On Talent I observed something fairly early on at Apple, which I didn’t know how to explain then, but I’ve thought a lot about it since. Most things in life have a dynamic range in which [the ratio of] “average” to “best” is at most 2:1. For example, if you go to New York City and get an average taxi cab driver, versus the best taxi cab driver, you’ll probably get to your destination with the best taxi driver 30% faster. And an automobile; what’s the difference between the average car and the best? Maybe 20%? The best CD player versus the average CD player? Maybe 20%? So 2:1 is a big dynamic range for most things in life. Now, in software, and it used to be the case in hardware, the difference between the average software developer and the best is 50:1; maybe even 100:1. Very few things in life are like this, but what I was lucky enough to spend my life doing, which is software, is like this. So I’ve built a lot of my success on finding these truly gifted people, and not settling for “B” and “C” players, but really going for the “A” players. And I found something… I found that when you get enough “A” players together, when you go through the incredible work to find these “A” players, they really like working with each other. Because most have never had the chance to do that before. And they don’t work with “B” and “C” players, so it’s self-policing. They only want to hire “A” players. So you build these pockets of “A” players and it just propagates. Steve Jobs, Steve Jobs: The Lost Interview Waste as little effort as possible on low competenceA small team of committed coworkersBuild projects around motivated individualsIndividuals matter talent
Waste as little effort as possible on low competence One should waste as little effort as possible on improving areas of low competence. It takes far more energy and work to improve from incompetence to mediocrity than it takes to improve from first-rate performance to excellence. Peter F. Drucker, Managing Oneself 95%-ile isn't that goodOn Talent talent
95%-ile isn't that good An Article by Dan Luu danluu.com Reaching 95Mistakes at the top Waste as little effort as possible on low competence talent
Deadlines are bullshit An Article contrariantruth.substack.com In software development deadlines are a necessary evil. It is important to understand when they are necessary, and it is important to understand why they are evil. External vs. internal deadlinesWhy are internal deadlines evil?Engineers who love their work Hofstadter's LawThe Thing-deadline calculusNever enough timeDriving engineers to an arbitrary date is a value destroying mistake bureaucracysoftwareprocesswork
External vs. internal deadlines When are deadlines necessary? Contractual obligations Technical liabilities (e.g., dependency EOL) Compliance, government, investors, and other external stakeholders What do all of these deadlines have in common? They are all important. They are all deadlines that cannot be missed. They are all external. When are deadlines evil? Your manager says you have a deadline Your software development methodology says you have deadlines What do all of these deadlines have in common? None of them are important. They are arbitrary. They are all internal. They are all bullshit.
Why are internal deadlines evil? Estimation: When estimating engineering work a substantial time investment is required by an engineer in order to get an accurate estimate. Misaligned Incentives: There is an incentive to lie and give estimates much longer than the feature is truly expected to take. Low Morale: Deadlines are likely to be missed often. Repeated failure has a cost to the morale of the team. Micromanagement: Deadlines are wielded by middle managers as a whip to harass and annoy engineers working on features. High Stress: When engineers feel the pressure of other stakeholders holding deadlines over their heads it creates an environment of high stress. High Turnover: On teams with high turnover rates the best engineers have an easy time finding new work and leave quickly, the worst engineers have a difficult time finding work and remain. This selects for a lower quality team over time.
Engineers who love their work The resolution is simple. Never have internal deadlines. Operate on a prioritized and ordered list of features. Estimate only when necessary to prioritize and do so in a t-shirt sizing way. Trust your engineers and they will begin to love their work. Engineers who love their work are happy and productive. Building is never a straight line