From: "Alastair Rodgers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > From: TommCatt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] >> Think at it this way: every hour a worker is doing something >> using his second-best skill is an hour he is not using his best skill. >> >> Which is why I would never let a PHD physicist or biologist >> or whatever ever write a single line of code. They would >> spend all their time physicing or biologying or whatevering >> with programmers supplying them with whatever code they needed. > >Sorry Tomm, but I think this is rather narrow-minded. I can see the >point you're trying to make, but I think it's unrealistic to suggest >that any one person is only capable of achieving proficiency in a single >skill set! Adaptability is one of mankind's greatest assets!
I fully agree. I also have a varied skill set and get bored when doing the same thing for long periods of time. We are not machines. However, and I admit that it was sloppy writing on my part, I am only talking about "locking" people into narrow functions only for short durations such as a project. > >During my PhD (Astroparticle physics), I developed many skills which >have stood me in good stead as a software developer - analysis & problem >solving, teamwork, self-motiviation, etc. This is irrespective of the >fact that a significant fraction of my PhD time was spent developing >software (C, Pascal and, dare I say it, Fortran). Admittedly, scientific >programming can be quite different from commercial, but it can be good >experience. Look at it this way. In order to get someone to do the work that requires the knowledge and skill level of a PhD in astroparticle physics, I have to pay, say, $60/hr. In order to get someone to write good code, I have to pay only $40/hr. For every hour you are writing code, I am losing $20/hr. This is true even if you are better at writing code than the programmer (remember, it is *relative* advantage). Now, if you love programming so much I have to give you some time writing code or risk you becoming dissatisfied and leaving the company, that is another issue. But it is far more efficient to have everyone performing where they perform best. > A lot of the skills necessary for scientific research (and, I dare say, > other technical fields) can be transferred successfully to software > development, and I think having a broader background can sometimes be an > advantage. True. But that is because it is usually impossible (or just not feasible) to hire a separate worker for every function needed for the project. And not every function is needed throughout the project. Design is different from analysis is different from implementation is different from testing, etc. But the principle holds and greater efficiency can be realized by being aware of it and adhering to it as much as possible. So a large company with many projects going at the same time so they can keep their designers working strictly on design (and so forth) will be able to achieve a level of efficiency not possible in a smaller company that must use people at second- and third-level proficiencies. However, I think we have gotten off topic on a subject that started out off topic to begin with. Is there an alt.comp.software.management group we could move to? 8^) Tomm ____________________________________________________ To change your JDJList options, please visit: http://www.sys-con.com/java/list.cfm Be respectful! Clean up your posts before replying ____________________________________________________
