[theli0nheart]

> For hard-tech those become important only after there is an implementation that solves a high barrier to entry technical problem. Then you can get a good run of the mill PM to keep it chugging.

I completely disagree, and your statement is emblematic of what is wrong with popular perceptions of what it means to be a good software engineer.

The best engineers I've ever worked with are fantastic communicators and understand the product that they are building to the core. Being able to ask a good question or drill down into correct requirements is far more important than knowing how to traverse a binary tree, at any level.

[srean]

Where did I say engineers are not or dont need to be fantastic communicators.

All I am saying is that if you are in a hard tech area with problems that has not yet been solved well enough to be monetizable, communication and delegation is not what is going to solve it. Agile, extreme or whatever is 'in' at the moment is not going to do it. It gets solved by ability to reason about technical things. I can for instance communicate the need to cure cancer (bad example sorry) or delegate willy nilly, but sorry thats not going to solve it.

[theli0nheart]

> It gets solved by ability to reason about technical things.

> I can for instance communicate the need to cure cancer (bad example sorry) or delegate willy nilly, but sorry thats not going to solve it.

I, again, disagree. Technical ability and communication skills are equally important. You need both to be an effective engineer.