| « Essential develper's toolkit | Jazoon - Day 3 » |
Don't develop for living and you will be a better developer
11/03/08
Sounds crazy right? Keep on reading, maybe it won’t be by the end of the story…
For the last 8 years I was a hardcore Java developer. Worked on many different projects, various kinds and various positions - from junior to senior, team leader, project manager, lead developer and architect. But all in all, every working day of my life contained in average 80% of pure coding.
Then I decided that it’s time for a career change. I quit my job, moved away from software development companies and became a solution architect in an insurance company.
Why? Mostly because anyone can be a Java developer these days. You don’t need a Master degree to be a code monkey. Just read JDK tutorial, keep up to date by following InfoQ/DZone posts and start producing. I figured out that I was missing a real business know-how and that I am not a subject area expert in any business-related field.
Being an architect in a non-software company has benefits. You work for internal clients and don’t bring money into the company. You just spend it.
Other benefit is that you don’t code for living anymore! It took me a while to realize why that is actually a benefit. Well, I am a developer by nature and I missed it naturally. When you are developing something all day at work, you don’t have much nerves/energy/enthusiasm to do the same at home in the evening. No matter what software company you work for (Google, IBM, Oracle etc.) you will always do what your boss tells you to do and what your architect tells you how to do it. It will never be exactly the way you want it.
When you are not programming during the day (and we all know that architects just throw documents over the wall for somebody else to develop it) then you have a high wish to program something at home. But this time it’s different. There is no time pressure. No clients. You develop your way, what you want and how you want it. That exciting feeling I had long time ago, came again. It didn’t burn out, but was just pushed down under every-day-heavy-weight-high-pressure-development work. I did things that I always wanted to do. Read “Design Patterns”, “Effective Java”, “Beyond Software Architectures”, “Java Puzzlers”, “Java Concurrency in Practice” etc. and started implementing some ideas I had pending long time ago but never had time/energy to work on them. Now I have enough time and energy to think about every implemented class, to test it properly, to document it, to play around with different performance tuning options etc. I want to be proud of every line of code I make. Life is too short to waste it on something that you don’t like or despise or are ashamed of later.
Suddenly I figured out that I did many things wrong just because of time pressure. I knew they were wrong, but had to take short cuts to meet tight deadlines. And that sucks! That is what is killing your will to continue coding and what makes you a terrible developer.
Some of you probably work on nice projects and completely disagree with previous statements. Fair enough. I envy you guys. There are others that probably feel the same way I did before.
My advice to this latter group is: “find a job that brings you a financial stability but doesn’t kill your desire to develop your stuff in your free time. That job can still be with some software company but don’t be afraid to let it go in case it’s not. World is a huge place with lots of opportunities. Go for it…”
33 comments
Comment from: Joachim [Visitor] 
First off, I think you're right.
Second, trivial but true: IT-Business is killing inspiration ! The most important aspect, you mentioned it, is Time Pressure.
I don't know where it comes from but it's always so astonishing that so many quite intelligent people think that a huge stress level is the best for becoming creative. What a nonsense.
For example: Our brain often finds the best solution while not directly thinking about a specific problem. While showering, running, listening to musik or just looking out of the window - the excellent solution comes along.
Ever tried to relax for 20 minutes by looking out of the window or sitting in a park while employed in an IT-Company. It takes 30 seconds till the first shouts: 'Hey, not yet time to leave' or something similar. The people just don't get it. Correction: You did :-)
Second, trivial but true: IT-Business is killing inspiration ! The most important aspect, you mentioned it, is Time Pressure.
I don't know where it comes from but it's always so astonishing that so many quite intelligent people think that a huge stress level is the best for becoming creative. What a nonsense.
For example: Our brain often finds the best solution while not directly thinking about a specific problem. While showering, running, listening to musik or just looking out of the window - the excellent solution comes along.
Ever tried to relax for 20 minutes by looking out of the window or sitting in a park while employed in an IT-Company. It takes 30 seconds till the first shouts: 'Hey, not yet time to leave' or something similar. The people just don't get it. Correction: You did :-)
11/03/08 @ 11:57
Comment from: nemanja [Member]
Indeed Joachim. Software industry is not an art anymore, it's a hard labor. That's really a shame.
Young junior software developers are the most intelligent, amusing and enthusiastic persons that I enjoy spending time with. Senior developers are on the contrary the most painful, cynic, unmotivated and boring people you can ever meet. And those seniors were juniors once.
Something, sometime, somewhere went terribly wrong...
Young junior software developers are the most intelligent, amusing and enthusiastic persons that I enjoy spending time with. Senior developers are on the contrary the most painful, cynic, unmotivated and boring people you can ever meet. And those seniors were juniors once.
Something, sometime, somewhere went terribly wrong...
11/03/08 @ 13:50
Comment from: Frank [Visitor]
I am definitely grateful that I have not worked in a development environment like you describe (and I've been developing software for 20+ years). There are many jobs where it's not necessary to become a hands-off architect to enjoy developing code again. I write code for a living and I also write a lot of code in my spare time.
