69

In some organizations, developers are kings, and in others they are pawns.

---

(Note. Trans. - Not so long ago I got a new book from Tom DeMarco associates - Adrenaline Junkies and Template Zombies . The main purpose of this book is based on the analysis of software development projects, to identify the main templates for which such projects exist and trying to systematize them. Applying the concept of a template to living people turned out to be much more interesting than to software, so the book is read with pleasure and almost everyone will find in his experience an example of one or another template, if not all. translated chapters one by one in random order, so if there is interest, I hope to translate the entire book).

Munders was an American sitcom that started in 1964 and lasted two seasons. It told about the noisy life of the family of monsters who lived in an ordinary city. The father, Herman Munster, is a stupid version of the Frankenstein monster; his wife is a vampire; grandfather resembles Count Dracula from vaudeville; and their son, Eddie, is a little werewolf.
')
Surprisingly, Manstrove's niece, Marilyn, who lives with them, is a beautiful ( college lane. - Well for the 60s) college student. However, the family does not consider her a beauty, but quite the opposite - a complete ugly. They are trying to protect her feelings, but still a little shy of her. And one of the main ideas of the series is that such an attitude towards Marilyn is due only to the fact that she was born in such a strange family. And it is absolutely clear that in any other family in the district, she was appreciated.

Many developers live the life of Marilyn Munster. They work for technology-dependent companies, but their work is not appreciated, and they have a very low status in the structure. In many of these organizations, managers receive full authority. Managers are responsible for planning, scheduling, tracking, evaluating, and assigning jobs to technicians. Planning, scheduling, tracking, and evaluations are usually done only by managers with other managers. The developers in this case are simply laymen who “don’t understand” how it’s really difficult to manage a company.

Managers hurt a lot of money because they are responsible for which project to start and for the work on the project that the main cones chose. Technicians should bow their heads and do what the managers told them to do. If they do not like it, then they can leave - the managers, along with HR, will find a replacement for them. Replacement may work under an employment contract and not on the staff of a company, or it may even be on another continent where technical profanees are cheaper than at headquarters. There is another version of this template, when all salesmen drag themselves over the blanket. In principle, it is quite logical that no matter how good your product is if you have not managed to sell it.

Indeed, what such companies believe is that there are many developers, they are all the same and everyone is equally good, and they need to pay as little as possible in order for them to do their job.

Of course there are other types of companies, with a completely different view of the developers. These companies believe that their products and services differ from competitors in quality and innovation. They understand that there is a huge difference in ability and performance between the top 10 percent of developers and the average developer. They want the best they can get. This is the result of a culture in which developers are kings who have the freedom to choose what to work on and how to achieve results. Such developers often determine the capabilities of the product and create it themselves. And they are usually the first to evaluate the work done. The most experienced developers can become team leaders, and sometimes more. Very often, but not always, developers are kings in organizations that develop software or software is the main component of their product.

However, do not overdo it with the "king of developers culture". When developers themselves optimize their work and plan not paying attention to the impact of these decisions on the rest of the team members, projects can expect trouble. For example, we came across a project in which two developers decided that they would first make an application framework — to leave many classes unfinished in order to finish them later. And focus on the most interesting moments for them. The rest of the team, testers, and technical writers began their work only when the project’s date of completion was already close, because they had nothing to do. There was nothing that could be tested or documented until everything suddenly became ready (when the developers filled the void they left). Thus, developers have optimized the project, optimizing their own work.

If you hire developers, ask yourself how important quality and innovation are to the success of your organization. Talented developers are needed for maximum levels of quality and innovation. You will not be able to attract, grow and save the most talented if you treat them as if you were wasting money on them.

If you are a great developer and you feel like Marilyn Munster, do not hesitate around a lot of other families who can give you the respect you deserve. Escape from this freak show. <