www.itminddesign.com

I was reading this blog over at Inter-Sections (blog: Inter-Sections » Blog Archive » How to recognize a good programmer) and some of the topics brought up I thought could be of value. I also thought that I would apply it SysAdmins and Technical Architects. I think these are good food for thought items People, jobs, and companies have all their own idiosyncrasies and these items are not the beginning or the end on hiring people.

Let’s start with some excerpts from Daniel’s blog entry.

#1 : Passion

Can you get this guy to excitedly chat up a technology that he’s using, for a whole half hour, without losing steam?

#2 : Self-teaching and love of learning

If you’re thinking of hiring someone as a programmer, and he ever utters the words “I can work with that, just send me on a training course for a week and I’ll be good at it”, don’t hire that guy. A good programmer doesn’t need a training course to learn a new technology.

#3 : Intelligence

In fact, good programmers are usually among the smartest people you know. Many of them will actually have pretty good social skills too. The cliché of the programmer who’s incapable of having a conversation is just that - a cliché.

#4 : Hidden experience

A good question to ask a potential “good programmer” in an interview would be “can you tell me about a personal project - even or especially one that’s completely irrelevant - that you did in your spare time, and that’s not on your CV?” If they can’t (unless their CV is 20 pages long), they’re probably not a good programmer.

#5 : Variety of technologies

Learning a new technology is one of the most fun things a programmer with any passion can do. So they’ll do it all the time, and accumulate a portfolio of things they’ve “played around with”. They may not be experts at all of them, but all decent programmers will be fluent in a large inventory of unrelated technologies.

#6 : Formal qualifications

The key point to outline here is that formal qualifications don’t mean squat when you’re trying to recognize a good programmer. Many good programmers will have a degree in Computer Science. Many won’t.

I have to say that these six points are very good and apply similarly to System Administrators and Technical Architects.  I want to add more thoughts around some of Daniel’s points and add some of my own as well. 

Passion & Hidden Experience

I do think that a good geek can talk your ears off about technology.  I also believe for the best, it is the continuation of a hobby or something they are good at.   This plays in line with #1 and #4 above.  I also think there has to be some amount of perfectionism or OCD as well.  I’m not talking about to the unhealthy levels, but a little bit of wanting it done 100% correct.  In my mind, the difference between a true geek and a manager is a geek doesn’t want to settle with something being 90% correct and a manager knows that with all projects, compromises will be made and nothing with 100% right.  The geeks that get into trouble are the ones that are so fixated on the getting to 100% that nothing else matters.  I have seen geeks lose good jobs because they were okay with “burning a village in order to save it”.  Needless to say that these types of geeks would never survive in a management role.

Passion also comes out in discussing around choices on how to do something and how well they can convince others as well.  It can go too far with fixation about being “right” and wanting to beat people into submission but the exuberance about the choices is usually a positive trait.  You want a person that cares about quality of work and taking care of others.  The individuals who are, don’t want to discuss with or convince others and will settle for the path of least resistance is the people who shouldn’t be hired.  Nothing frustrates me more than those who ,“have turned being unengaged into a Zen-like thing.” , a quote from one of my favorite fictional characters. 

In regards to hidden experience, good Systems people tend to don’t view being a SysAdmin or Architect as a “day job” it is more like a part of them or more than just a vocation.  I would be cautious about the passion levels or commitment levels of those who aren’t interested or fiddle around with technologies outside the office.

Self-teaching and love of learning

I totally agree with point #2.  With the tempos of projects individuals who insist on always having a training class before wanting to work with something typically is going to be trouble.  I do believe in training classes and believe that a company should provide people with training.  However, my experience has taught me that most people use this as an excuse as a crutch so they do not have to support or learn something.  I have found that I always want to learn something about and how to use technologies before I go to the training classes.  I have found that understanding many aspects of the technology before hand helps get the most value for me out of a training class.  I have also seen some of the “gotta have the classes” individuals are the same that have more initials after their name than my medical doctor does.  It could be that they want to milk the company for as many certifications as possible so they can go somewhere else and get paid more.

Variety of Technology

I think senior people should have a variety of experiences.  I think that some experience in different disciplines is excellent as well. (e.g. SysAdmin, Security, Network Admin, Management, Project Management)  For more of my thoughts and pontifications on career paths see this post.  I also want to place technology biases in this category as well.  We all use technologies and products that we are all comfortable with and the natural tendency is for us to reach for those tools whenever we have a problem to solve.  That’s normal and natural but that is not exactly what I’m talking about.  It’s the folks who flat refuse to work with Microsoft Windows, or think that mainframes are dinosaurs that need to be put out to pasture.  Talented people like exposure to all kinds of technologies and feel like any technology can be the correct fit given it meets the requirements.  If someone wants to run their data centers off of a bunch of Blackberry phones chained together, if it meets the business requirements and can be supported properly, what is the problem?  Ultimately, you are looking for someone who feels that they can provide the most cost effective solutions that are in line with business requirements.