Your comment about the "benefits" of being an architect sounded a bit facetious. Are you sure you aren't still doing work you don't like? :-)
Your comment about the "benefits" of being an architect sounded a bit facetious. Are you sure you aren't still doing work you don't like? :-)
11/03/08 @ 18:54
Comment from: Steven [Visitor]
@nemanja:
you must have had some bad experiences... maybe your experiences are with old dinosaurs as seniors, rather than younger people.
the problem is likely the age of the person, not the experience/skill of being a senior developer.
atleast, thats what i think as a "young" senior developer (25 years old)
you must have had some bad experiences... maybe your experiences are with old dinosaurs as seniors, rather than younger people.
the problem is likely the age of the person, not the experience/skill of being a senior developer.
atleast, thats what i think as a "young" senior developer (25 years old)
11/03/08 @ 23:18
Comment from: nemanja [Member]
Frank, Steven,
as I mentioned in my original post, there are people that are happy with their development job in their current software companies. You two are probably one of them and I envy you guys.
I am not generalizing things but based on discussions I had with other senior developers the story is always the same: "I used to be excited about new technologies and programming, now it's just another job."
I didn't have such a bad experience in the past but its just that feeling that you are coding something for someone over and over again - database model for this guy, web frontend for that company, middleware for someone who wants it quick&dirty way etc. At the end of the day, job is done but I am just not happy with the quality of the delivered code.
Writing code in spare time has brought me joy again. This scenario might not work for everyone but it works for me...
Cheers.
as I mentioned in my original post, there are people that are happy with their development job in their current software companies. You two are probably one of them and I envy you guys.
I am not generalizing things but based on discussions I had with other senior developers the story is always the same: "I used to be excited about new technologies and programming, now it's just another job."
I didn't have such a bad experience in the past but its just that feeling that you are coding something for someone over and over again - database model for this guy, web frontend for that company, middleware for someone who wants it quick&dirty way etc. At the end of the day, job is done but I am just not happy with the quality of the delivered code.
Writing code in spare time has brought me joy again. This scenario might not work for everyone but it works for me...
Cheers.
11/04/08 @ 00:42
Comment from: raveman [Visitor]
I agree with the author, however i think the way to deal with it is to play with some cool technology(or your project) at work. 0,5-1h a day is enough. I do that and it makes me motivated to go to work every day :) plus i try to choose companies that are using cool technologies, so i also have some fun at work :)
11/04/08 @ 02:22
Comment from: Darran [Visitor]
I`m a little concerned that you`ve been developing software for 8 years and are now an architect and you`ve never read "Design Patterns"!!!! That books a right of passage with regards to software development :)
Most of the architects I`ve worked with are so far from the code that we end up rearchitecting anyway :)
I agree that you must of worked in the wrong places if you`ve been grinding out code and not enjoying developing.
Most of the architects I`ve worked with are so far from the code that we end up rearchitecting anyway :)
I agree that you must of worked in the wrong places if you`ve been grinding out code and not enjoying developing.
11/04/08 @ 04:36
Comment from: nemanja [Member]
@Darran: there is a big difference in having "Design Patterns" book and alike sitting on a bookshelf or occasionally peeking inside and actually reading it from cover to cover.
How many books do you have waiting on your stack to be read? I have at least 5 more.
I agree that architects are far away from the code but are quite close to the business. You need that layer between business and coders otherwise the whole IT would stop. Business would tell you to implement something you don't understand and you would implement something they don't need. Architects are here to save the day... :)
How many books do you have waiting on your stack to be read? I have at least 5 more.
I agree that architects are far away from the code but are quite close to the business. You need that layer between business and coders otherwise the whole IT would stop. Business would tell you to implement something you don't understand and you would implement something they don't need. Architects are here to save the day... :)
11/04/08 @ 05:16
> Why? Mostly because anyone can be a
> Java developer these days. You don’t
> need a Master degree to be a code
> monkey. Just
> read JDK tutorial, keep up to date by
> following InfoQ/DZone posts and start
> producing.
Anyone can be a developer of any language by clicking through tutorials and start coding. But is it a good developer then?
I have started coding as about 10 years old boy and now after more than 20 years of experience in software development I still learn more best practices and improve coding style.
> When you are not programming during
> the day (and we all know that architects
> just throw documents over the wall for
> somebody else to develop it) then you
> have a high wish to program something
> at home.
Yes, I would have a high wish to code something at home also for my personal needs. But I also have a high wish to be with my family. I have a wife and a little child. Not all software developer are doing social life only behind the computer... - And since the birth of our son I don't have time to code at home any more.
On the other hand if coding would not be my daily work then I couldn't be really good in it. Only that what you do intensive you could be good at - especially IT because times and technologies change fast.
nemanja wrote:
> Young junior software developers are
> the most intelligent, amusing and
> enthusiastic persons that I enjoy
> spending time with. Senior developers
> are on the contrary the most painful,
> cynic, unmotivated and boring people
> you can ever meet. And those seniors
> were juniors once.
Probably your description of the senior developer matches more to me. ;-) - But I think it has nothing (or only few) to do with the age - it is only the times. I remember coding times when I could be sure that a crashing program was my fault. Nowadays I cannot be sure any more. Because it could be bugs of the IDE, the OS or some buggy 3rd party component.
Playing around with some (new) technology or language is something completely different than the need of developing long-term-living software that must be working reliable and maintainable for many years (I have still software running at customers developed in 1998).
Steven wrote:
> the problem is likely the age of the
> person, not the experience/skill of being
> a senior developer.
