navigate every project purely with shortcuts. If thinking is not your bottleneck, then it makes a lot of sense to optimize for typing speed.

poulsbohemian 6y ago
>You probability just never met one of the 10x-ers. You might be right. But I spent 23 years in industry and can think of just a couple people who I might consider to be 10xers... and that's not enough to build all the software that has to be built in the world. >To the outside, them enforcing a productive environment might look like diva behavior. Your examples of chairs, screens, etc - I don't have any beef with that; that's not what I mean by prima donna behavior. What I've tended to see are people who definitely are not 10xers who have somehow got the organization in a stranglehold of toxicity.
- fxtentacle 6y ago
  In my opinion, most software these days looks like it's built with a lot of duct tape and the bare minimum level of skill necessary. For example, the Slack client could probably be built at 10% the RAM usage, 1% the disk space, 20% the CPU usage, and still be twice as fast. But I totally understand that Slack didn't want to "waste" their A team on an app that's already good enough. Try arguing at FAANG that you'll need your own quiet office for your stuff plus a window and some potted plants to help you stay awake and concentrate. I think you'd be thrown out for "refusing to be a team player". And yes, in my 18 years in IT I have also met toxic hostage keepers. But my impression was that those were people who were highly skilled and have in-depth knowledge of the system. And then somewhere along the way they had a fallout with management and wanted to leave, but the company couldn't hire any suitable replacement. So now both company and employee are stuck in an abusive relationship, for fear of being alone otherwise.

quickthrower2 6y ago

"10x developer" is meaningless and unmeasurable. We have to try and measure somehow so we know what grade people are and what to pay. But really most people are working for a business not research. And in such cases the productivity could be measured in affect say revenue or profit. That's hard to measure for a lot of things. And it takes teamwork, and a lot of human factors. I doubt typing speed really comes into it. If you can do 40wpm or more it's fine IMO. Hunt and peck is OK. An "idiot" using NodeJS writing it all in one big ugly index.js file might make the company a million with an idea or subtle change that the Linux Kernel genius missed. Not really sure how you measure 10x. The only way to do it is to confine what it means. "Can they implement this given problem in 1 hour? Then they are 10x" But... software by it's nature is about implementing problems that are even hard to define in the first place and spotting opportunities. The right decisions - what NOT to develop, or what tech to use could make such a big difference. It might be hidden in an inane looking decision to use C# for example, that doesn't make you "look" like a 10xer.

quickthrower2 6y ago
Thinking about this a bit more, I think a 10x is like one of those maths proofs that says "I can prove it exists, but I can't tell you what it is!" I "10x" was originally intended as a hypothetical talking point. There probably are 10x people in a team. The 10x status could change rapidly as circumstances change, team dynamics and company goals change. Someone else might take the invisible 10x crown once they get to work on a project that aligns with their strengths. At any time you don't know who to 10x is. You need some system to decide what is a fair salary and who you want to try hard to keep. A good manager should have a feel for who that is in their team. If that person moves into another company they may not be that person anymore in the new team. So 10x probably exists (as defined as ratio of best to worse). If it didn't exist it means that most people are pretty much performing the same, which I don't believe. But I doubt anyone is permanently a 10x contributor, and I doubt many people (include the 10x-er themselves) can tell who it is.