|
|
|
|
|
by Aromasin
847 days ago
|
|
I think a lot of the reasons that engineers rag on business leaders more than engineering ones are that: 1. They haven't tried creating a product and then making money off it. It's amazing how painfully difficult that can be (without good Sales and Marketing). 2. They haven't done a (good) MBA and don't understand how much goes into it, so write it off as similar to an undergraduate business degree. 3. They have a superiority complex from their university days where engineering was the hardest discipline. Pat Gelsigner's favourite phrase is "We all work for Sales and Marketing". He says it over and over. I think at this time in Intel's history an engineer is the better one to be running the ship, but the idea that you need to be 100% tech savvy to run a successful tech company is, as you proved through your example, patently false. A good CTO can make all the difference in the product, while a good MBA-type CEO can focus on everything else. |
|
I’ve worked at both large and small companies, and engineers do tend to forget that no matter how good what they build is, it’s going nowhere without someone selling it.
Similarly, people on the business side often neglect the blood sweat and tears that can sometimes go into building something, forgetting sometimes that without a product there is no sales or marketing.
I really liked this response, but this is HN, people love romanticizing engineers to a fault.
At the end of the day, it’s just another false dichotomy. There are shitty business people just as there are shitty engineers.
Best to not be married to anyone idea in this case and just take it on a case by case basis.