![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
[Poll #649524]
I set question #1 up as a forced choice because I suspected that, otherwise, everyone's answer would be "it depends." I'd be delighted to entertain further discussion of what it depends on, and why, in the comments section - but I also wanted people's gut reaction if they were forced to choose one or the other.
I set question #1 up as a forced choice because I suspected that, otherwise, everyone's answer would be "it depends." I'd be delighted to entertain further discussion of what it depends on, and why, in the comments section - but I also wanted people's gut reaction if they were forced to choose one or the other.
no subject
no subject
In software, it's particularly tricky, though. Because of the huge disparity in productivity, promoting your least competent programmers to management is actually a better choice than promoting the competent although neither choice is particularly good.
This is part of a much larger rant that may or may not eventually resolve itself into a book about what it takes to be a good manager of software developers and how those skills are different from both what it takes to be a good programmer and what it takes to be a good general-purpose manager.