3 ms·

I agree, except instead of 'mediocre' I'd use 'competent'. As long as technical wizardry doesn't add significant value, or it isn't essential to the business,

I agree, except instead of 'mediocre' I'd use 'competent'. As long as technical wizardry doesn't add significant value, or it isn't essential to the business, most companies would rather not pay for it. They believe they don't need experts. And most computing folks at most companies know that rising technically is not the way to advance your career. If it were, more companies would be crying out to hire experienced 'expert' 50 year olds. But they're not. From what I've seen, expertise is overrated. And competence is underrated. Adding real value to an enterprise comes from achieving multiple avenues of competence (technical, business, social, etc), and then anticipating the needs of the enterprise before experts have to be drafted to rescue a misdirected effort (or a disaster that never should have happened if sufficient competence had been employed). A lack of emphasis on expertise is probably a good thing. Answering clever interview questions well, like taking tests well, is at best a surrogate measure for street smarts -- the skills that really matter outside academe.

1tCKV3QfIo 6y ago
You conflate misunderstanding project requirements with competence. So you think the most efficient solution _and_ implementation will come from someone technically mediocre? Go ahead and implement your high-level business solution - see how many resources you waste implementing it because you are unaware of a better way.
partyboat1586 6y ago
Very true. I knew a C++ developer who knew the language inside and out, incredible skill, 100% on a written test where most people get hired with a score of 60%+. He offered very little to the company other than optimising the build to run faster. He just wasn't motivated to solve the problems the company needed solving or engage in the product. Unsurprisingly he wanted to play with C++ all day long. I also knew a developer who came from a coding bootcamp, adequate CS fundamentals and basic knowledge of JavaScript and Java. He was the most productive developer I've ever worked with. Laser like focus and great social skills. He occasionally needed guidance from more technical developers but he knew when to ask for help and he got the job done.

1tCKV3QfIo 6y ago

You conflate misunderstanding project requirements with competence. So you think the most efficient solution _and_ implementation will come from someone technically mediocre? Go ahead and implement your high-level business solution - see how many resources you waste implementing it because you are unaware of a better way.

partyboat1586 6y ago

Very true. I knew a C++ developer who knew the language inside and out, incredible skill, 100% on a written test where most people get hired with a score of 60%+. He offered very little to the company other than optimising the build to run faster. He just wasn't motivated to solve the problems the company needed solving or engage in the product. Unsurprisingly he wanted to play with C++ all day long. I also knew a developer who came from a coding bootcamp, adequate CS fundamentals and basic knowledge of JavaScript and Java. He was the most productive developer I've ever worked with. Laser like focus and great social skills. He occasionally needed guidance from more technical developers but he knew when to ask for help and he got the job done.