This is curiously similar to my own experiences in mid size engineering shops. At my prior company the upper management really struggled with getting our tech level employees (drafters and designers) "take ownership in their work," meaning to take pride in what they do and go the extra mile to make sure it was both correct and elegant. And I kept telling them "the reason they don't take ownership in their work is that they don't own it, you do."
I cooked up an entire new way to run the thing, where salaries were reduced and employees got a profit share of every project they participated in, by ratio of how much work they did, to solve this problem from the ground up. But it was too weird and unusual for the civil engineering space so it got round-filed. They were right, it was too different from what we were doing.
But yes, this tension exists everywhere, not just software.
> Any employer who’s trying to make you feel like an owner is setting you up for a rude awakening. So don’t be a chump and buy into it.
Equity ownership is very different from collectivist union. With so few shops actually allowing unionization, what alternatives do programmers have? That's the background driving people to chase an illusion, which is better than losing hope. The awakening is not necessarily unexpected, and the anger in response is not without warrant.
> Don’t make people feel like something they’re not.
If only we have the wisdom to see through marketing and motivational leadership to the future. The good intentions of lifting someone up and the benefits that brings in terms of both better productivity and relationship is real until the fallout. Another story of debt accumulating and crashing down.
One minor note that I'll make: semiconductors isn't the only place you get the "you need more of your product to make more of your product" loop. Machine tools were the original example of this, and them coming into their own is part of the industrial revolution. Once you have a lathe of reasonable accuracy, you can use it to make an even better lathe, then use *that* lathe to make an even better one, etc.
This is curiously similar to my own experiences in mid size engineering shops. At my prior company the upper management really struggled with getting our tech level employees (drafters and designers) "take ownership in their work," meaning to take pride in what they do and go the extra mile to make sure it was both correct and elegant. And I kept telling them "the reason they don't take ownership in their work is that they don't own it, you do."
I cooked up an entire new way to run the thing, where salaries were reduced and employees got a profit share of every project they participated in, by ratio of how much work they did, to solve this problem from the ground up. But it was too weird and unusual for the civil engineering space so it got round-filed. They were right, it was too different from what we were doing.
But yes, this tension exists everywhere, not just software.
> Any employer who’s trying to make you feel like an owner is setting you up for a rude awakening. So don’t be a chump and buy into it.
Equity ownership is very different from collectivist union. With so few shops actually allowing unionization, what alternatives do programmers have? That's the background driving people to chase an illusion, which is better than losing hope. The awakening is not necessarily unexpected, and the anger in response is not without warrant.
> Don’t make people feel like something they’re not.
If only we have the wisdom to see through marketing and motivational leadership to the future. The good intentions of lifting someone up and the benefits that brings in terms of both better productivity and relationship is real until the fallout. Another story of debt accumulating and crashing down.
One minor note that I'll make: semiconductors isn't the only place you get the "you need more of your product to make more of your product" loop. Machine tools were the original example of this, and them coming into their own is part of the industrial revolution. Once you have a lathe of reasonable accuracy, you can use it to make an even better lathe, then use *that* lathe to make an even better one, etc.