At least the high end engineers MAKE something. Unlike the high end CEO's - who make monies measured in the millions and tens of millions per year, not in the hundreds of thousands.
Well, there's a difference between working yourself to death and working hard. And if you don't have at least a modicum of the life balance thing going on, you will burn out. [1] Especially if you're good, passionate and dedicated to your work.
You are right about the arrogance to some extent (though, a mark of maturity in an engineer is to not let on quite so much). However, if you know how to look, you can tell who is producing what. Sometimes, it takes a while - all problems are different, but it shows in the fruits of the efforts.
Realize that I'm not talking about slacking off - this is about disciplined and intelligent approaches to problems. It's about being an engineer, not about being a hacker with 20 years of professional experience. [2]
[1] I'm writing this as my code compiles. Go figure.
[2] A good engineer is also a hacker. A hacker that is also an engineer is... an engineer. One is passion, quick thinking, and cleverness; the other is discipline and the eloquence that comes from experience. Not trying to start a hacker/engineer thread here.
First, f he's a bad engineer (your first refutation), then he won't have the recommendations, won't be commanding the salary levels that we're talking about. He will have worked in skut projects during his career, and his previous manager will not have nice things to say about him. His linked in profile will show the same, and he won't be eloquent at the white board.
Second - the No True Scotsman fallacy. To be direct: What in the hell are you talking about? No true Scotsman? What does that have to do with anything at all in my comments? You, however, have most certainly added non sequitur to the discussion.
Sad thing is, the experienced guy can often get done in 20 what it takes the new guy 80 to do, but to a certain type of managers, all he sees is that the old guy goes home after 40, and the young guy is working away over the weekend....
So if you're an employer who can hire a worker fresh out of college who is making $60,000 versus an older worker who is making $150,000, and the younger worker has skills that are fresher, who would you hire?
Fresher? Skills aren't vegetables. The older guy is also the wiser and more experienced. He knows the meta behind the skills, and what will work, and what won't. And if he's worth his titles, he has been constantly learning throughout his career. He knows how to be part of a team (even if he never grew into liking to "work with others"), and how to get things done.
The young guy is going to make a lot of mistakes. What he has is energy and drive, and fresh ideas. But too often, he'll work for 20 hours when an hour of thought would have led to a four hour solution that works better - a solution that would have occurred instantly to the old guy. He'll get the job done, but it won't have the eloquence that the older guy would have brought to the table. Many of his ideas will be naive, but through sheer force of will and energy, he'll make them work. But it'll be ten years before he has the experience to even come close to the depth and perception of the older engineer.
(Obviously, written by someone who's paid their dues for a couple of decades, and is still doing so.)
Shocked [3][12][21], I tell you! [4][7]! Studies [14][17][31] have shown [11][15] that this [26] never [21][22] happens [25] with reputable [5][14][24] papers [19]! How could this [32] have happened? [12][16]
If they are kept short, if folks give status, indicate plans and lay out blockers, without drilling down during the meeting (you can always schedule another meeting after standup, but standup is not the time for deep discussions).
In general, when used correctly, agile is just the fitting of good work habits and practices to the reality. No matter what the approach, an individual should have reachable short term daily goals, weekly goals, sprint level goals, etc. Forming the process around good work habits can indeed massively increase productivity.
With that said, no management/team approach will in and of itself fix a broken team.
Unless of course the RIAA is smart enough to pull a stunt like the insurance industry did on Health Care - oppose it right up to the moment it passed, then announce gleefully that they had "won"...
If we're going to have to have something, and I think that we might, just so the politicians can point to it and declare victory, at least in this case the MAFIAA doesn't think it's enough.
Slashdot Mirror
I'm offended that you're offended.
At least the high end engineers MAKE something. Unlike the high end CEO's - who make monies measured in the millions and tens of millions per year, not in the hundreds of thousands.
If you don't learn, you don't get the opportunity to get more experience.
Well, there's a difference between working yourself to death and working hard. And if you don't have at least a modicum of the life balance thing going on, you will burn out. [1] Especially if you're good, passionate and dedicated to your work.
You are right about the arrogance to some extent (though, a mark of maturity in an engineer is to not let on quite so much). However, if you know how to look, you can tell who is producing what. Sometimes, it takes a while - all problems are different, but it shows in the fruits of the efforts.
Realize that I'm not talking about slacking off - this is about disciplined and intelligent approaches to problems. It's about being an engineer, not about being a hacker with 20 years of professional experience. [2]
[1] I'm writing this as my code compiles. Go figure.
