Karsten Wade shares five reasons for which he loves working at Red Hat. Not a reason on its own, but a part of one is this excellent quote:
At this company, the technical people have a serious influence on adjusting the mindset of the very smart people we bring in who haven’t yet fully absorbed the open source way.
Just brilliant!
I’ve heard an excellent phrase today – “corporate slavery“. The moment I read, it made all the sense in the world. A brief and clear description of something, straight to the point. Here is how I heard it on Twitter:
Corporate slavery begins Thursday
But aparently the term is in use for a few years. Here is an excellent photo set on Flickr. And here is a gaping void back of a business card.
Perfect.
During the last few month I’ve been explaining software engineering to management types quite a bit. Most of the “bosses” that I talked to weren’t technical at all, so I was trying to stay away from famous concepts, examples, and terminology as much as I could. Of course, that required some sort of substitute for concepts, examples, and terminology. I’ve tried analogies from different unrelated areas, and was surprised as how good cooking was fitting the purpose.
Before I go any further, I have to say that I am not a cook and that I don’t know much about cooking. But. I know just about the same as any other average human being. Which, sort of, moves me into the same category with my targets, or “bosses”, as I called them before.
Here are a few examples that worked well.
Continue reading Software engineering is like cooking
Sometimes, it feels like marketing is the hype of the millenium. Or a decade at least. There are marketeers, marketing divisions, online marketing, marketing this and marketing that. But what the heck is this marketing thing after all? Can we have it in simple terms?
Well, either I don’t understand a lot (and I don’t claim that I do), or I haven’t met with the right marketing people, or both, or something else, but what I am thinking is that marketing on its own is nothing. Nada. Not at all.
Before you eat me and my old shoes, let me explain. Marketing is that thing that supposedely helps the product (or service for that matter) reach the customer. Or the other way around. And then maybe even convince the customer that he is actually satisfied by what he got. Or maybe I am way off already.
Anyway. To do that (connect the customer with the product or service), marketing people need to know three things. First is the product or service – the destination. Second is the customer – the source. And third is, well, marketing – the path or possible pathes between the two. Am I even remotely right ono this? If I am, then let me tell you something – this doesn’t work. How about that, eh?
Marketing on its own doesn’t work for exactly the same reasons that MIS doesn’t work. MIS is this gray area between Information Technology and Business Administration. It’s supposed to help them communicate with each other. But because MIS never (or almost never, or extremely rarely) truly understands both the business side and the technical side, it only makes things worse. Instead of having two languages – one very technical with lots of terminology and precise definitions, and another one business – with lots of money and people-related processes – the company now has to speak three languages, with the third one being a weird dialect combined and distored from the other two.
The product and the customer are like two magnets. When connecting them, they will either be of opposite polarity and will hurry towards each other and live happily ever after, or they will resist each other as much as they can. Is it possible to bring two magnets of the same polarity to each other? Yes. If the magnets are small and you hands are strong, you can pull them together. That’s marketing for you. Let it go and both magnets would be much happier. And if they were of the different polarity? Guess what? You don’t need much force to put them together.
Back from the abstract world. I think marketing makes sense on the secondary level. That is, everyone should have a bit of marketing knowledge – from sysadmins and programmers to accountants and managers. But marketing shouldn’t stand on its own. In fact, if marketing is taught to everyone, then it can be that common language for everyone to help to understand each other. The one that MIS so miserably failed to be.
Those who are at the top, they want to grow, increase, make more and better. Those are down below, actually doing things, really know how to make things better or faster. The problem is that they can’t communicate with each other usually. So what they need is a little help in this area. Not someone else who neither understands what is possible or not or how big or fast things can go.
That’s about it, minus a few disclaimers.
Disclaimer #1: all my knowledge of marketing came from working at or talking with people who are working at small or medium companies, the majority of which deal with information and technology.
Disclaimer #2: I was thrown off balance by a some marketing types recently.
Disclaimer #3: I had a few pints of a lovely Guiness draught before I typed this whole post in.
Paul Graham continues writing down his thoughts and observations – “Cities and ambitions“:
No matter how determined you are, it’s hard not to be influenced by the people around you. It’s not so much that you do whatever a city expects of you, but that you get discouraged when no one around you cares about the same things you do.
There’s an imbalance between encouragement and discouragement like that between gaining and losing money. Most people overvalue negative amounts of money: they’ll work much harder to avoid losing a dollar than to gain one. Similarly, though there are plenty of people strong enough to resist doing something just because that’s what one is supposed to do where they happen to be, there are few strong enough to keep working on something no one around them cares about.