Doubtful. Usually when one person makes the proof of concept they do 20% of the work and collect 80% of the credit.
The people tasked with cleaning up the mess and making it usable in production do the remaining 80% of the work, but management is always disappointed that it’s going so slow relative to how quickly the proof of concept was created.
At one company it was widely known that the key to taking credit for technical work was to be the team presenting the GUI pieces to management. If you were working on something that couldn’t be shown to management with a “wow” factor, you were not valued. I see the same thing happening here, with vibe coders capturing the wow factor and the people who actually make it production stable being viewed as the slow and expendable ones.
People who made the initial thing in the absolute cheapest way possible expect the maintenance work to be similarly cheap. If it turns out it just can't be done on that budget, it'll often just not get done rather than pay what it would cost.
The people tasked with cleaning up the mess and making it usable in production do the remaining 80% of the work, but management is always disappointed that it’s going so slow relative to how quickly the proof of concept was created.
At one company it was widely known that the key to taking credit for technical work was to be the team presenting the GUI pieces to management. If you were working on something that couldn’t be shown to management with a “wow” factor, you were not valued. I see the same thing happening here, with vibe coders capturing the wow factor and the people who actually make it production stable being viewed as the slow and expendable ones.