No, I think this is a fine metaphor. If an engineer can understand a problem, identify a solution, and then implement, document, deploy, and support it in production for project after project, it’s completely legit to say they’re good engineers, and are not necessarily improving in any relevant way.
Similarly, a bus driver that consistent drives without causing accidents, doesn’t spill the passengers’ coffee, doesn’t burn too much gas or wear out the breaks too quickly is a good driver.
What you say to either of these people is “Great job, we love you, keep doing what you’re doing!”
Encouraging growth and improvement as an end in itself can be destructive: How many projects amount to rewriting something that works in some new language or framework because an engineer wants to pad their resume or just learn something new?
Craig Mod recently wrote Fast Software, the Best Software; I’m hoping he follows that up with Software That Already Exists and Works Fine Using an Unsexy Suite of Technologies, Software that Doesn’t Need to Be Rewritten.
> No, I think this is a fine metaphor. If an engineer can understand a problem, identify a solution, and then implement, document, deploy, and support it in production for project after project, it’s completely legit to say they’re good engineers, and are not necessarily improving in any relevant way.
We agree. If someone has maxed out all the relevant dimensions then there's no room for improvement. The problem is that there's a difference between that and average. The other problem is that there's continual room for being even better at identifying solutions.
> How many projects amount to rewriting something that works in some new language or framework because an engineer wants to pad their resume or just learn something new?
Unneeded re-writes and getting better are orthogonal concepts. That you're confusing them here underlines the logical fallacy that you're making. If there's legitimate room for improvement (and there generally is in bus driving and in software engineering), and if that improvement makes you substantially better at your job, then it's worth it. In neither of those areas is the "average" employee completely topped off in where they can grow.
Similarly, a bus driver that consistent drives without causing accidents, doesn’t spill the passengers’ coffee, doesn’t burn too much gas or wear out the breaks too quickly is a good driver.
What you say to either of these people is “Great job, we love you, keep doing what you’re doing!”
Encouraging growth and improvement as an end in itself can be destructive: How many projects amount to rewriting something that works in some new language or framework because an engineer wants to pad their resume or just learn something new?
Craig Mod recently wrote Fast Software, the Best Software; I’m hoping he follows that up with Software That Already Exists and Works Fine Using an Unsexy Suite of Technologies, Software that Doesn’t Need to Be Rewritten.