4 ms·

>I never understood why some people despise the term full-stack. More for the role: full-stack has you doing multiple roles, but is not compensated as such. Yo

>I never understood why some people despise the term full-stack. More for the role: full-stack has you doing multiple roles, but is not compensated as such. You're even removing the communication overhead if the role had been split in two. It seems to me as a business move to compress roles and pay you less for double the capability in exchange for varied work. I don't think people should just accept lower comp just because they prefer varied work.

willsmith72 4y ago
I don't agree about multiple roles, backend/frontend is just one way of splitting a system. It's not like you get twice as much done in a fullstack role, you just do half as much frontend and half as much backend (in an even split role). But why do you think fullstack is paid less? Is this a generally accepted fact?
- DietaryNonsense 4y ago
  The reduction of the communication overhead is definitely non-trivial. Though many businesses don't seem to measure the internal performance of their systems when the programs are running on and between humans. So if it works to some vague, hand wavey degree, "fine". By relying on the idea that back/front is "just" a way of splitting a system, one could say that SRE/Front is a way of splitting a system, or Sales/Support, or Finance/HR, and so on. We're of course talking about ways of splitting the system(s) involved. I think the spirit of the original idea is that roles are defined by boundaries. The boundaries are definitely "made up" but they aren't arbitrary. The degree of expertise and volume of knowledge needed to operate effectively (or expertly) within a role, and the ease or difficulty of obtaining those requirements, should be acknowledged when a company describes a role they are hiring for. If the bulk of your roadmap is back-end work but you want to hire full-stack devs because its nice to have everything, this seems like sloppy practice (though totally accepted). On the other hand there are plenty of full-stack jobs that really just mean "back-end but not going to throw a contract in our face when you have to drop into the browser debugger to solve a problem". This is the kind of full stack I am. I wouldn't be okay with being asked to work on our frontend for the next year but I'm perfectly comfortable with debugging, making recommendations, doing some front-end work if it means filling a gap when resources are constrained.
temporallobe 4y ago
In my 20+ year career, I have met very few programmers who can actually justify the claim of being full-stack. Usually it means strong back-end that happens to have worked with some front-end framework fad, and less often vice versa. Specialists (UI/UX, database admins, CI/CD engineers, automation testers, just to name a few) are still very much needed and the trend to make everybody on the team “full-stack” doesn’t work well in practice unless everyone is a 10x developer.
- hoosieree 4y ago
  I have worked on ASICs, FPGAs, compilers, routers, clusters, servers, websites and mobile apps. But I would not describe myself as a "full-stack developer". To me that implies a very specific thing - a RDBMS backend coupled to heavyweight javascript framework frontend.
  - indymike 4y ago
    May I steal this description of "full-stack developer": a RDBMS backend coupled to heavyweight javascript framework frontend
    - mixmastamyk 4y ago
      Fullstack never required a heavy frontend to my mind, simply reasonable js, css, and ux knowledge. Depends heavily on the product however.
drstewart 4y ago
So do you feel the same way about backend developers who use databases? Surely that's two roles: server developer and database developer? Of course, they can't test their own code manually. That's two roles: developer and QA! So a backend developer is at least 3 roles of work. Are you making 3x the salary you should be?
- RockingGoodNite 4y ago
  It's a commonly accepted view that backend developers know databases. Until it is fixed, there are two major realms now due to Google (Angular) and Microsoft (TypeScript), backend and frontend. I was once a full stack developer but refuse to touch Angular gargabe or TypeShit.
- vsareto 4y ago
  TBH you could add Architect and DevOps if they're doing architecture/writing IaC as well. These all can be individual roles. The formula doesn't necessarily have to be salary times roles, but it should be higher than specific roles like front-end, back-end, DBA, QA, architect which can all ask for high salaries on their own. In my experience, full stack jobs often have salaries on par with the specific roles which is my beef. The biggest personal reason generalist roles should be priced higher is the time you spent to learn multiple things well enough to get a job doing them. If you accept a role as full stack that pays the same as a backend only role, you're essentially devaluing your own time. The other perks are reducing head count and giving the business that extra flexibility and convenience. If your salary doesn't reflect that, you're giving it away for free and we know how much businesses make us pay as consumers for convenience. It might seems strange to consider a lot of factors, but you have to remember that generalists can bring quite a lot to the table.
s1k3 4y ago
I think the rush of boot camp grads all calling themselves full stack engineers after 3 months of working on a rails project really weakened it’s appeal. I used to call myself full stack as I genuinely can work across the stack, but I noticed it was a bad way to market myself. Now I just tailor my resume to the position much more specifically.

willsmith72 4y ago

I don't agree about multiple roles, backend/frontend is just one way of splitting a system. It's not like you get twice as much done in a fullstack role, you just do half as much frontend and half as much backend (in an even split role). But why do you think fullstack is paid less? Is this a generally accepted fact?

