4 ms·

But its a solvable problem: oblige all decision takers to get training on the IT side and get all IT staff to get training on how to explain/communicate what th

But its a solvable problem: oblige all decision takers to get training on the IT side and get all IT staff to get training on how to explain/communicate what they do.

willcipriano 5y ago
Gleefully declaring you are non-technical in a tech company is like gleefully declaring you are illiterate in a publishing house. Publishing houses just refuse to hire people who can't read rather than getting the executives hooked on phonics.
- ozim 5y ago
  In a tech company. Most companies don't consider themselves "tech" and there is a lot of space for people who refuse to learn "technical mumbo jumbo" like just basic use of web browser or getting at least some knowledge of how browser is working.
  - bumby 5y ago
    I agree, in most companies, software is an enabling function and not part of the core deliverable.
bumby 5y ago
>But its a solvable problem I would push back a little bit that this is the sole reason (and thus not quite as solvable a problem as one might think). A couple other reasons that help explain why a lot of software sucks: 1) Unlike other engineering disciplines, there is not strict adherence to codified standards. It's easy for me to argue that my solution is adequate, even when if yours may be objectively better. An electrician or civil engineer has much less leeway for creativity because they are constrained by codes, standards, and industry-accepted best practices where adherence/compliance is culturally ingrained. Software, by comparison, is very much the Wild West. 2) It's very easy to change. Because software is relatively easy to change, it means configurations are often less stable. Especially at scale (and combined with the lack of standards), this can cause problems. 3) It's relatively cheap to implement (superficially at least) and there's a low barrier for entry (superficially at least). Software doesn't have the culture of other engineering disciplines regarding accreditation. I'm not a huge fan of credentialism personally, but it can provide a stop-gap in terms of skills, especially when those doing the hiring don't know how to properly assess those skills.

But its a solvable problem: oblige all decision takers to get training on the IT side and get all IT staff to get training on how to explain/communicate what they do.

willcipriano 5y ago

Gleefully declaring you are non-technical in a tech company is like gleefully declaring you are illiterate in a publishing house. Publishing houses just refuse to hire people who can't read rather than getting the executives hooked on phonics.

ozim 5y ago
In a tech company. Most companies don't consider themselves "tech" and there is a lot of space for people who refuse to learn "technical mumbo jumbo" like just basic use of web browser or getting at least some knowledge of how browser is working.
- bumby 5y ago
  I agree, in most companies, software is an enabling function and not part of the core deliverable.

bumby 5y ago

>But its a solvable problem I would push back a little bit that this is the sole reason (and thus not quite as solvable a problem as one might think). A couple other reasons that help explain why a lot of software sucks: 1) Unlike other engineering disciplines, there is not strict adherence to codified standards. It's easy for me to argue that my solution is adequate, even when if yours may be objectively better. An electrician or civil engineer has much less leeway for creativity because they are constrained by codes, standards, and industry-accepted best practices where adherence/compliance is culturally ingrained. Software, by comparison, is very much the Wild West. 2) It's very easy to change. Because software is relatively easy to change, it means configurations are often less stable. Especially at scale (and combined with the lack of standards), this can cause problems. 3) It's relatively cheap to implement (superficially at least) and there's a low barrier for entry (superficially at least). Software doesn't have the culture of other engineering disciplines regarding accreditation. I'm not a huge fan of credentialism personally, but it can provide a stop-gap in terms of skills, especially when those doing the hiring don't know how to properly assess those skills.