|
|
|
|
|
|
by that_guy_iain
2024 days ago
|
|
|
> What would those fast-dev do in a vacuum? Or with only clone of themselves coworkers. Well considering my assertion is the dev is just fast and producing the same quality as others. Carry on working. > What happens when one of those fast-dev quit? The company would need to replace them or have the team produce less work due to less works? > Final last thought: imagine you are actually a good fast-dev like you describe, and your colleagues are less good, but imagine a case where the whole organization would actually benefit from you slowing down a bit and working on developing better way to work more efficiently with others or making them improve, overall yielding even more business value at the end. This can happen too. This seems like "What if, it is better that you don't do the job you were hired for but do a higher job without getting promoted and recognised for your skills?". Well one, is if a company wants their fast dev to teach others they should make them a coach or something along those lines. Secondly, just because they're fast doesn't mean they can teach, sometimes the reason they're fast is they have less interactions with people and therefore able to continually code without having to stop to talk to Jenny from Admin about how important a bug is (not actually a devs job, there should be product/project management for this).Maybe fast dev is fast because they've been there for longer and understand the system, then it's just a case of other devs need to ramp up. Lastly, maybe the fast dev doesn't want to do this other role and just likes programming. |
|
|
But if all your descriptions are precisely correct, then my opinion is that your conclusions broadly are too.
Simply, I will think and check a lot before projecting actual situations on that model. For now I don't have the feeling I've ever encountered anything like you describe. More often it was some of the variations I suggested, and maybe others.