I don't think that it is age. Maybe because of the older developers are frustrated because software development has become more complicated over the years. I will not say that it was better in the old times. Although some things were: I was used at deployment just copying everything to a folder. Nowadays mostly there are a lot of dependencies to be taken into consideration. Developers are not working on islands any more.
> atleast, thats what i think as a "young"
> senior developer (25 years old)
at least, thats what I think as a middle-aged developer (36 years old) and I don't know if I am a senior developer or not...
Anyway, I already thought several times to change the job - but then I would change completely and not just stop coding but remain in IT business. As long as I am in IT business I want to be able to code in an appropriate routine speed. I don't like the jobs where a lot is planned but nobody of the planners know what is really going on.
> Java developer these days. You don’t
> need a Master degree to be a code
> monkey. Just
> read JDK tutorial, keep up to date by
> following InfoQ/DZone posts and start
> producing.
Anyone can be a developer of any language by clicking through tutorials and start coding. But is it a good developer then?
I have started coding as about 10 years old boy and now after more than 20 years of experience in software development I still learn more best practices and improve coding style.
> When you are not programming during
> the day (and we all know that architects
> just throw documents over the wall for
> somebody else to develop it) then you
> have a high wish to program something
> at home.
Yes, I would have a high wish to code something at home also for my personal needs. But I also have a high wish to be with my family. I have a wife and a little child. Not all software developer are doing social life only behind the computer... - And since the birth of our son I don't have time to code at home any more.
On the other hand if coding would not be my daily work then I couldn't be really good in it. Only that what you do intensive you could be good at - especially IT because times and technologies change fast.
nemanja wrote:
> Young junior software developers are
> the most intelligent, amusing and
> enthusiastic persons that I enjoy
> spending time with. Senior developers
> are on the contrary the most painful,
> cynic, unmotivated and boring people
> you can ever meet. And those seniors
> were juniors once.
Probably your description of the senior developer matches more to me. ;-) - But I think it has nothing (or only few) to do with the age - it is only the times. I remember coding times when I could be sure that a crashing program was my fault. Nowadays I cannot be sure any more. Because it could be bugs of the IDE, the OS or some buggy 3rd party component.
Playing around with some (new) technology or language is something completely different than the need of developing long-term-living software that must be working reliable and maintainable for many years (I have still software running at customers developed in 1998).
Steven wrote:
> the problem is likely the age of the
> person, not the experience/skill of being
> a senior developer.
I don't think that it is age. Maybe because of the older developers are frustrated because software development has become more complicated over the years. I will not say that it was better in the old times. Although some things were: I was used at deployment just copying everything to a folder. Nowadays mostly there are a lot of dependencies to be taken into consideration. Developers are not working on islands any more.
> atleast, thats what i think as a "young"
> senior developer (25 years old)
at least, thats what I think as a middle-aged developer (36 years old) and I don't know if I am a senior developer or not...
Anyway, I already thought several times to change the job - but then I would change completely and not just stop coding but remain in IT business. As long as I am in IT business I want to be able to code in an appropriate routine speed. I don't like the jobs where a lot is planned but nobody of the planners know what is really going on.
11/04/08 @ 08:28
Funny, I code for profit when I'm at home. Getting a lot done quickly is important.
I see quality as a means to an end there: I'm not trying to write the perfect code, but I am trying to develop a software product line so I can build ten systems in the time that most people build two.
In "9-to-5" work, I also see quality as a means to an end of getting the job done quick. My experience is that systems that don't work either (i) get thrown back at you or (ii) don't work.
I see quality as a means to an end there: I'm not trying to write the perfect code, but I am trying to develop a software product line so I can build ten systems in the time that most people build two.
In "9-to-5" work, I also see quality as a means to an end of getting the job done quick. My experience is that systems that don't work either (i) get thrown back at you or (ii) don't work.
11/04/08 @ 11:06
Comment from: Dennis [Visitor]
Hmmm 8years huh? I have 32 years and could not imagine life without developing code. Java, C, C++...ok ok fortran, and assembler, device drivers to GUI applications and everything in the middle. Startups to huge defense companies. Yeah, I am exhausted at the end of the day, but so are doctors, carpenters, etc, etc...not sure if doctors go home and practice on family members.
11/06/08 @ 10:18
Comment from: nemanja [Member]
Dennis, do you fit to my description of senior developers I gave in the first comment: "Senior developers are on the contrary the most painful, cynic, unmotivated and boring people you can ever meet." ?
:)
:)
11/06/08 @ 14:09
Comment from: Steven [Visitor]
@Dennis: yes, but doctors get paid A LOT more than developers
money is a huge factor for me, particually when im struggling to survive on typical dev wages...
maybe its just that aus devs get paid poorly.
money is a huge factor for me, particually when im struggling to survive on typical dev wages...
maybe its just that aus devs get paid poorly.
11/07/08 @ 02:47
Comment from: Peter Lawrey [Visitor]
> You develop your way, what you want and how you want it. That exciting feeling I had long time ago, came again. It didn’t burn out, but was just pushed down under every-day-heavy-weight-high-pressure-development work
Definitely time for a change. You could be lucky and still get paid to do this. :)
Definitely time for a change. You could be lucky and still get paid to do this. :)
11/08/08 @ 00:38
Comment from: Yakov [Visitor]
I like this post and agree with it on one condition - The day job of solution architect gives you gives you financial stability but allows you to work normal hours - 9-6.
