3 ms·
> Sure, it may take some on the team a half hour to do some work, but for others, it will take two weeks. That seems like an egregious difference, and I don’t
by nis0s 2y ago
> Sure, it may take some on the team a half hour to do some work, but for others, it will take two weeks.
That seems like an egregious difference, and I don’t think should be mentioned in such an off hand manner. Why doesn’t your team train people?
FYI, training doesn’t need to be hands-on, I think it’s often better to give employees education/training budgets. Technical team leads should be able to identify someone’s gaps, and make recommendations.
Or maybe it’s better to let someone go instead of wasting their time in a no-growth environment.
- geraldwhen 2y agoYou can lead a horse to water, but that’s it. And firing is politically impossible where I am. If someone chooses not to improve, or simply does not, there are no repercussions.
- noprocrasted 2y ago> Why doesn’t your team train people? It's not a matter of training, it's a matter of lack of rewards and mismatched incentives. The reward for good work is generally more work and a "token" raise at best that is never proportional with the value you added. The market has converged on a baseline of what is typically expected out of a given role. Now sure, we can argue (and I personally agree) that said baseline has become absolutely terrible, but we shouldn't blame the people for that. If your objective is to be an employee and engineering is purely a means to an end (to earn a salary as said employee), then delivering the baseline and getting the baseline salary is all you need to do. Any effort beyond that is a waste of time that can rather be spent on hobbies/family/etc because it will not be adequately rewarded. It only makes sense to go beyond the baseline if you want to learn and have a plausible way to monetize that extra experience (outside of this current job). If you want to build your own product, do consulting, etc.