It's quite simple... There are people who have a knack/drive for understanding the world/universe and its many functions. People who care to understand the roo

It's quite simple... There are people who have a knack/drive for understanding the world/universe and its many functions. People who care to understand the root mechanism as opposed to speculating about how the tree and leaves form. This is the base talent behind good software engineers who become great through experience and challenges. If you -truly- understand something, you are good at communicating it in many ways and capable of expressing it in a 'language'. What came first? Language or understanding. What do a lot of institutions teach? Programming. What don't companies want to invest in : Understanding....Mind the gap. You may be good at a language and still not have any good ideas to express;Programmer A lot of people fail to see this and go on with arbitrary measures of what makes a good software engineer. Oh nos', you don't know how to craft the perfect general expression for this. Oh nos', your Translation look-a-side buffer calculation was off... And so on. The typical interview centers on how well someone programs. People write long articles which stirs people into a frenzy and much is lost in the discourse. Mindless interview structures are administered which tests people on their ability to work through leaf problems. Tress of horrible construction are made and root analyzers are called in to save the day. Since there aren't many who fully understand root construction, such talent is hardly ever understood for its value : Modern software engineering at your alphabet soup of companies. And here we are. Much will never change because there are few actually looking at the root issues. Few actually care to. It's all about the leaves and low hanging fruit.