I'm sure there are such industries where it's possible, but usually financial stability require longer hours when you're wearing a hat of a solution architect.
Catch 22.
I'm sure there are such industries where it's possible, but usually financial stability require longer hours when you're wearing a hat of a solution architect.
Catch 22.
11/11/08 @ 15:42
Comment from: Tim Hunt [Visitor]
I suppose I am just lucky, but I work for an open source company (Moodle.com, the company behind the open source project moodle.org) so I get paid to develop software all day, and a lot of the time I get to work on what I want, or at least ideas that I believe it!
But I take your general point.
I like you reading list too, having read most of them. If I may suggest one more title, I think you would probably enjoy Software Craftsmanship (http://www.mcbreen.ab.ca/SoftwareCraftsmanship/)
But I take your general point.
I like you reading list too, having read most of them. If I may suggest one more title, I think you would probably enjoy Software Craftsmanship (http://www.mcbreen.ab.ca/SoftwareCraftsmanship/)
11/11/08 @ 17:59
Comment from: Gautam [Visitor] · http://www.techbuzz.in
My thoughts exactly are the same. You've had eight years of experience and I have around 4. That's the only difference.
I've quit my job now. Working on my own things, working from home. I just realized one thing, I'm a social person, can't be alone the whole day.
I have to see faces, hear voices, and talk to people. Got a find a job which lets me do all the three.
Bookmarked your blog and will be a reg_visitor() frm now on :).
/Gautam
I've quit my job now. Working on my own things, working from home. I just realized one thing, I'm a social person, can't be alone the whole day.
I have to see faces, hear voices, and talk to people. Got a find a job which lets me do all the three.
Bookmarked your blog and will be a reg_visitor() frm now on :).
/Gautam
11/11/08 @ 18:03
Comment from: Ranga [Visitor]
Sir,
Your comments are true. I relived a few moments of my fresher life when I read your blog.
But truth still remains in the fact that the world is a larger place and we need to fit in ourselves to get the kind of jobs that we want.
RRanga
Your comments are true. I relived a few moments of my fresher life when I read your blog.
But truth still remains in the fact that the world is a larger place and we need to fit in ourselves to get the kind of jobs that we want.
RRanga
11/11/08 @ 20:39
Comment from: Mike [Visitor]
You are absolutely right. I have to say the reason I am a great developer and probably the best developer where I work (It is hard to say this without being conceited, sorry) is because I've always worked at home at my own projects. Time pressures and "standards" make development at work the worst, it's just a fact. Also, at home you're free to work the state of the art tech. At work typically we're stuck with working like dinosaurs like SAP which say the are state of the art but are really crap
11/11/08 @ 20:47
Nemanja,
I've been a developer, architect, project manager, CTO, author and editor over the course of the last quarter century. It's given my an interesting perspective on the whole art of development, but overall you're almost correct.
Inspiration comes from a combination of many factors, of which time to think plays a fairly large role. In an era when Tayloresque rules dictate production values, many managers strive for lines of code produced per day in order to get a sense of metric for whether a person is producing good code.
It's a silly metric, of course, but it does have a rough basis in fact up to a point - if you have two beginning programmers that are unfamiliar with a given code base, the one who writes the most code will be the one to encounter errors, problems and missteps first.
However, as programmers become more experienced and familiar with their respective languages, they also become less likely to throw everything at the wall to see what sticks and to start developing intelligently ... and then to focus on other coding projects or other activities if they are under a deadline.
A good architect should be capable of laying out what code needs to be written, and more to know what specific code does not need to be written, but as with learning development skills, learning architectural skills still requires spending that trial and error period.
Architects do not, in general "stop coding". Those after hour excursions into code books and laboring over compilers or websites is your way of testing and retesting assumptions from your work in contexts that aren't necessarily tied to the product you worked on during your 9-5 period.
I've worked at any number of code mills over the last few decades, including a couple of stints at Microsoft. They are, as you say, brutal, and the code that gets produced at places like Microsoft or IBM is of passable quality (if not necessarily brilliant) only because the company has spent literally billions of dollars in trying to find out how to make programmers produce manageable code.
The next stage after architect is either senior technical management or teaching/writing/research. This is where you influence the next generation of coders. Sadly, once you leave the realm of being a workaday developer, its hard to ever get back into it completely, though you will likely have to occasionally spend time coding up prototypes or examples to get a point across.
Good luck, and keep on writing!
Kurt Cagle
Online Editor
O'Reilly Media
I've been a developer, architect, project manager, CTO, author and editor over the course of the last quarter century. It's given my an interesting perspective on the whole art of development, but overall you're almost correct.
Inspiration comes from a combination of many factors, of which time to think plays a fairly large role. In an era when Tayloresque rules dictate production values, many managers strive for lines of code produced per day in order to get a sense of metric for whether a person is producing good code.
It's a silly metric, of course, but it does have a rough basis in fact up to a point - if you have two beginning programmers that are unfamiliar with a given code base, the one who writes the most code will be the one to encounter errors, problems and missteps first.
However, as programmers become more experienced and familiar with their respective languages, they also become less likely to throw everything at the wall to see what sticks and to start developing intelligently ... and then to focus on other coding projects or other activities if they are under a deadline.
