4 ms·

> People aren't comparable, nor are their talents or knowledge I'm sorry but this just isn't true. My knowledge about software engineering is better than a ca

> People aren't comparable, nor are their talents or knowledge I'm sorry but this just isn't true. My knowledge about software engineering is better than a cardiologist's. A cardiologist's knowledge of the heart is better than mine. You can make comparisons about this very easily. Neither of these things make one or the other party a better person, but let's not pretend we can't make the knowledge comparison. You're absolutely right not to let it go to your head. But there's nothing wrong with being proud of your talent and knowledge, and pretending that titles are just "a social construct" is just false humility.

jnovek 3y ago
Comparing a software engineer to a cardiologist is contrived, though. Comparing the knowledge and skill of two engineers at the same stage of progression is still hard. "I have two skilled senior engineers and I have approval to promote one" is often a difficult problem.
- switch007 3y ago
  It’s not hard at all: who laughed at my jokes the most and who complained the least?
- robertlagrant 3y ago
  That's extremely different to saying that comparison is fundamentally impossible, though. I agree with the previous commenter that statements like that should be outright rejected before we have the more useful discussion on the point you're making.
- thesnide 3y ago
  promotion & hiring are the 2 most important acts of a manager. in that order. those 2 will solely make or break a company.
- xboxnolifes 3y ago
  That's not saying people aren't comparable though. It's saying people are bad at being the comparison function.
6gvONxR4sf7o 3y ago
It's not saying they aren't comparable in the sense of you can't compare them at all, but rather that you can't find a single ordering on which you can line people up. For example, you needed two dimensions to compare yourself to the cardiologist in your example. How do you reduce that to a single dimension? Even within a single title at a single org, it often reduces to the same issue of A is better at X, but B is better at Y (and they differ on twenty other things too).
- john-radio 3y ago
  I mean, that's why there's such a thing as competencies: https://www.shrm.org/ResourcesAndTools/hr-topics/behavioral-competencies/leadership-and-navigation/Pages/leadershipcompetencies.aspx https://www.shrm.org/ResourcesAndTools/hr-topics/behavioral-... People have thought about this topic before! This thread reminds me of https://xkcd.com/1112/ https://xkcd.com/1112/, where the programmer who's never encountered chess before starts explaining to the chess player how it most makes sense to approach it.

jnovek 3y ago

Comparing a software engineer to a cardiologist is contrived, though. Comparing the knowledge and skill of two engineers at the same stage of progression is still hard. "I have two skilled senior engineers and I have approval to promote one" is often a difficult problem.

switch007 3y ago
It’s not hard at all: who laughed at my jokes the most and who complained the least?
robertlagrant 3y ago
That's extremely different to saying that comparison is fundamentally impossible, though. I agree with the previous commenter that statements like that should be outright rejected before we have the more useful discussion on the point you're making.
thesnide 3y ago
promotion & hiring are the 2 most important acts of a manager. in that order. those 2 will solely make or break a company.
xboxnolifes 3y ago
That's not saying people aren't comparable though. It's saying people are bad at being the comparison function.

6gvONxR4sf7o 3y ago

It's not saying they aren't comparable in the sense of you can't compare them at all, but rather that you can't find a single ordering on which you can line people up. For example, you needed two dimensions to compare yourself to the cardiologist in your example. How do you reduce that to a single dimension? Even within a single title at a single org, it often reduces to the same issue of A is better at X, but B is better at Y (and they differ on twenty other things too).

john-radio 3y ago
I mean, that's why there's such a thing as competencies: https://www.shrm.org/ResourcesAndTools/hr-topics/behavioral-competencies/leadership-and-navigation/Pages/leadershipcompetencies.aspx https://www.shrm.org/ResourcesAndTools/hr-topics/behavioral-... People have thought about this topic before! This thread reminds me of https://xkcd.com/1112/ https://xkcd.com/1112/, where the programmer who's never encountered chess before starts explaining to the chess player how it most makes sense to approach it.