4 ms·

In my specific case we all have roughly the same experience with each technology so it’s fine to consider people as interchangeable. Of course that doesn’t mean

by hk__2 4y ago

In my specific case we all have roughly the same experience with each technology so it’s fine to consider people as interchangeable. Of course that doesn’t mean we don’t take preferences into account; it’s just to have a rough idea of our roadmap and know if we need to recruit.

dusted 4y ago
I agree. Also, if people are so uniquely skilled that each and every task can only be made by a specific person (excuse me, "human being") then your bus-factor is 1 and a single person leaving, getting sick (or indeed, hit by a bus) means death for the project.. That's terrible. It's entirely reasonable to think of work and people using separate terms, I'd argue it's probably healthy too.. Now, that's not the same as ignoring personal preferences where they apply, for instance, when allocating resources to a task or project, of course, consideration should be taken when possible, "oh, person X hates doing this, but Y loves it, sure, X is slightly stronger at it, but we let Y do it, then they're happier and Y gets stronger too" I consider myself as being around a 1.3x javascript resource for backend, a 0.8x for frontend, and around a 0.5x resource for C++ (meaning I'll spend twice the amount of time doing the same task as someone I consider a 1x C++ resource).
- necovek 4y ago
  > uniquely skilled I was mostly referring to how we all have different levels of expertise in some narrower domains. Just like your example of you being 1.3x at JS and 0.5x for C++: you can do C++ on a project, but you can't allocate two weeks on the C++ part of the project without deciding if it's you or 1.5x person doing the work. IOW, your roadmap is "faked".
necovek 4y ago
Certainly, it's entirely possible you have people who can do roughly the same type of work. You still don't benefit at all from calling them "resources" — at best, nobody minds, until you hire someone who does :) I mean, this is not even a nerdy or funny name that only certain people would enjoy, so why not simply stick with "people"?

by hk__2 4y ago

dusted 4y ago

I agree. Also, if people are so uniquely skilled that each and every task can only be made by a specific person (excuse me, "human being") then your bus-factor is 1 and a single person leaving, getting sick (or indeed, hit by a bus) means death for the project.. That's terrible. It's entirely reasonable to think of work and people using separate terms, I'd argue it's probably healthy too.. Now, that's not the same as ignoring personal preferences where they apply, for instance, when allocating resources to a task or project, of course, consideration should be taken when possible, "oh, person X hates doing this, but Y loves it, sure, X is slightly stronger at it, but we let Y do it, then they're happier and Y gets stronger too" I consider myself as being around a 1.3x javascript resource for backend, a 0.8x for frontend, and around a 0.5x resource for C++ (meaning I'll spend twice the amount of time doing the same task as someone I consider a 1x C++ resource).

necovek 4y ago
> uniquely skilled I was mostly referring to how we all have different levels of expertise in some narrower domains. Just like your example of you being 1.3x at JS and 0.5x for C++: you can do C++ on a project, but you can't allocate two weeks on the C++ part of the project without deciding if it's you or 1.5x person doing the work. IOW, your roadmap is "faked".

necovek 4y ago

Certainly, it's entirely possible you have people who can do roughly the same type of work. You still don't benefit at all from calling them "resources" — at best, nobody minds, until you hire someone who does :) I mean, this is not even a nerdy or funny name that only certain people would enjoy, so why not simply stick with "people"?