Hi geebee, its Hung, CEO of Workshape here. Thanks for taking the time to write in. I'm glad you liked the post. Your response here is fascinating! You've intr

Hi geebee, its Hung, CEO of Workshape here. Thanks for taking the time to write in. I'm glad you liked the post. Your response here is fascinating! You've introduced an additional dimension that we hadn't explored: power Its certainly interesting to compare chartered or regulated professions with software engineering. I share with you opposition to the idea that there should be any body determining who can be called a 'software engineer'. What might have once been a method of quality control, is now simply a method of constraining labour supply, and thankfully wouldn't fly in today's open source era. The use of job descriptions as a tool for negotiating space and remit is equally interesting! I can see the value as defensive artefact, though it must be pretty tough to continue to be motivated to work in an environment where such a move would be needed. In reality, I suspect most developers would take advantage of a buoyant market and simply leave before ever a move like this ever required. I think you might under play the risk that job descriptions will not be used aggressively by negative employees. In organisations that have strong employee protections in place, tightly specified job descriptions can be used to the detriment of others. I imagine that certain industries and sectors are often so slow moving precisely because of workers invoke their right not to stray beyond their job description, safe in the knowledge they can then stay behind that signed document and remain immune from management influence. Thanks again for the comment - lots of things to think about!