Self-confidence vs. Hubris

Often times there is a thin line between self-confidence and hubris. Self-confidence is the thing that gives one the ability to take on challenges and new technologies.  It’s the positive part that fuels #1 through #6.  However, hubris is the biological weapon of mass destruction that will eventually destroy everything it comes in contact with.    It manifests itself in numerous ways. I’ve seen it come out in “smart people” who called the less knowledgeable or people with less memory capacity, STUPID!  I have also seen it people who think they are above doing certain types of work because of their title.  I have also seen it appear wearing the disguise of “efficiency” .  It sounds harmless as, why can’t someone else do this, I’m paid $100/sec and wouldn’t it be more efficient for someone else that is paid less to do instead of me.  I’m not knocking efficiency, but come on, what company thinks it normal to breaks down every task down to who is the cheapest person to the job.  I’m sorry, if they want me to take out the trash, I agree that it’s not an efficient use of the company’s money, but that is their call and I’m not above taking out the trash.  Here is both sides of that argument, the company pays for my time and I should be willing to do whatever the job requires(as long as it’s legal and moral) but I also have the choice to continue to work there as well if I don’t feel challenged or like what I’m being asked to do.

The Star Trek test

This one is mostly for a bit of humor, but I have noticed some correlation between how ”geeky” a person is by discovering how much they were into Star Trek (original series, spin-offs, and movies) and or other Scifi shows,  Dr. Who, Battle-star Galactica, etc.  I’m curious if others have seen this too.

This is only part one, I have so many different topics to discuss. I was afraid that if I added too many more characters that this post would require a warning statement about reading it why operating heavy machinery.

As all ways, if you have feedback or comments, either comment below or email me:  feedback at itminddesign dot com.   If you found it useful or entertaining please share it.

Every survey of employees I have heard people reference rate money below #1 as the biggest motivator or what makes employees’ the “happiest”.  I know that some would disagree and that’s fine.  I am as rapacious as the next guy and go to work to make money.  However, I don’t understand how people work at jobs they hate.  I respect that people have families and bills to pay, but long term how can any person be miserable for so long in a job they don’t like or don’t feel accomplished in?

I guess I now know what it might be like to go to a support group and realize that there are others out there who feel like I do.  I was touched by this article I read in the Wall Street Journal.  The title was “A Modern Conundrum: When Work’s Invisible, So are its satisfactions.” written by Jared Sanberg.  The link to the whole article can be found by clicking  Cubicle Culture - WSJ.com.  Several times through out my career I have moments of existential crisis.  I think most people want to be able to see their value and feel that they have left something positive in/to the world.  I often wonder, if I die today, would anyone in a hundred or thousand years ever know I existed and did I do anything to add value to humanity.  I’m not saying that I have to cure cancer to feel a sense of success, but at a minimum I want to give back to humanity at least as much as I have taken.  I truly relate to this in part the article:

In the information age, so much is worked on in a day at the office but so little gets done. In the past, people could see the fruits of their labor immediately: a chair made or a ball bearing produced. But it can be hard to find gratification from work that is largely invisible, or from delivering goods that are often metaphorical. You can’t even leave your mark on a document in increasingly paperless offices. It can be even harder trying to measure it all. That may explain why to-do listers write down tasks they’ve already completed just to be able to cross them off.

I actually do add things to my to-do list so I can just mark them off. I do feel good when I mark something completed. (It also allows me to keep a written record of what I do week to week) 

The team does have some metrics (KPIs) that measure our accomplishments but its hard to see how the company is doing any good in the world. I believe we do make products that make people’s travel process easier but seeing their impact to the end customer is hard.  I think when companies want to improve productivity and want employee buy in on the mission, they must find something for the employees to get behind.  The mission statements are usually a bunch of BS bingo and considered a joke at most places. It can be powerful if used correctly.  Saying that ABC company wants to be leader of XYZ industry and make $999 Billion dollars by 2010 isn’t very emotional to me.  Though if my salary is tied to revenue, I might get teary eyed thinking about my bonus. :)  Seriously, if I’m GE medical and we make defibrillators, then a mission statement of saving a million lives a year with our devices is an awesome mission to create.  I know I would want to contribute and work hard to help save a million lives a year.  Working late seems more trivial when lives could be at stake. I think meeting those people and know the good that is done by devices like that, that’s how IT people working in the “intangible” products get to see their work. 

The goal is to help each company find out how they contribute to something emotional and provide the easiest way to see the effects of everyone’s work.  All of us out there, we work for companies and have to help them find those things, so we can bring meaning, success, and fulfilment to our coworkers.  Until that’s true everywhere, including at my company, I will take comfort in knowing that I’m not alone out there, and others feel the way I do.  For now, that’s enough to help me keep digging for the emotional meanings in my world.

Comments/feedback always welcome.   email feedback at itminddesign dot com or hit the comment button below.