Slashdot Mirror


Ask Slashdot: Is Tech Talent More Important Than Skill?

snydeq writes "Taming technology is sometimes more art than science, but the difference can sometimes be hard to discern, writes Deep End's Paul Venezia. 'You've probably come across colleagues who were extremely skilled at their jobs — system administrators who can bend a zsh shell to their every whim, or developers who can write lengthy functions that compile without a whimper the first time. You've probably also come across colleagues who were extremely talented — who could instantly visualize a new infrastructure addition and sketch it out to extreme detail on a whiteboard while they assembled it in their head, for example, or who could devise a new, elegant UI without breaking a sweat. The truly gifted among us exhibit both of those traits, but most fall into one category or another. There is a difference between skill and talent. Such is true in many vocations, of course, but IT can present a stark contrast between the two.'"Assuming Venezia is correct, which do you think is more important?

12 of 277 comments (clear)

  1. Neither by Quinn_Inuit · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Hard work usually wins the day.

    --

    Stop learning! Only you can prevent esoterrorism.
    1. Re:Neither by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No way.

      Someone who's willing to spend 12 hours a day trying their best, but not actually getting anything done is far less useful than someone who slacks of 7 hours of the day and gets a monumental amount done in the 60 minutes they are actually working. Usually the people doing that are pretty skilled and pretty talented - and have the bonus that when the shit hits the fan, you can usually get weeks worth of work done in surprisingly short time spans.

    2. Re:Neither by Tough+Love · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Hard work usually wins the day.

      Hard work by a dullard is only effective for dull tasks.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    3. Re:Neither by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Cute, but wrong. The world is full of persistent, determined failures. If you lack skills and talent, you will not succeed by persisting. If you lack the skills of a carpenter and the talent of an architect, you can "press" on all you want but it's unlikely that you'll build a house that stays up. You might come up with some sort of servicable shelter, but that's hardly contributing towards "solving the problems of the human race".

      Persistence is important of course; without persistence you are unlikely to develop your skills and talents. Solving hard problems takes persistence. But there is a difference between persisting in attacking a hard problem and not giving up after a failure or three, and persisting in trying and trying again when you simply lack the skills for the job. As GP points out, persistence can make up for some lack of skill, but it will not bring you on the same level as a highly skilled person.

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    4. Re:Neither by leaen · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'm going with Coolidge on this one. "Nothing in the world can take the place of Persistence...

      This is not true, to quote Kurt von Hammerstein:

      I divide my officers into four groups. There are clever, diligent, stupid, and lazy officers. Usually two characteristics are combined. Some are clever and diligent -- their place is the General Staff. The next lot are stupid and lazy -- they make up 90 percent of every army and are suited to routine duties. Anyone who is both clever and lazy is qualified for the highest leadership duties, because he possesses the intellectual clarity and the composure necessary for difficult decisions. One must beware of anyone who is stupid and diligent -- he must not be entrusted with any responsibility because he will always cause only mischief.

      I seen plenty of programmers that are persistent but their code is flawed on so many levels that if I wrote that code myself it would save me time over convincing managers that their code needs fixing and fixing it.

  2. Whichever One I Have by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Assuming Venezia is correct, which do you think is more important?

    Whichever one I've got, with justification to follow.

  3. Different Jobs by sycodon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What is described is two different jobs.

    --
    When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
  4. Re:Huh? by Gorobei · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I don't understand the difference. Who cares? If someone can get the job done, that's what counts.

    Ah, grasshopper, as you gain respect and seniority, you will find the success of your project becomes more and more dependent on other people.

    If you want to continue to succeed, you need to understand these peoples' strengths.

    1. No skill, no talent: avoid these people, have them write doc or something.
    2. Skill, no talent: give them designs or procedures. They will execute well if they understand what you want.
    3. No skill, talent. Mentor them and watch them closely. You will get a Scala engine running 20 lines of code in the middle of your Java app if you don't pay attention.
    4. Skill & Talent. Just chat will them about what you need. You'll get what you need in no time.

  5. Is this whole story a troll? by Diomedes01 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Is this whole story a troll? The false dichotomy proposed between the (poorly-labelled) attributes of "talent" and "skill" is disingenuous. The comparison between acquired knowledge (what the author refers to as "skill") and inductive reasoning about a proposed new piece of functionality/infrastructure/etc (referred to by as "talent" in this bizarre example) is contrived, and somewhat arbitrary. I almost never read or discuss Slashdot stories anymore, and this s a great example of the underlying problem. Now, all you kids get off my lawn, and leave me in peace.

    --
    "To hope's end I rode and to heart's breaking: Now for wrath, now for ruin and a red nightfall!"
  6. Re:He's using silly terms to confuse himself. by Gothmolly · · Score: 5, Funny

    Except in modern practice, 'coder' is a monkey who took an 8 week Khan Academy course in Java, while an 'architect' is a guy who knows powerpoint. Most frequently observed alongside 'managers' whose skillset includes Outlook, and 'the rest of the employees' who watch as their companies fold/outsource anything important.

    --
    I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
  7. true for jobs other than programmer, though ... by raymorris · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Working hard and smart at the same time is normally a winning combination.

    It's been aid that laziness is a popular characteristic of a good programmers. a programmer's JOB is to make the computer work for you. Hard work in programming sometimes means writing 18 different classes in one day, to handle 18 different columns. a better approach is to write one abstract class and a couple of subclasses that handle the different columns is polymorphically.

    Many times I've deleted a hundred lines of code and replaced it with four lines that do the same task more reliably and more elegantly. My predecessor worked hard. I worked smart.

    That said, reading a 1300 page book to learn HOW to do it in four lines was "hard work". I suspect programmers should listen to the old advice about sharpening the axe and spend a lot of their mental energy learning how to accomplish more faster, rather than producing more lines of code per day. The number of bugs is proportional to the number of lines of code, so the person who writes more lines per day really just creates more problems per day.

  8. Re:Sadly true by Dahamma · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you can optimize integer math, you can think big picture, and vice versa.

    Actually, after interviewing literally thousands of software developers over my career, I can tell you that is absolutely NOT true...