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.
"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.
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. 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.