3 ms·

If that person does not exist, then one needs to be hired eventually, as it would be better to wait than to have a person not adept at the task doing it wrong.

by mroman 18y ago

If that person does not exist, then one needs to be hired eventually, as it would be better to wait than to have a person not adept at the task doing it wrong. I am sure that some are better than others at networking, my point was (minus my admittedly harsh figurative description) that high intelligence and knowledge are best applied to something that mandates intelligence, as opposed to something that does not mandate a high level of intelligence and knowledge. Those kinds of activities (networking, sales, marketing) do not mandate exceptional intelligence, from what I have seen those mostly require innate skill and experience. Many people can network, sell, and market. Not many can code. Now, I mentioned more than coding when I referred to what I believe creates value, however I will respond to your point by saying that 1) creating value is conducive to attracting attention IMO 2) I did not state that there should be no networking/marketing/promotion at all, I wrote that it should not be done before a product is ready, and that it should be done by someone adept at it (usually not a propeller head like me, for example, although I am sure some guys are skilled at those activities as well as tech work)

jamiequint 18y ago
"Those kinds of activities (networking, sales, marketing) do not mandate exceptional intelligence, from what I have seen those mostly require innate skill and experience. Many people can network, sell, and market. Not many can code." I still think this is arguable, you describe what separates star marketers from the rest is "innate skill" in this case innate marketing/sales/networking skill. However, I think I can equally make the case for star marketers. I'll discuss you're argument from the marketing perspective because its the area I'm most familiar with and feel most qualified to speak for. Marketing isn't just a game of follow these rules and you will be successful, its not just a matter of experience either. If it were, marketing agencies wouldn't be differentiable and campaigns like Absolut wouldn't have cult-like status. Just as there is an so described "innate skill" for programmers I would argue that there is a similar type of "innate skill" that separates the best marketers from the rest. To say that intelligence on the same level as programming isn't mandated for marketing is demeaning to that profession as a whole and represents a misunderstanding of what really goes into a well defined marketing strategy. Admittedly, it may not be as quantitatively measured as programming, but that does not mean it requires less intelligence or is less demanding. I do agree with your point that creating value is conducive to attracting attention, but by no means is it a limiting factor. There are plenty of historical examples where things of little to no value, when marketed well, rose to great success. (The pet rock, among other things) I've done a fair amount of both programming and marketing, and while I don't claim to be a "star" at either, I still cringe when people dismiss one or the other categorically as being of little added value. It happens from both sides and most of the time just represents a lack of understanding of the efforts that go into either.
- mroman 18y ago
  I referred to a combination of innate skill and experience, not one or the other. I did not say that marketing was a follow the cookbook type endeavor either. Problem with this point is that, neither one of us in this small debate has any hard data to back up or counter our respective points (does any exist? I personally doubt it) which are highly subjective anyway, mostly based on anecdotal perception. I stick by my opinion however, and can point to the relative number of programmers versus marketing people in the global workforce as indicative of what I am saying . . . if more people were smart enough to program, as opposed to market, they would . . . Marketing has its place, but to an admittedly occasionally arrogant geek such as myself (who has come across some incredibly, impossibly dumb marketing types) they are figuratively just the people who stand outside the shop on the sidewalk and try to get people to step inside and look at the wares . . .
  - jamiequint 18y ago
    "I stick by my opinion however, and can point to the relative number of programmers versus marketing people in the global workforce as indicative of what I am saying . . . if more people were smart enough to program, as opposed to market, they would . . ." Can you further explain here? Market forces will determine where people go, salaries will rise until people move into those positions. The number of people in given positions is not indicative at all of the skill of the people taking those jobs. "Marketing has its place, but to an admittedly occasionally arrogant geek such as myself (who has come across some incredibly, impossibly dumb marketing types) they are figuratively just the people who stand outside the shop on the sidewalk and try to get people to step inside and look at the wares . . ." I agree with you that this is an extremely arrogant viewpoint. I've met many stupid programmers but I don't assume the same of all programmers. I also think you're confusing the roles of sales and marketing but that's beside the point. Discounting the value of people who aren't like you isn't a very great way to get anywhere in life, especially as an entrepreneur.
    - mroman 18y ago
      The numbers speak for themselves. That is obvious. You are not reading what I write. I did not mention skill, I mentioned intelligence. Those are not the same. It is quite simple. Look at all occupations. There are more non-intellectually demanding jobs than there are intellectually demanding jobs. There are more dumb people than smart people on the planet. That is obvious. Speaking of market forces, why are programmers on average paid more than marketing and sales people? You have met stupid programmers? Interesting. I agree that not all are extremely bright, however, anyone who is truly stupid will not be able to even learn how to program, much less become worthy of the title programmer, whereas, I have seen some nearly illiterate folks working in marketing, and sales, and I realize those two are different, even though I do not bother to differentiate between the two when making reference to them. "Discounting the value of people who aren't like you isn't a very great way to get anywhere in life, especially as an entrepreneur." Neat, now you are starting the personal attacks.

