3 ms·

PG is of course correct in suggesting that if you want to keep programming, don't accept a promotion to a non-programming role. That's not what he is suggestin

by sthlm 15y ago

PG is of course correct in suggesting that if you want to keep programming, don't accept a promotion to a non-programming role. That's not what he is suggesting though: His statement doesn't include "if you want". He formulates it as an at-all-costs mantra -- stay in programming, for the worst could happen. It can be absolutely horrid advice to a number of people who would excel even more at other IT roles or management roles (see interesting comment from robertk [1]). I myself was long not considering applying to non-development roles, because many of those great opportunities are more and more looked down upon as "not programming". I know some people who've come as far as "Be Mark Zuckerberg or die trying", completely rejecting any business model that isn't two guys coding in a garage. I didn't actually read PG's comment like that -- I have the utmost respect for PG; but this is the background for why I authored such an opposing comment. I don't actually think the RAQs we are discussing were designed to be put under lawyer-like scrutiny ;) Depends on what your goal is Completely agree. Casual focus will rarely lead to greatness. they should get out of the way and enable programmers to work optimally For someone to get out of the way, he first has to be in the way. You make the general assumption that a manager is bad unless he actively changes his style. I cannot challenge this assumption for I have no data or ideas on where to find some concerning if managers are universally good or bad. And even then employee satisfaction might not be the only metric to measure success. Although I do think that having fun at work is one of the most, if not the most important metric. Many things would be better if everyone enjoyed their work. [1] http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3012765 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3012765

Apteris 15y ago
I know some people who've come as far as "Be Mark Zuckerberg or die trying", completely rejecting any business model that isn't two guys coding in a garage. I believe the idea behind that perspective is that the aggressive startup model will lead to either failure or fabulous success, whereas a more traditional career will lead to only incremental improvements to your lot in life. Some people are attracted to that. For someone to get out of the way, he first has to be in the way. You make the general assumption that a manager is bad unless he actively changes his style. I cannot challenge this assumption for I have no data or ideas on where to find some concerning if managers are universally good or bad. And even then employee satisfaction might not be the only metric to measure success. Although I do think that having fun at work is one of the most, if not the most important metric. Many things would be better if everyone enjoyed their work. No no, that was merely short-hand. To say "they should get out of the way" is to say the manager should create a good working environment for the programmers, while not micro-managing. So yes on the nice office with few distractions, yes on the manager being the sole gateway between the team and the rest of the company, no on the manager dictating what sorting algorithm to use. See for instance this article by Joel Spolsky: http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2009/03/09.html http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2009/03/09.html

by sthlm 15y ago

Apteris 15y ago

I know some people who've come as far as "Be Mark Zuckerberg or die trying", completely rejecting any business model that isn't two guys coding in a garage. I believe the idea behind that perspective is that the aggressive startup model will lead to either failure or fabulous success, whereas a more traditional career will lead to only incremental improvements to your lot in life. Some people are attracted to that. For someone to get out of the way, he first has to be in the way. You make the general assumption that a manager is bad unless he actively changes his style. I cannot challenge this assumption for I have no data or ideas on where to find some concerning if managers are universally good or bad. And even then employee satisfaction might not be the only metric to measure success. Although I do think that having fun at work is one of the most, if not the most important metric. Many things would be better if everyone enjoyed their work. No no, that was merely short-hand. To say "they should get out of the way" is to say the manager should create a good working environment for the programmers, while not micro-managing. So yes on the nice office with few distractions, yes on the manager being the sole gateway between the team and the rest of the company, no on the manager dictating what sorting algorithm to use. See for instance this article by Joel Spolsky: http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2009/03/09.html http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2009/03/09.html