I think your 3 examples of "10x programmers" definitely exist.
But, here's what's most typical in my experience:
4. A programmer who writes a bunch of code and delivers a bunch of features early in a project's history. Because management typically does not have the engineering chops to determine the actual quality/maintainability of the code being delivered, but does highly value rapid delivery, this process overwhelmingly selects for developers who are deliver sloppy but (mostly) working code at high velocity. Additionally, they are the only ones able to understand how the existing mess works, because they are the ones who created it. So everybody else works at a disadvantage. This further cements the belief that they are "10x" and they are rewarded with more and more greenfield work and they usually make a mess of that as well while management continues to think they're geniuses.
Well, to play devil's advocate, that's 10x in the context of finding product-market fit. And that really matters, whether "good" engineers want to believe it or not too. It's just that the kind of person who does that is also likely to be burned out, and have nothing else going for them in life, so they tend to become an asshole – leading to your assessment of things.
I've seen 10x folks in the other 3 categories be total assholes too.
I think the "debate" around 10x folks is a bit silly, and by hard-earned experience, I've learned to question the motivations of the folks who deny that such engineers exist. There is a whole other sort of politics going on, and, it doesn't address the core problem.
My experience of 10x folks is more like: can you live with them, will they be a boost to the team overall, or will they use their 10x to bring down folks around them (consciously or subconsciously) so that they can appear to be more like 20x, or something petty like that.
Some 10x folks use their 10x to put everyone else at a disadvantage, by forcing people to play their very specific sort of game (happens especially with strong specialists who are also decent generalists, i.e. T-shaped people).
There are others who use their 10x to resist any changes, typically out of some seen-it-all cynicism (happens with the crowd who are really good at some codebase, or who are leaders of their lab, etc.). The damage caused is difficult to dislodge because it's based on context as much as skill, and learning the business context can take years, which most talented people won't have patience for – if the 10x even allows them to exist.
Every sort of 10x has some dark pattern (alluding back to your experience), and for that reason, I think it's important for "good" people to not let whatever 10x they have get to their head, and to find other things in life that offers them non-attachment and perspective. It isn't necessarily a strong-people-be-assholes problem as much as a human nature problem. Left unchecked, 10x becomes self-defeating at a team or org level, and will make the 10x person miserable too (even if they don't know it).
Well, to play devil's advocate, that's 10x in the
context of finding product-market fit. And that
really matters, whether "good" engineers want to
believe it or not too.
Well said. It definitely matters.
"Good" engineering is finding the optimum balance between various competing factors: time-to-market, cost, tech debt, etc.
(There are plenty of "good" engineers who try to perfect everything and never actually ship anything. We have all felt that temptation, I'm sure...)
But I think the core issue still remains. Management can't properly balance these competing factors because they can't be elbow-deep in the code.
I think the "debate" around 10x folks is a bit silly,
and by hard-earned experience, I've learned to question
the motivations of the folks who deny that such engineers
exist
Haha. I usually question the motivation of those who say that such engineers do exist. However, that's because they usually fail to consider any of the nuances (team fit, luck, circumstance, etc). You definitely do not fall into that category; I think you really describe it well.
My experience of 10x folks is more like: can you live
with them, will they be a boost to the team overall,
or will they use their 10x to bring down folks around
them (consciously or subconsciously)
Amen. I worked with one single programmer in my life who was perhaps a true 10x. However, he was a lot. He was very hyperactive and on the autism spectrum. Social grace and norms were totally alien to him. He really crapped on other programmers. However, he was actually an extremely sweet person at heart! Just lacking in the filters and restraints that neurotypicals have. We eventually reached a good working arrangement where he could be his eccentric 10x self and a mortal 1x peer engineer like me worked closely with him to gently rein him in in ways that would have been impossible for management. For a couple of years there I thought we were a really good team.
But he definitely wasn't the kind of guy you could just throw onto any old team without a care. His 10x did not come for free.
I have seen it. The person was a new hire, and while he's a solid developer, from a maintenance / debugging / support perspective I haven't encountered his equal -- he solved a complicated issue in about 4 hours (including the time taken to get the dev environment setup) and apologized for how long it took. Great attitude, and amazing ability to get at the root of maintenance problems.
But, here's what's most typical in my experience:
4. A programmer who writes a bunch of code and delivers a bunch of features early in a project's history. Because management typically does not have the engineering chops to determine the actual quality/maintainability of the code being delivered, but does highly value rapid delivery, this process overwhelmingly selects for developers who are deliver sloppy but (mostly) working code at high velocity. Additionally, they are the only ones able to understand how the existing mess works, because they are the ones who created it. So everybody else works at a disadvantage. This further cements the belief that they are "10x" and they are rewarded with more and more greenfield work and they usually make a mess of that as well while management continues to think they're geniuses.