Senior Developers do the hard stuff first: the easy stuff is hardest, delegate it
Posted: Sun Sep 03, 2023 4:12 pm
When tasked with making a browser extension to scan a website for changes and notify upon certain changes, I first read the spec and identified the highest risk item first. I solved that hard issue and was satisfied. Related to the operation of the scanning code itself... if that wouldn't work then nothing would work.
I was thinking if I were a junior developer I might start with the code to match the patterns in text and other low risk items first, because that's what I know how to do and I want to show fast progress. I can't say all juniors think like this, but it seems characteristic of many who I've worked with. After I de-risked the big item, I cleaned up the code and put in the app logic that collects and processes data and integrates with other systems. The last step I completed was setting up config code and matching the exact patterns from the text that needs to be processed. Those things were hard coded in the beginning and have been done 100 times, it's almost hard to push myself to finish them because it feels so low impact relative to other things I need to do.
The low risk code is where a senior should start delegating. They're often needed for higher impact work. They typically have a higher rate as well. So in terms of both time and money it makes sense to delegate to a more available and lower cost resource, a junior developer. If one is not available it can be painful for an undisciplined developer to finish the code.
In lower rate hospitality work people are often in harder situations and need to 'make hours' more often than wealthier and better paid developers, even though the rate is much higher. If a senior engineer is in a tight financial spot they're more likely to have discipline. If they're not, then this is a flight risk scenario for overqualified workers--there are very real problems with hiring over-qualified people if they're not in a desperate situation. So if doing so, know that when they're no longer in a desperate situation the flight risk increases unless they have someone to delegate the easy stuff to. Nobody wants to accept mediocrity of they don't have to and working below one's pay grade without reason amounts to such. There's no shame in doing so when needed, but it does become degrading when extended beyond the necessity.
Some people do work entry level hospitality far longer than they need to and their attitude and coping mechanisms reflect it. Many pursue higher education or higher positions within their field, such as dish washer or server transitioning to food prep or chef work. I can't speak a ton about hospitality because I'm so new to it, but I'm working out of necessity and learning as much as I can while I'm there. I notice that I was making similar observations in terms of construction work while I was doing that for a short period, using 'digger' in place of 'dish washer.'
Nobody should be staying in an unchallenging role for longer than they need to, and if they do then their attitude reflects it. And probably the quality of their work as well. It's hard to keep doing work that one is overqualified for and easy to cope in destructive ways that let the quality drop or even compromise integrity--stemming from the lowered attitude. I don't mean to judge anyone who stays in work and don't progress, but it's not for everyone and in my opinion the people who should be hired want to progress and keep learning.
I was thinking if I were a junior developer I might start with the code to match the patterns in text and other low risk items first, because that's what I know how to do and I want to show fast progress. I can't say all juniors think like this, but it seems characteristic of many who I've worked with. After I de-risked the big item, I cleaned up the code and put in the app logic that collects and processes data and integrates with other systems. The last step I completed was setting up config code and matching the exact patterns from the text that needs to be processed. Those things were hard coded in the beginning and have been done 100 times, it's almost hard to push myself to finish them because it feels so low impact relative to other things I need to do.
The low risk code is where a senior should start delegating. They're often needed for higher impact work. They typically have a higher rate as well. So in terms of both time and money it makes sense to delegate to a more available and lower cost resource, a junior developer. If one is not available it can be painful for an undisciplined developer to finish the code.
In lower rate hospitality work people are often in harder situations and need to 'make hours' more often than wealthier and better paid developers, even though the rate is much higher. If a senior engineer is in a tight financial spot they're more likely to have discipline. If they're not, then this is a flight risk scenario for overqualified workers--there are very real problems with hiring over-qualified people if they're not in a desperate situation. So if doing so, know that when they're no longer in a desperate situation the flight risk increases unless they have someone to delegate the easy stuff to. Nobody wants to accept mediocrity of they don't have to and working below one's pay grade without reason amounts to such. There's no shame in doing so when needed, but it does become degrading when extended beyond the necessity.
Some people do work entry level hospitality far longer than they need to and their attitude and coping mechanisms reflect it. Many pursue higher education or higher positions within their field, such as dish washer or server transitioning to food prep or chef work. I can't speak a ton about hospitality because I'm so new to it, but I'm working out of necessity and learning as much as I can while I'm there. I notice that I was making similar observations in terms of construction work while I was doing that for a short period, using 'digger' in place of 'dish washer.'
Nobody should be staying in an unchallenging role for longer than they need to, and if they do then their attitude reflects it. And probably the quality of their work as well. It's hard to keep doing work that one is overqualified for and easy to cope in destructive ways that let the quality drop or even compromise integrity--stemming from the lowered attitude. I don't mean to judge anyone who stays in work and don't progress, but it's not for everyone and in my opinion the people who should be hired want to progress and keep learning.