What he said about developer productivity might be technically wrong, but misleading. Certain types of work require one to be at certain level of mastery, not j

What he said about developer productivity might be technically wrong, but misleading. Certain types of work require one to be at certain level of mastery, not just in software by the way. One who performs at that level can do the job, but just barely. Below that level you are a burden, not an asset, whoever worked in the industry knows such people, they don't do anything productive, but mostly get in the way. If we then assume that this level is zero, then everything above it it is positive, and or measurement of how much one engineer is better than another is exaggerated. It's like when you are playing an RPG. Quest that requires level 5 is pretty much impossible for level 4. Doable for level 5. Level 6 can pass one easy. Level 10 would zoom through it. He's not 10 times higher in level than level 5, but certainly would get the job done 10 times faster and more reliably. That's where this comes from. Small advantages can mean difference between failing the project, barely pulling the project, or acing one; all of which translates into business losing or making money.