[aristofun]

> We miss subtleties, test scenarios,

This is something only 4x+ perfectionist types of engineers can do naturally.

They cost double the price tag, they need freedom and respect, you don’t attract them by leetcode interviews or arrogant managers but its the only way to get high quality product in reasonable time.

Otherwise you have no alternative but do it like everybody else — spend time and money on training, layers of management, elaborate system of acceptance tests, feedback loops etc.

Including training your users to live with your mediocre product and hope for the best.

[softprod]

I see. I’ve also seen there are some 4x+ Engineers who do this naturally but they are also really hard to find, along with being expensive as you’ve said. Which of these 2 paths do you think succesful tech companies rely on?

[dr_kiszonka]

I sound like the described engineer type (or so I was told), but without the 4x. I don't know if it helps at all, but I care deeply about my work and need 1) the environment to deliver results at least at the level of quality I expect from myself (in other words, don't make me produce crappy software), 2) technical challenges to help me grow, 3) meaningful projects.

[aristofun]

big companies don't have real choice, there are not that many 4x+ engineers on the market to cover all products and areas

one good example of a product type that can be (and is) made by a small team of high performers is Telegram app

I personally believe that inside a big company you still can and should have some top priority projects run by that kind of teams, if your management is smart and flexible enough

[dsattt]

There are plenty of 4x engineers available, you’re just bad at hiring.

[morbicer]

Similar experience as the sibling reply. I have plenty of colleagues that care about quality and details. Engineers are expected to fill the gaps on specs. Only few of them are 4x+ and we are all cheap because we live in central Europe.

The key is to have good company culture and pay above average (in local rates so 3x and more cheaper than USA). This give you great retention. People are loyal and aren't switching jobs every 2 years. Many of us are with the same company for 5+ years.

Which creates a sense of ownership. Give engineers freedom to make decisions [1], give them challenges. Not deadline challenges that lead to burnout. Foster collaboration and reward seniors teaching juniors. Maintain lean processes.

But truth to be told the dream starts to crumble. Our small to mid size company got acquired by a bigger one and the process bullshit and top down decisions start to creep up. I won't probably last long here but I am worried if I can find a company with a mindset we used to have.

[1] Perhaps controversial hot take: discard architects. Teams should own the technical design. If it's a huge project spanning multiple teams, host in-person designathon for a week. You should have staff engineers on board steering it, but involve seniors or even lower ranks. The people designing should be the same people who are going to implement it. Again, sense if ownership, lower communication overhead. If you are worried teams would stray in different ways, have guilds around core tech/architecture areas. Designs can be reviewed cross team. Let people join other teams for quarter or so to cross-pollinate ideas and best practices.

[dsattt]

They are not hard to find, you just reject them before you can see them.

[softprod]

I was a Software Developer for 10 years so I fully understand this industry can be toxic and sometimes exploits workers. I can't say that my recruitment practices are "great" but I do put a lot of effort into not rejecting people for dogmatic reasons.