> That said, I've seen many really solid developers be motivated by solving complex technical challenges instead of work that actually creates business/product value.
Complex technical challenges create value for the developer, as it's fun solving problems like that. If management doesn't communicate the end-user's needs/wants and how the product helps them, even valuable work can feel like pushing up Sisyphus's boulder, so working on fun stuff at least creates value for you rather than work that appears to be purely for the leadership's vanity.
For people that are in software because they love it, rather than for fame and fortune, in fact love the fact that the maths side of your brain can make stuff happen for people. For technical challenges, nothing beats algebraic topology or QFT, but with software you can make stuff that is real, and amaze and deight your family. The problem is management’s persistent blindness to the reality of their technology and development technology. The non-technical folk will hear “we can’t add this new feature without touching dozens of risk places in the code” and not understand the fact that this is extremely risk and is an urgent problem. they seem to think, hire someone that can remember the dozens of places to change” and make for awesome failure analyses where 36 call points where changed but the 37th was missed and . . . Etc.
If you think the software you are making is useless, you should find a different position. Life is short, and it’s thrilling to be responsible for software that people use and enjoy.
Complex technical challenges create value for the developer, as it's fun solving problems like that. If management doesn't communicate the end-user's needs/wants and how the product helps them, even valuable work can feel like pushing up Sisyphus's boulder, so working on fun stuff at least creates value for you rather than work that appears to be purely for the leadership's vanity.