A good architect should be capable of laying out what code needs to be written, and more to know what specific code does not need to be written, but as with learning development skills, learning architectural skills still requires spending that trial and error period.
Architects do not, in general "stop coding". Those after hour excursions into code books and laboring over compilers or websites is your way of testing and retesting assumptions from your work in contexts that aren't necessarily tied to the product you worked on during your 9-5 period.
I've worked at any number of code mills over the last few decades, including a couple of stints at Microsoft. They are, as you say, brutal, and the code that gets produced at places like Microsoft or IBM is of passable quality (if not necessarily brilliant) only because the company has spent literally billions of dollars in trying to find out how to make programmers produce manageable code.
The next stage after architect is either senior technical management or teaching/writing/research. This is where you influence the next generation of coders. Sadly, once you leave the realm of being a workaday developer, its hard to ever get back into it completely, though you will likely have to occasionally spend time coding up prototypes or examples to get a point across.
Good luck, and keep on writing!
Kurt Cagle
Online Editor
O'Reilly Media
11/11/08 @ 21:38
I can relate with this post. I am from India and there are thousands of billion dollar code factories hiring thousands of fresh engineers coming out of college.
But, I decided to join a relatively small education company with lot of criticism from my friends and family. Joining a small company gave me opportunity to work on range of exciting stuff whether its project mgmt. or process improvement or range of technologies . If I would have joined a software company, I would be a coder or QA guy banging keyboard everyday.
The only drawback of working with company where revenue doesnt directly come from "code" and technology is a cost centre, developers are paid lesser than if compared to salaries in code factory.
But, I decided to join a relatively small education company with lot of criticism from my friends and family. Joining a small company gave me opportunity to work on range of exciting stuff whether its project mgmt. or process improvement or range of technologies . If I would have joined a software company, I would be a coder or QA guy banging keyboard everyday.
The only drawback of working with company where revenue doesnt directly come from "code" and technology is a cost centre, developers are paid lesser than if compared to salaries in code factory.
11/11/08 @ 22:25
I've been coding since I've got my first Sinclair ZX Spectrum in 1984 and made from my hobby my profession. Nowadays half of my time I spent on project management and coding. The only part of it that I truly like is coding. Main reason for this is that I'm an introvert which means that dealing with other people severely drains my energy levels. I'm therefore more happy to be left "alone" behind my computer coding. Nethertheless, I like to deal with our software architect, because occasionally he asks for my advise. I wouldn't want to do that job myself, because I find it a bit boring and too theoretical.
I love coding, because I consider it to be an art form. You create something with your bare hands that comes to life. Nothing pleases me to get my programs up and running for the first time, passing all quality standards and seeing the happy faces of my customers. If you give it all the love and attention then it really makes a big difference in comparison with the stuff that code monkeys churn out.
My wife tried to push me more in the software architecture and project management direction, but that is not where my heart lies. I rather be paid less and have the job that I love than a better salary and be bored, frustrated or drained out of energy most of the time.
I love coding, because I consider it to be an art form. You create something with your bare hands that comes to life. Nothing pleases me to get my programs up and running for the first time, passing all quality standards and seeing the happy faces of my customers. If you give it all the love and attention then it really makes a big difference in comparison with the stuff that code monkeys churn out.
My wife tried to push me more in the software architecture and project management direction, but that is not where my heart lies. I rather be paid less and have the job that I love than a better salary and be bored, frustrated or drained out of energy most of the time.
11/11/08 @ 23:18
Comment from: Jonathan [Visitor]
One should have pleasure and be passionate in what one does every minute of the day otherwise it will not be fulfilling. Life is too short so enjoy it while you can. I have heard the expression "take risks, make mistakes" from some Steve Jobs literature.
As a consultant I often see people pressured into fulfilling one role. For some people that is just fine. Everyone is different and we should respect that.
I actually prefer to experience business problems at first hand and using whatever creative means translate this into an automated solution by cross cutting a number of roles to achieve this.
The consequence of this means one has to develop a multi-skilled, multi-role approach rather than shoehorning into one role such as: a powerpoint architect, only coder, only tester, only analyst. In practice I rarely see this multi-role in agile RUP, waterfall RUP, XP or SCRUM but more a case of working in one role as a value chain where each individual creates value the only downside and analogy is that of chinese whispers... the original question is diluted, mis-interpreted, whatever via the multiple cross over points and the solution doesn't fit the question. TDD, BDD whatever tries to fix this but actually it doesn't fix the root cause - single skilled roles versus multi-skilled multi-role.
For those that think performing a multi-role you will never be an expert in a particular field, or a "jack of all trades and master of none"... well do we have to be? As long as we passionately deliver a solution to the original business problem the job is done. The more you experience the more experienced you will become and the more you will be able to converse and build a stronger team. The journey becomes more enjoyable. At the end of the day there is nothing better than achieving all round win/win results - everybody has given there best.
The challenge is managing a team of people and understanding each other capabilities and work.
In my view an architect is someone who has experienced all these different roles and in addition can facilitate business and understand where team members are in there development. I don't make a comparison between young and old, junior or senoir. I do look for those that adapt to change and maintain change.
My 2 pennies.
Have fun!
