[fiveoak]

The article says "A 10x engineer isn’t someone who is 10x better than those around them, but someone who makes those around them 10x better."

I'm guessing you disagree with the author's definition of a "10x developer". I don't really think there is a clear accepted definition for it.. so how would you define the term?

[core-questions]

Ten times more productive than the baseline minimum-productivity-to-maintain-a-career-without-hassle developer. Simple as that. "Ten times" is really just a placeholder for your intuitive observation of their performance.

C'mon, we know who it's referring to. That developer who just powers through things, understands huge parts of the stack in depth, and usually sacrifices more of their time than they should to getting things done.

I don't know if you can become that person. I think maybe you have to be born that way, or drag yourself into that position from a young age.

[fiveoak]

Yeah, I know the spirit of the term. I'm really not trying to play dumb here or anything. I agree that other people can be more productive than others on an individual basis.

I just disagree with using a "10x" quantification without a clear way to measure individual productivity when you're working in a team. It's not like we can just point to something like.. hey, Person A has 10x as many line changes as Person B, therefore Person A is 10x as productive. And unless we have two individuals working on features completely alone, we can't say Person A shipped 10x as many widget features as Person B either.

I dunno. I honestly don't have a good answer for how to measure individual productivity on a clear, quantifiable basis, again not trying to play dumb here I'm admittedly not sure on it and was hoping to get some feedback from others about it.

[dyarosla]

There is a commonly accepted definition (described in a sibling comment) and the article explicitly says ‘I will redefine the term as ...’ what it goes into.

[fiveoak]

For the sibling comment, are you referring to this comment?

"10x developer is absolutely a thing, in the easily observed phenomenon that some developers are 10x more productive than other developers. The "other developers" are earning good wages and doing good work; the 10x developer is usually found making 2x or 3x the norm. That said; I just can't believe that a team can perform 10x by the actions of one person. This claim is so outlandish I may just have to skim the article. It is often the case that having a 10x developer nearby can greatly improve the quality of a product, but that's not the same thing as improving the team."

I don't agree that some developers are "10x more productive" than others. I agree that some developers are more/less productive than others but I agree with the article's premise that teamwork is a much more important metric than individual talent. I understand the spirit of "10x developer" in that some individuals are more productive than others.. but the quantification of 10x seems very unrealistic, and IMO is overshadowed by potential productivity gains by having a well-functioning team. Again just my opinion here so feel free to disagree with me on this.

The relevant paragraph in the article is this:

"Software engineering today is a team sport; like water polo, you can’t build incredible software systems alone. So when I first heard the concept of the 10x engineer, I was confused. How could someone be so talented that it overshadows the power of teamwork? In my experience, individual excellence is necessary, but not sufficient, for greatness. Focusing purely on individual achievement misses the larger picture that teams are required to build great software. So I decided to change the definition of a 10x engineer to this: "

It doesn't give a very clear definition of what a "10x engineer" is. Again I agree with them here that the "10x" number and lack of a clear objective "individual productivity" metric makes the term hard to clearly define. Since most work is not done on an individual basis, but rather in teams.