This actually sounds like a middle-of-the-pack engineer, which is about a 4x.
A 2nd edition of Peopleware summarises it; the 10x programmer is not a myth, but it's comparing the best to the worst; NOT best to median. It's also not about programming specifically; it's simply a common distribution in many metrics of performance.
The rule of thumb Peopleware states is that you can rely on the best outperforming the worst by a factor of 10, and you can rely on the best outperforming the median by a factor of 2.5. This of course indicates that a median developer, middle of the pack, is a 4x developer. Obviously, this is a statistical rule, and if you've got a tiny sample size or some kind of singular outlier or other such; well, we're all adults and we understand how statistics and distributions work.
Peopleware uses Boehn (1981), Sackman (1968), Augustine (1979) and Lawrence (1981) as its sources. [ "Peopleware", DeMarco and Lister, 1987, p45 ]
Arguably this list can apply to any "level" of engineer and not just 1x. It really consists of - in general - good qualities for an engineer (and some unrelated ones like how you spend time outside of work, work to live/live to work, workspace decoration, etc.)
I feel like the article is trying to imply that other "levels" of engineers might lack these qualities.
This is a list of good qualities regarding engineering practices, teamwork and emotional intelligence.
10x engineers, who are supposed to be 10x more impactful than 1x engineers, are expected to have many of attributes of that list to a higher degree even than 1x engineers.
This is a nice list, but smells a bit of resentment.
I like that list. I went to go star the repo after reading it and looks like I already starred it ages ago!
I have a friend I am mentoring and am definitely going to put this on the reading list. I don't care if it is called a 1x engineer or not, it is a solid list!
A 2nd edition of Peopleware summarises it; the 10x programmer is not a myth, but it's comparing the best to the worst; NOT best to median. It's also not about programming specifically; it's simply a common distribution in many metrics of performance.
The rule of thumb Peopleware states is that you can rely on the best outperforming the worst by a factor of 10, and you can rely on the best outperforming the median by a factor of 2.5. This of course indicates that a median developer, middle of the pack, is a 4x developer. Obviously, this is a statistical rule, and if you've got a tiny sample size or some kind of singular outlier or other such; well, we're all adults and we understand how statistics and distributions work.
Peopleware uses Boehn (1981), Sackman (1968), Augustine (1979) and Lawrence (1981) as its sources. [ "Peopleware", DeMarco and Lister, 1987, p45 ]