As a consultant I often see people pressured into fulfilling one role. For some people that is just fine. Everyone is different and we should respect that.
I actually prefer to experience business problems at first hand and using whatever creative means translate this into an automated solution by cross cutting a number of roles to achieve this.
The consequence of this means one has to develop a multi-skilled, multi-role approach rather than shoehorning into one role such as: a powerpoint architect, only coder, only tester, only analyst. In practice I rarely see this multi-role in agile RUP, waterfall RUP, XP or SCRUM but more a case of working in one role as a value chain where each individual creates value the only downside and analogy is that of chinese whispers... the original question is diluted, mis-interpreted, whatever via the multiple cross over points and the solution doesn't fit the question. TDD, BDD whatever tries to fix this but actually it doesn't fix the root cause - single skilled roles versus multi-skilled multi-role.
For those that think performing a multi-role you will never be an expert in a particular field, or a "jack of all trades and master of none"... well do we have to be? As long as we passionately deliver a solution to the original business problem the job is done. The more you experience the more experienced you will become and the more you will be able to converse and build a stronger team. The journey becomes more enjoyable. At the end of the day there is nothing better than achieving all round win/win results - everybody has given there best.
The challenge is managing a team of people and understanding each other capabilities and work.
In my view an architect is someone who has experienced all these different roles and in addition can facilitate business and understand where team members are in there development. I don't make a comparison between young and old, junior or senoir. I do look for those that adapt to change and maintain change.
My 2 pennies.
Have fun!
11/12/08 @ 03:49
Comment from: Travis Berthelot [Visitor]
I think your story is sad.
I will never give up developing software.
I have hundreds of thousands of people use my software yet I can't make a decent living in the U.S. because shit heads in China, India, Africa, Ireland in the mid 90's, and others have or had false currency values with the U.S. Japan and most of Western E.U. have the same problem.
$1.80/hr is the real going rate for software development. That is fine for most of China when it cost 1.20 for a good meal. here in the U.S. that is 10 hours.
World Nazi police state is the problem, and not coding, design, or development.
I will never give up developing software.
I have hundreds of thousands of people use my software yet I can't make a decent living in the U.S. because shit heads in China, India, Africa, Ireland in the mid 90's, and others have or had false currency values with the U.S. Japan and most of Western E.U. have the same problem.
$1.80/hr is the real going rate for software development. That is fine for most of China when it cost 1.20 for a good meal. here in the U.S. that is 10 hours.
World Nazi police state is the problem, and not coding, design, or development.
11/12/08 @ 05:02
Comment from: Landir [Visitor]
I felt the same way you wrote and everything applied to me too.
11/12/08 @ 06:26
Comment from: wolfy [Visitor]
You have been a "hardcore Java developer" without ever having read “Design Patterns”, “Effective Java” et al.?
Well, well, well ... perhaps the problens your code sometimes had in those aforementioned projects didn't always stem only from "tight deadlines", huh? ;o)
> "Why? Mostly because anyone can be a Java developer these days. (...) Just read JDK tutorial, keep up to date by following InfoQ/DZone posts and start producing."
No, sorry, not really. You are not a "developer" then - you are just one of those code monkeys who often cost more than be of benefit by doing things the (seemingly) "quick" or plain wrong way, which leads to enhancement and maintenance nightmares later on.
> "You don’t need a Master degree to be a code monkey."
You name it ;o)
Well, well, well ... perhaps the problens your code sometimes had in those aforementioned projects didn't always stem only from "tight deadlines", huh? ;o)
> "Why? Mostly because anyone can be a Java developer these days. (...) Just read JDK tutorial, keep up to date by following InfoQ/DZone posts and start producing."
No, sorry, not really. You are not a "developer" then - you are just one of those code monkeys who often cost more than be of benefit by doing things the (seemingly) "quick" or plain wrong way, which leads to enhancement and maintenance nightmares later on.
> "You don’t need a Master degree to be a code monkey."
You name it ;o)
11/12/08 @ 06:57
Comment from: Remi Vankeisbelck [Visitor]
+1 wolfy !
Man, I received this newsletter from Javalobby, with that pile of crap written in it, couldn't believe it. They really don't have anything to talk about up there or what ???
To the author of this blog entry : you're just NOT a hardcore developer, it's just written between the lines of your blog post.
If you were, you'd probably have looked for another position where you can express your "coding monkey talent" instead of switching to something completely different and expressing your disappointment in public blog posts.
Man, if my job sucked, I would rent my brain to another company, or another team, that's all !
Also, you definitly need good education to be a good coder. Only a few exceptions don't (but based on your post I suspect you're not part of them).
Not everyone can turn from a code monkey to a real developer without proper education (been teaching Java for 6 subsequent years to CS masters degrees, I think I have a quite good idea about the subject). Graduated people sometimes miss the point, but clearly, there's a huge gap between a script kiddie and a PhD in Computer Science when it comes to abstraction levels and high level vision. Writing code isn't only about "if" and "foreach", sorry. How can you possibly produce good quality code if you don't even know about the most basic theory of CS (e.g. state machines, OOP, etc) ?
Please don't reduce the work of a developer to write code like a monkey, without even thinking about it.
To the Javalobby editors who might read this : what crossed your mind when you decided to spam us, devs, with this ???