DietaryNonsense 4y ago
The reduction of the communication overhead is definitely non-trivial. Though many businesses don't seem to measure the internal performance of their systems when the programs are running on and between humans. So if it works to some vague, hand wavey degree, "fine". By relying on the idea that back/front is "just" a way of splitting a system, one could say that SRE/Front is a way of splitting a system, or Sales/Support, or Finance/HR, and so on. We're of course talking about ways of splitting the system(s) involved. I think the spirit of the original idea is that roles are defined by boundaries. The boundaries are definitely "made up" but they aren't arbitrary. The degree of expertise and volume of knowledge needed to operate effectively (or expertly) within a role, and the ease or difficulty of obtaining those requirements, should be acknowledged when a company describes a role they are hiring for. If the bulk of your roadmap is back-end work but you want to hire full-stack devs because its nice to have everything, this seems like sloppy practice (though totally accepted). On the other hand there are plenty of full-stack jobs that really just mean "back-end but not going to throw a contract in our face when you have to drop into the browser debugger to solve a problem". This is the kind of full stack I am. I wouldn't be okay with being asked to work on our frontend for the next year but I'm perfectly comfortable with debugging, making recommendations, doing some front-end work if it means filling a gap when resources are constrained.

temporallobe 4y ago

In my 20+ year career, I have met very few programmers who can actually justify the claim of being full-stack. Usually it means strong back-end that happens to have worked with some front-end framework fad, and less often vice versa. Specialists (UI/UX, database admins, CI/CD engineers, automation testers, just to name a few) are still very much needed and the trend to make everybody on the team “full-stack” doesn’t work well in practice unless everyone is a 10x developer.

hoosieree 4y ago
I have worked on ASICs, FPGAs, compilers, routers, clusters, servers, websites and mobile apps. But I would not describe myself as a "full-stack developer". To me that implies a very specific thing - a RDBMS backend coupled to heavyweight javascript framework frontend.
- indymike 4y ago
  May I steal this description of "full-stack developer": a RDBMS backend coupled to heavyweight javascript framework frontend
  - mixmastamyk 4y ago
    Fullstack never required a heavy frontend to my mind, simply reasonable js, css, and ux knowledge. Depends heavily on the product however.

drstewart 4y ago

So do you feel the same way about backend developers who use databases? Surely that's two roles: server developer and database developer? Of course, they can't test their own code manually. That's two roles: developer and QA! So a backend developer is at least 3 roles of work. Are you making 3x the salary you should be?

RockingGoodNite 4y ago
It's a commonly accepted view that backend developers know databases. Until it is fixed, there are two major realms now due to Google (Angular) and Microsoft (TypeScript), backend and frontend. I was once a full stack developer but refuse to touch Angular gargabe or TypeShit.
vsareto 4y ago
TBH you could add Architect and DevOps if they're doing architecture/writing IaC as well. These all can be individual roles. The formula doesn't necessarily have to be salary times roles, but it should be higher than specific roles like front-end, back-end, DBA, QA, architect which can all ask for high salaries on their own. In my experience, full stack jobs often have salaries on par with the specific roles which is my beef. The biggest personal reason generalist roles should be priced higher is the time you spent to learn multiple things well enough to get a job doing them. If you accept a role as full stack that pays the same as a backend only role, you're essentially devaluing your own time. The other perks are reducing head count and giving the business that extra flexibility and convenience. If your salary doesn't reflect that, you're giving it away for free and we know how much businesses make us pay as consumers for convenience. It might seems strange to consider a lot of factors, but you have to remember that generalists can bring quite a lot to the table.

s1k3 4y ago

I think the rush of boot camp grads all calling themselves full stack engineers after 3 months of working on a rails project really weakened it’s appeal. I used to call myself full stack as I genuinely can work across the stack, but I noticed it was a bad way to market myself. Now I just tailor my resume to the position much more specifically.