[2] A good engineer is also a hacker. A hacker that is also an engineer is... an engineer. One is passion, quick thinking, and cleverness; the other is discipline and the eloquence that comes from experience. Not trying to start a hacker/engineer thread here.
Why is it that the MBA class, who actually create nothing, are so often the first to whip out the Ayn Rand arguments?
First, f he's a bad engineer (your first refutation), then he won't have the recommendations, won't be commanding the salary levels that we're talking about. He will have worked in skut projects during his career, and his previous manager will not have nice things to say about him. His linked in profile will show the same, and he won't be eloquent at the white board.
Second - the No True Scotsman fallacy. To be direct: What in the hell are you talking about? No true Scotsman? What does that have to do with anything at all in my comments? You, however, have most certainly added non sequitur to the discussion.
Sad thing is, the experienced guy can often get done in 20 what it takes the new guy 80 to do, but to a certain type of managers, all he sees is that the old guy goes home after 40, and the young guy is working away over the weekend....
Maybe it was one of those "laugh or weep" reactions...
So if you're an employer who can hire a worker fresh out of college who is making $60,000 versus an older worker who is making $150,000, and the younger worker has skills that are fresher, who would you hire?
Fresher? Skills aren't vegetables. The older guy is also the wiser and more experienced. He knows the meta behind the skills, and what will work, and what won't. And if he's worth his titles, he has been constantly learning throughout his career. He knows how to be part of a team (even if he never grew into liking to "work with others"), and how to get things done.
The young guy is going to make a lot of mistakes. What he has is energy and drive, and fresh ideas. But too often, he'll work for 20 hours when an hour of thought would have led to a four hour solution that works better - a solution that would have occurred instantly to the old guy. He'll get the job done, but it won't have the eloquence that the older guy would have brought to the table. Many of his ideas will be naive, but through sheer force of will and energy, he'll make them work. But it'll be ten years before he has the experience to even come close to the depth and perception of the older engineer.
(Obviously, written by someone who's paid their dues for a couple of decades, and is still doing so.)
Wow - that's a lot of attitude.
I'm guessing that you're probably a really good coder - and really bad at interaction with others on your team in general.
Shocked [3][12][21], I tell you! [4][7]! Studies [14][17][31] have shown [11][15] that this [26] never [21][22] happens [25] with reputable [5][14][24] papers [19]! How could this [32] have happened? [12][16]
Seems to me that if folks have to use public shame as a whip, the team has more problems than simple standups will fix.
On the other hand, the pride of being able to come in every day and announce the accomplishments is a positive motivator.
When used properly.
If they are kept short, if folks give status, indicate plans and lay out blockers, without drilling down during the meeting (you can always schedule another meeting after standup, but standup is not the time for deep discussions).
In general, when used correctly, agile is just the fitting of good work habits and practices to the reality. No matter what the approach, an individual should have reachable short term daily goals, weekly goals, sprint level goals, etc. Forming the process around good work habits can indeed massively increase productivity.
With that said, no management/team approach will in and of itself fix a broken team.
Then you're doing it wrong. The standup should be for status and blockers only - if you need another meeting, schedule it during the standup.
I'd note that visual is far less intrusive than audible.
Unless of course the RIAA is smart enough to pull a stunt like the insurance industry did on Health Care - oppose it right up to the moment it passed, then announce gleefully that they had "won"...
Well, actually, no you're not. Especially if you can be labeled terrorist, terrorist sympathizer, or terrorist suspect in any way, shape or form.
Kim Jong Il looking at it or it didn't happen.
If we're going to have to have something, and I think that we might, just so the politicians can point to it and declare victory, at least in this case the MAFIAA doesn't think it's enough.
Change your insurance company.
Yeah, right.
The vast majority of Americans get insurance through their employer, and could not possibly afford the employer subsidized premiums.
You're as locked in to your insurance as you fear you would be under a government plan.
You just have an illusion of choice.
In modern Rome, you hand over all your bread for the circus, or ware the centurion...
Nope.
Kirk and Spock smash it up, tell them if they want to have a war, have a real war. Or better, figure out how to solve their problems without killing.
JRIC - Joint Regional Intelligence Center in Los Angeles
http://www.lapdonline.org/newsroom/news_view/32984
BJA - Bureau of Justice Assistance
http://www.ojp.gov/BJA/
Basically, the BJA appears to be a bridge organization intended to funnel intel to the feds and provide control over local agencies:
http://www.ojp.gov/BJA/about/index.html
So - you can't stop someone from dumping poison in the town well, causing everyone's children to be stillborn.
But hey - you can sue them for damages, right?