3 ms·

> the best engineers can pick and chose Sorta. I would take a less-qualified but more personable engineer over their more capable peer any day of the week, for

by 23B1 4y ago

> the best engineers can pick and chose Sorta. I would take a less-qualified but more personable engineer over their more capable peer any day of the week, for the aforementioned reasons: engineering isn't the only skill required – those who don't insist on managerial perfection don't actually need a lot of managing as a result. It's a positive feedback loop. Also if engineers think we don't check references and backgrounds anymore – including reputation – those days are long past. It's too much of a liability to have the 'talented asshole' as part of a team anymore. > Especially if you introduce boundaries and restraints. Boundaries and restraints are a professional reality. > So when/if management go down the route of treating Software Development like they treat any other department. It's this exceptionalism that earns engineers the reputation of being jerks, and creates a negative feedback loop. Want to be free and clear to operate without too much bureaucracy? Play the cooperation game. This is as true with engineering as it is literally any other thing that requires more than one human.

DangitBobby 4y ago
You're doing a lot of assuming that the engineer seeking greener pastures because they are, I don't know "selfish" or something, is easily detectible. I can confidently tell you that you're operating under self delusion. Also assuming that someone who isn't going to tolerate fuck-fuck games with assholes when they don't have to is themselves an asshole. It's entirely possible to amicably end a relationship with someone (a business) you can't stand, with them none the wiser that it was ever about something other than compensation. > Want to be free and clear to operate without too much bureaucracy? Play the cooperation game. This is as true with engineering as it is literally any other thing that requires more than one human. This is pure hopium. Bureaucracy is installed in anticipation of growth/security/safety gains, and existing success of the team can be completely ignored by someone who thinks the good of bureaucracy will outweigh the harm.
- 23B1 4y ago
  > I can confidently tell you that you're operating under self delusion. Confidently incorrect! It's the iron law of the market; I don't make the rules. Fwiw, bureaucracy used to not be such a pejorative term; it implies coordination at scale, with internal checks and balances. Engineering doesn't happen without talent, talent needs money, money comes from good sales and marketing, etc. To be efficient, these things have to be centrally coordinated by an entity that typically has an eye on the market, which behaves beyond anyone's control.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
p1esk 4y ago
if engineers think we don't check references and backgrounds anymore – including reputation – those days are long past How do you check reputation?
- 23B1 4y ago
  Word of mouth, mostly.
msrenee 4y ago
I'd say the more personable engineer is the more qualified engineer even if their technical knowledge is less. Being able to deal with other people is a massive part of being good at the job.
EnKopVand 4y ago
What makes you think that the personable engineers aren’t also the ones leaving? One of the reasons I have a lot of job offers isn’t that I’m the best technical engineer you’re going to meet, it’s that I have a large network and is generally seen as a nice person to work with. Obviously my ability also plays into this, but you can be both good at your job and a decent person at the same time. In my experience most people are. > Play the cooperation game. Like I said in my original post, I do this, and in my personal opinion experience so so most people. The thing is though, I have a lot of experience (and education) with/in the “MBA” side of things, and a lot of the things you see some companies do, that this article also touches on, like putting up a needless bureaucracy around estimates and time tracking, don’t actually work as intended. Time tracking tends to lead to cultures where the speed of delivery becomes more important than the quality, and estimating things by the hour is frankly just impossible in a field where you can spend an hour on something incredibly stupid and then 10 minutes on some brilliant solution to an issue marked as complex. I mean, maybe my anecdotal experience is from a mediocre perspective, but even after decades of programming I still do the equivalent of talking to a rubber duck, or at least asking my very good friend and coworker to come and spend 5 seconds spotting where I’ve made the obvious mistake (and the other way around), which we have time to do because we’re not on the clock to deliver as fast as possible by the way. In a world of a lot of shitty business practices, people who can, will take their cooperation game to the place it makes the most sense for them. Including when they are also very personable people.

by 23B1 4y ago

DangitBobby 4y ago

You're doing a lot of assuming that the engineer seeking greener pastures because they are, I don't know "selfish" or something, is easily detectible. I can confidently tell you that you're operating under self delusion. Also assuming that someone who isn't going to tolerate fuck-fuck games with assholes when they don't have to is themselves an asshole. It's entirely possible to amicably end a relationship with someone (a business) you can't stand, with them none the wiser that it was ever about something other than compensation. > Want to be free and clear to operate without too much bureaucracy? Play the cooperation game. This is as true with engineering as it is literally any other thing that requires more than one human. This is pure hopium. Bureaucracy is installed in anticipation of growth/security/safety gains, and existing success of the team can be completely ignored by someone who thinks the good of bureaucracy will outweigh the harm.

23B1 4y ago
> I can confidently tell you that you're operating under self delusion. Confidently incorrect! It's the iron law of the market; I don't make the rules. Fwiw, bureaucracy used to not be such a pejorative term; it implies coordination at scale, with internal checks and balances. Engineering doesn't happen without talent, talent needs money, money comes from good sales and marketing, etc. To be efficient, these things have to be centrally coordinated by an entity that typically has an eye on the market, which behaves beyond anyone's control.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

p1esk 4y ago

if engineers think we don't check references and backgrounds anymore – including reputation – those days are long past How do you check reputation?

23B1 4y ago
Word of mouth, mostly.

msrenee 4y ago

I'd say the more personable engineer is the more qualified engineer even if their technical knowledge is less. Being able to deal with other people is a massive part of being good at the job.

EnKopVand 4y ago

What makes you think that the personable engineers aren’t also the ones leaving? One of the reasons I have a lot of job offers isn’t that I’m the best technical engineer you’re going to meet, it’s that I have a large network and is generally seen as a nice person to work with. Obviously my ability also plays into this, but you can be both good at your job and a decent person at the same time. In my experience most people are. > Play the cooperation game. Like I said in my original post, I do this, and in my personal opinion experience so so most people. The thing is though, I have a lot of experience (and education) with/in the “MBA” side of things, and a lot of the things you see some companies do, that this article also touches on, like putting up a needless bureaucracy around estimates and time tracking, don’t actually work as intended. Time tracking tends to lead to cultures where the speed of delivery becomes more important than the quality, and estimating things by the hour is frankly just impossible in a field where you can spend an hour on something incredibly stupid and then 10 minutes on some brilliant solution to an issue marked as complex. I mean, maybe my anecdotal experience is from a mediocre perspective, but even after decades of programming I still do the equivalent of talking to a rubber duck, or at least asking my very good friend and coworker to come and spend 5 seconds spotting where I’ve made the obvious mistake (and the other way around), which we have time to do because we’re not on the clock to deliver as fast as possible by the way. In a world of a lot of shitty business practices, people who can, will take their cooperation game to the place it makes the most sense for them. Including when they are also very personable people.