If you wanna hear my feeling : the IT industry would be much productive if lamers like the author of this blog post (and people who actually thinks it's of any interest) could just all get another job :-)
Anyway... I'm back to coding. 'cause when it comes to me, man... I LOVE MY DEV JOB, I WOULD NEVER TRADE IT FOR SOMETHING ELSE !!!
Cheers
Remi
Man, I received this newsletter from Javalobby, with that pile of crap written in it, couldn't believe it. They really don't have anything to talk about up there or what ???
To the author of this blog entry : you're just NOT a hardcore developer, it's just written between the lines of your blog post.
If you were, you'd probably have looked for another position where you can express your "coding monkey talent" instead of switching to something completely different and expressing your disappointment in public blog posts.
Man, if my job sucked, I would rent my brain to another company, or another team, that's all !
Also, you definitly need good education to be a good coder. Only a few exceptions don't (but based on your post I suspect you're not part of them).
Not everyone can turn from a code monkey to a real developer without proper education (been teaching Java for 6 subsequent years to CS masters degrees, I think I have a quite good idea about the subject). Graduated people sometimes miss the point, but clearly, there's a huge gap between a script kiddie and a PhD in Computer Science when it comes to abstraction levels and high level vision. Writing code isn't only about "if" and "foreach", sorry. How can you possibly produce good quality code if you don't even know about the most basic theory of CS (e.g. state machines, OOP, etc) ?
Please don't reduce the work of a developer to write code like a monkey, without even thinking about it.
To the Javalobby editors who might read this : what crossed your mind when you decided to spam us, devs, with this ???
If you wanna hear my feeling : the IT industry would be much productive if lamers like the author of this blog post (and people who actually thinks it's of any interest) could just all get another job :-)
Anyway... I'm back to coding. 'cause when it comes to me, man... I LOVE MY DEV JOB, I WOULD NEVER TRADE IT FOR SOMETHING ELSE !!!
Cheers
Remi
11/12/08 @ 07:42
Comment from: nemanja [Member]
Wow, so many replies!
I am glad that people react in such a different ways. Some completely agree with, some partially and some think that I am just a lamer.
Important thing is that people step back sometimes and really ask themselves what are they doing and how they feel about it.
If you are happy with it, keep up the good work. If not, try to change it.
Not all people are born equal (with equal oportunities). Sad but true...
I am glad that people react in such a different ways. Some completely agree with, some partially and some think that I am just a lamer.
Important thing is that people step back sometimes and really ask themselves what are they doing and how they feel about it.
If you are happy with it, keep up the good work. If not, try to change it.
Not all people are born equal (with equal oportunities). Sad but true...
11/12/08 @ 08:23
Comment from: alvz [Visitor]
nemanja,
What you were saying about the benefits of working in a non-software shop are all true. However, it has its own share of problems as well.
Working in a non-software shop means working with and for people who don't know about technology, and worse, don't know anything about software development. Sometimes this is good and sometimes this is bad. What you mentioned are only the good things. Let me mention the bad things.
What is bad about working in a non-software shop is that you'll be reporting to a management that doesn't know about technology and yet they have the strongest opinion about it. Think about the pointy-haired boss. This can be frustrating when they assumed they know technology better than you do (since you work for them) and you'll be ask to do something that technically doesn't make sense. You'll spend hours and hours trying to convince these people that they should just stick to business and leave the technology to you. If you are a hard core programmer, you usually don't have the political skills (and the time) to manage these kind of people. I don't know about you but I'd rather spend time coding or working on technical solutions than having endless meetings with a non-technical management.
Another bad thing about working in a non-software shop is that its management does not have a clue about how software developers work. They would stick you in a working environment together with non-IT workers with all the worst possible distractions a programmer could face. They thought a programmer can work like any other worker where he can be interrupted every 15 minutes, can be on the phone every five minutes, can be expected to be in a meeting every other 30 minutes... They thought that working 30 minutes now and then continue working 30 minutes an hour later is the same as working for one hour straight. They couldn't understand why you can't leave at 5PM and continue working until midnight instead of returning at 8AM the next day to continue what you were doing.
They wouldn't understand why you need a powerful workstation to run Eclipse. They would give you a 14-inch monitor like everyone else. Having two large monitors is totally absurd to them.
They thought programmers are all the same. They thought that adding more programmers to the project would proportionately increase the productivity rate. They thought programmers can be easily swapped around from different projects.
The horrors are endless.
What you were saying about the benefits of working in a non-software shop are all true. However, it has its own share of problems as well.
Working in a non-software shop means working with and for people who don't know about technology, and worse, don't know anything about software development. Sometimes this is good and sometimes this is bad. What you mentioned are only the good things. Let me mention the bad things.
What is bad about working in a non-software shop is that you'll be reporting to a management that doesn't know about technology and yet they have the strongest opinion about it. Think about the pointy-haired boss. This can be frustrating when they assumed they know technology better than you do (since you work for them) and you'll be ask to do something that technically doesn't make sense. You'll spend hours and hours trying to convince these people that they should just stick to business and leave the technology to you. If you are a hard core programmer, you usually don't have the political skills (and the time) to manage these kind of people. I don't know about you but I'd rather spend time coding or working on technical solutions than having endless meetings with a non-technical management.
