[theorique]

From the VBScript and complex spreadsheet wrangling required to perform analysis of key organizational metrics to mastery of numerous different specialized softwares and systems in order to perform basic functions of the job ranging from accounting to people operations, non-technical employees must have a bevy of technical skills at the ready every single day. In fact, I had to code a sample app using the company’s API to get my job as an operations manager — and I committed code to the frontend of the marketing site regularly. I’m not the exception.

That doesn't really sound like a non-technical employee to me. Maybe a question of terminology, or the primary focus of the person's role, but a person who is coding sample apps using the company's API sounds pretty damn technical.

[hobs]

That was my immediate thought, irregardless of the gender argument. I work with plenty of non-technical ops people, ALL of them REGARDLESS of intelligence, can not code out of a wet paper bag. I have at various points shown them all how to use basic excel formulas and they still use calculators that would not look out of place in a grade school.

Are they good at what they do? Yes. Does what they do require that type of abstract thinking and computer skills? Not that I have seen, they seem effective at what they do, the lights are on, the place runs smoothly.

[CGudapati]

Not to be that guy but regardless is the correct form. Irregardless is considered as non-standard or incorrect. But if you do know this, please don't mind this nitpick.

[hobs]

I actually didn't know that. I googled and learned that it came into use in the 50s, interesting. Edited and changed.

Edit: too old to edit! But still, thanks for the info.

[lostcolony]

I do not believe this thread just happened.

[hobs]

I smiled reading this comment. If you make a mistake and someone corrects you, I assume you also try to learn from it.

On HN, I believe that people are trying to make a positive contribution when the post, and while correcting people on the internet can seem pedantic, I take it to be a positive contribution and an opportunity to learn something.

Hopefully I don't make the same mistake twice!

[stephenaturner]

Maybe her argument is that she's less technical than the engineers (and therefore looked down upon unnecessarily, leading to this article), even if she has to be far more technical than the average person, just to get the job.

[theorique]

I think you're probably right. "Less Technical" or "Not As Technical" is more accurate.

Perhaps "non-SE" or "non-Programmer" or "non-Engineer" might be closest to what we're trying to say here.

It's unfortunate that some technical people look down on others in these kind of roles.

[rachellaw]

I'm the "non-technical" co-founder of my startup, and I used to program web server gateways in python. It just happens that our technical architecture that we're using isn't really my area of specalisation (it's my partner's) so I ended up doing most of the business dev, ops, sales/marketing instead of programming.

I think all this really depends on the where the startup is in timeframe. A larger company will have more specialised employees who do only one thing, but a smaller one would have a single employee doing multiple roles even if in both cases their titles were exactly the same.

[benjamincburns]

> or the primary focus of the person's role

That one.

A implies B does not necessarily mean that B implies A. She's just saying that it's possible for a person to have skills beyond those required for their role. The examples you quoted aren't listed as what should be expectations of her role, they're examples of how she often pulls in her not-in-the-job-req skills in the service of her official duties.