by mroman 18y ago

jamiequint 18y ago

"Those kinds of activities (networking, sales, marketing) do not mandate exceptional intelligence, from what I have seen those mostly require innate skill and experience. Many people can network, sell, and market. Not many can code." I still think this is arguable, you describe what separates star marketers from the rest is "innate skill" in this case innate marketing/sales/networking skill. However, I think I can equally make the case for star marketers. I'll discuss you're argument from the marketing perspective because its the area I'm most familiar with and feel most qualified to speak for. Marketing isn't just a game of follow these rules and you will be successful, its not just a matter of experience either. If it were, marketing agencies wouldn't be differentiable and campaigns like Absolut wouldn't have cult-like status. Just as there is an so described "innate skill" for programmers I would argue that there is a similar type of "innate skill" that separates the best marketers from the rest. To say that intelligence on the same level as programming isn't mandated for marketing is demeaning to that profession as a whole and represents a misunderstanding of what really goes into a well defined marketing strategy. Admittedly, it may not be as quantitatively measured as programming, but that does not mean it requires less intelligence or is less demanding. I do agree with your point that creating value is conducive to attracting attention, but by no means is it a limiting factor. There are plenty of historical examples where things of little to no value, when marketed well, rose to great success. (The pet rock, among other things) I've done a fair amount of both programming and marketing, and while I don't claim to be a "star" at either, I still cringe when people dismiss one or the other categorically as being of little added value. It happens from both sides and most of the time just represents a lack of understanding of the efforts that go into either.

mroman 18y ago
I referred to a combination of innate skill and experience, not one or the other. I did not say that marketing was a follow the cookbook type endeavor either. Problem with this point is that, neither one of us in this small debate has any hard data to back up or counter our respective points (does any exist? I personally doubt it) which are highly subjective anyway, mostly based on anecdotal perception. I stick by my opinion however, and can point to the relative number of programmers versus marketing people in the global workforce as indicative of what I am saying . . . if more people were smart enough to program, as opposed to market, they would . . . Marketing has its place, but to an admittedly occasionally arrogant geek such as myself (who has come across some incredibly, impossibly dumb marketing types) they are figuratively just the people who stand outside the shop on the sidewalk and try to get people to step inside and look at the wares . . .
- jamiequint 18y ago
  "I stick by my opinion however, and can point to the relative number of programmers versus marketing people in the global workforce as indicative of what I am saying . . . if more people were smart enough to program, as opposed to market, they would . . ." Can you further explain here? Market forces will determine where people go, salaries will rise until people move into those positions. The number of people in given positions is not indicative at all of the skill of the people taking those jobs. "Marketing has its place, but to an admittedly occasionally arrogant geek such as myself (who has come across some incredibly, impossibly dumb marketing types) they are figuratively just the people who stand outside the shop on the sidewalk and try to get people to step inside and look at the wares . . ." I agree with you that this is an extremely arrogant viewpoint. I've met many stupid programmers but I don't assume the same of all programmers. I also think you're confusing the roles of sales and marketing but that's beside the point. Discounting the value of people who aren't like you isn't a very great way to get anywhere in life, especially as an entrepreneur.
  - mroman 18y ago
    The numbers speak for themselves. That is obvious. You are not reading what I write. I did not mention skill, I mentioned intelligence. Those are not the same. It is quite simple. Look at all occupations. There are more non-intellectually demanding jobs than there are intellectually demanding jobs. There are more dumb people than smart people on the planet. That is obvious. Speaking of market forces, why are programmers on average paid more than marketing and sales people? You have met stupid programmers? Interesting. I agree that not all are extremely bright, however, anyone who is truly stupid will not be able to even learn how to program, much less become worthy of the title programmer, whereas, I have seen some nearly illiterate folks working in marketing, and sales, and I realize those two are different, even though I do not bother to differentiate between the two when making reference to them. "Discounting the value of people who aren't like you isn't a very great way to get anywhere in life, especially as an entrepreneur." Neat, now you are starting the personal attacks.