Another bad thing about working in a non-software shop is that its management does not have a clue about how software developers work. They would stick you in a working environment together with non-IT workers with all the worst possible distractions a programmer could face. They thought a programmer can work like any other worker where he can be interrupted every 15 minutes, can be on the phone every five minutes, can be expected to be in a meeting every other 30 minutes... They thought that working 30 minutes now and then continue working 30 minutes an hour later is the same as working for one hour straight. They couldn't understand why you can't leave at 5PM and continue working until midnight instead of returning at 8AM the next day to continue what you were doing.
They wouldn't understand why you need a powerful workstation to run Eclipse. They would give you a 14-inch monitor like everyone else. Having two large monitors is totally absurd to them.
They thought programmers are all the same. They thought that adding more programmers to the project would proportionately increase the productivity rate. They thought programmers can be easily swapped around from different projects.
The horrors are endless.
11/12/08 @ 11:14
Comment from: nemanja [Member]
@alvz
Your comments about down sides of working for non-software company are all valid and I agree with them.
But, is it really completely different in a software company?
In a software company you might not have a pointy-hair boss who knows nothing about technology but you might have a hippi-hair boss who says: "yes, you are right and I understand your point but client wants that piece soon no matter what. We need to make improvisation and do it fast or we will lose the client."
By the end of the day, problems might be the same only wrapped in a different package.
Software development is not an art or a science anymore. It's all about money, competition and a fast delivery.
You need to try to find your position in all this mess and still keep a good balance of private life, descent salary and evening fun you have while you develop your stuff the way you want it...
Your comments about down sides of working for non-software company are all valid and I agree with them.
But, is it really completely different in a software company?
In a software company you might not have a pointy-hair boss who knows nothing about technology but you might have a hippi-hair boss who says: "yes, you are right and I understand your point but client wants that piece soon no matter what. We need to make improvisation and do it fast or we will lose the client."
By the end of the day, problems might be the same only wrapped in a different package.
Software development is not an art or a science anymore. It's all about money, competition and a fast delivery.
You need to try to find your position in all this mess and still keep a good balance of private life, descent salary and evening fun you have while you develop your stuff the way you want it...
11/12/08 @ 12:37
Comment from: wolfy [Visitor]
+1 remi :o)
(BTW, I've been teaching OO and various OO-languages for > 10 years, so I'm feeling with you)
In my earlier post I didn't go into as much detail as you did - but you nailed it:
> "Also, you definitly need good education to be a good coder."
amen, brother...
> "Graduated people sometimes miss the point, but clearly, there's a huge gap between a script kiddie and a PhD in Computer Science when it comes to abstraction levels and high level vision."
AMEN, brother!
> "Writing code isn't only about "if" and "foreach", sorry. How can you possibly produce good quality code if you don't even know about the most basic theory of CS (e.g. state machines, OOP, etc) ?"
FRICKIN' AMEN, BROTHER!
people, read remis post again if you still did not get what he said - he has it spot on!
(BTW, I've been teaching OO and various OO-languages for > 10 years, so I'm feeling with you)
In my earlier post I didn't go into as much detail as you did - but you nailed it:
> "Also, you definitly need good education to be a good coder."
amen, brother...
> "Graduated people sometimes miss the point, but clearly, there's a huge gap between a script kiddie and a PhD in Computer Science when it comes to abstraction levels and high level vision."
AMEN, brother!
> "Writing code isn't only about "if" and "foreach", sorry. How can you possibly produce good quality code if you don't even know about the most basic theory of CS (e.g. state machines, OOP, etc) ?"
FRICKIN' AMEN, BROTHER!
people, read remis post again if you still did not get what he said - he has it spot on!
11/12/08 @ 18:16
Comment from: nemanja [Member]
@remi and brother wolfy,
Guys, don't feel threatened. I am not underestimating your knowledge.
I have M.Sc. in CS, Java certificate, international experiance, bunch of development years blah blah blah, but that's not the point.
My post was about people that feel the way I did also. You belong to the other side.
Stay there and be happy. One day if you are not, come again here and read it through again...
Guys, don't feel threatened. I am not underestimating your knowledge.
I have M.Sc. in CS, Java certificate, international experiance, bunch of development years blah blah blah, but that's not the point.
My post was about people that feel the way I did also. You belong to the other side.
Stay there and be happy. One day if you are not, come again here and read it through again...
11/13/08 @ 02:17
Comment from: Stephen McConnell [Visitor]
Great article. At first it sounds counter-intuitive. But I agree. I quit developing for a living about 3 years ago. I love developing, but got REALLY burned out. I had to develop the way someone ELSE told me. When it was obvious their methodology was wrong, I STILL had to do it their way. Lots of stress there.
Now, I Day Trade for a living. Actually there's lots less stress. And, like you, I can develop what I want, how I want and try new things and ideas. And with no "time table", I can write it right THE FIRST TIME!
I can take on projects when someone needs help. I can take on projects I want to do. Life is good.
Thanks for the insight.
Now, I Day Trade for a living. Actually there's lots less stress. And, like you, I can develop what I want, how I want and try new things and ideas. And with no "time table", I can write it right THE FIRST TIME!
I can take on projects when someone needs help. I can take on projects I want to do. Life is good.
Thanks for the insight.
11/14/08 @ 14:09
This post has 7 feedbacks awaiting moderation...
Comment feed for this postLeave a comment
