3 ms·

Most of the software is more like landscaping than architecture, but software engineers want to build fancy bridges and gothic temples.

• harimau777 2y ago
  That's why they demand high salaries. You are paying so much to convince them to build boring software instead of the fancy bridges and gothic temples.
  • akomtu 2y ago
    Rather than hiring architects as landscapers and paying them a lot to trash their skills, I tell candidates upfront that the job is to mow a lawn and the pay is appropriate for the job.
    • johnnyanmac 2y ago
      That's great transparency. And I imagine you get what you pay for. That's honestly not a bad thing as long as it's a living wage. You don't always need an achitect, especially non-tech . But we should always keep in mind that these crazy salaries aren't all a result of impact software can make, but also as a bid to prevent other companies from hiring those architects. Paying someone an extra 200k/yr to potentially keep a new competitor from making 10m/year is an obvious bargain sale if you can afford it. At least, that was the gameplan back in the '10's. I think we're past that point and those levels of salariesare only reserved for director+ level people in 2024/5.
    • fn-mote 2y ago
      I respect this approach. I hope it reduces the mismatches of salary expectations in your hiring process. Less drama for everyone. I would never apply, but that’s fine. I’m not a landscaper.
    • harimau777 2y ago
      Aren't the landscapers still trashing their skills? They are giving up the opportunity to develop the architecture skills that they need in order to get better roles in the future.