3 ms·

This is a silly framing of the 10x engineer issue. That label originally designated someone who had written an unusual amount of excellent software. Recently i

by anmxxx 5y ago

This is a silly framing of the 10x engineer issue. That label originally designated someone who had written an unusual amount of excellent software. Recently in the discussions here, people take it to mean someone who cobbles together broken apps at a rapid pace and gets credit from management for being a hero. This is not what 10x engineer means. Please find another label for that phenomenon, for example 10x faker.

eurasiantiger 5y ago
I don’t think that’s a fair labeling; from my experience ”cobbled-together, broken apps” are the result of taking the MVP approach to continuous development due to time constraints imposed by management due to contracts sold too cheap by sales directors. The failure of a software project begins at the contract stage. This gives salespeople a measure of control over the developers, and it is in their interests to increase developer stress by selling more things cheaper. The worst part is that salespeople are prone to corruption: if they can make a client company pay less for a service, the company may hand over a part of their savings. This is difficult to control, as the kickbacks may come in material or immaterial forms. The effects of the corruption are very real to the organisation, which now puts undue stress on developers with projects that are designed to fail just enough to trigger contractual clauses in benefit of the buyer.
jjav 5y ago
> people take it to mean someone who cobbles together broken apps at a rapid pace and gets credit from management for being a hero I agree, but as you say, this is more often than not the definition used (unconsciously) by management. Management considers this person the 10x and others consider them the -1x. And yet.. these developers are also great though, in their niche. It's awesome to have someone on the team who can whip up the demoware in an evening for investors and customers! Even when I'd rather they never commit anything to the product source. Which is why this discussion of finding who is the 10x is misguided. Turns out people excel at different things. Good management will identify what everyone is best at and have them focused on that. Bad management will shoehorn people into the wrong roles and set them up for failure.

by anmxxx 5y ago

eurasiantiger 5y ago

I don’t think that’s a fair labeling; from my experience ”cobbled-together, broken apps” are the result of taking the MVP approach to continuous development due to time constraints imposed by management due to contracts sold too cheap by sales directors. The failure of a software project begins at the contract stage. This gives salespeople a measure of control over the developers, and it is in their interests to increase developer stress by selling more things cheaper. The worst part is that salespeople are prone to corruption: if they can make a client company pay less for a service, the company may hand over a part of their savings. This is difficult to control, as the kickbacks may come in material or immaterial forms. The effects of the corruption are very real to the organisation, which now puts undue stress on developers with projects that are designed to fail just enough to trigger contractual clauses in benefit of the buyer.

jjav 5y ago

> people take it to mean someone who cobbles together broken apps at a rapid pace and gets credit from management for being a hero I agree, but as you say, this is more often than not the definition used (unconsciously) by management. Management considers this person the 10x and others consider them the -1x. And yet.. these developers are also great though, in their niche. It's awesome to have someone on the team who can whip up the demoware in an evening for investors and customers! Even when I'd rather they never commit anything to the product source. Which is why this discussion of finding who is the 10x is misguided. Turns out people excel at different things. Good management will identify what everyone is best at and have them focused on that. Bad management will shoehorn people into the wrong roles and set them up for failure.