4 ms·
It's a sweeping, evidence-free generalization nonetheless – business people in tech get no respect? Really now? If you list the most well-known names I would be
by nerfhammer 13y ago
It's a sweeping, evidence-free generalization nonetheless – business people in tech get no respect? Really now? If you list the most well-known names I would bet ~0% of them are purely technical
- msandford 13y agoBusiness people in tech get no respect from the purely technical folks. "Every" programmer hates their PM. Yes it's a generalization and thus false by definition. But there's a lot of truth to it. Project Managers are a nicer way of saying "boss" or "manager" in a lot of ways even if they don't hire & fire and thus yes, there are tons of people who don't like their boss. Sure PMs are supposed to be more west-coast management style and delegate and herd cats but there's always shitty work that SOMEONE has to do and thus they end up having to do the east-cost top-down style stuff from time to time. And that engenders negative feelings no matter the sex of the person. Business people get no respect because when asked about business logic they'll reply one way "definitively" and then 3 months later -- when it's critical for them to make a deal -- they'll change their mind about a thing "that will never change" and make extra work for a programmer. Programmers, being lazy by nature, hate this and that's why business people "get no respect" in tech. From the tech folks, not from management or broader society, but from the people who do the technical stuff.
- nerfhammer 13y agoYou are adding qualifiers to it that were not present. It's a careless, obviously mostly false claim. An idea so tenuous should need evidential support, much less handwaving. I don't get the feeling the author put much thought into it. The article said: "it’s the purely technical people — not the businesspeople — who get the respect in the tech industry." Simply put. Which is thoughtless nonsense that belongs in a poorly thought out livejournal post and not in a serious article in the new york times.