4 ms·
I don't disagree. That they may have acquired a bad rep (amongst developers, or perhaps hackers) wasn't a value judgment, just an observation. I try to separa
by sageikosa 14y ago
I don't disagree. That they may have acquired a bad rep (amongst developers, or perhaps hackers) wasn't a value judgment, just an observation.
I try to separate the individuals holding a position from the position itself. I've met great sales people, marketers, testers and subject matter experts. I've also met bad project managers, directors, software architects, and developers.
I think if there was any reason for general business functions to get a bad rep in the late 1990s, it was probably due to the glut of post-Reagan-era business school graduates, the dearth of traditional large corporate organizations to fill them (by then, military-industrial downsizing was underway and heavy industry was moving offshore), and the boom-time investment craze of the early ".COM" era, leading to the ready availability of job roles which could be absorbed (and were often demanded) by investment capital.
- mindcrime 14y agoI think if there was any reason for general business functions to get a bad rep in the late 1990s, it was probably due to the glut of post-Reagan-era business school graduates, the dearth of traditional large corporate organizations to fill them... Yeah, that's reasonable. A lot of things definitely changed in the 80's and bled over into the 90's. The era of "right-sizing" and "re-engineering" and the proliferation of TLA's and buzzwords, and the breaking of that traditional company/employee bond, definitely could have (did?) lead to some perception changes of "business people." That said, I think there's always been (and maybe always will be, as much as I wish it were othewise) a gulf between the technology world and the business world. It's like the people on each "side" don't really understand each other, don't really want to understand each other, and each underestimates the value of the other. sigh