Those who make the hiring/firing/promoting decisions rarely have the technical chops to determine which of the engineers is good and which isn't. So it's the en

Those who make the hiring/firing/promoting decisions rarely have the technical chops to determine which of the engineers is good and which isn't. So it's the engineers that are the most convincing that get the benefits, rather than the highest performers. There are those who constantly put in overtime to put out fires that they created. To management, these seem like hard-working, dedicated folks. Meanwhile those who design things well, don't have fires to put out, and leave on-time every day seem lazy. All too often the first group is given praise instead of the second group. This is a point of unfairness that is rampant in the industry. I don't know of any way to solve it, besides each person being their own promoter, hype man, sales man.