Monday, March 05, 2007

The Codewright Mentality revisited

In my last post about the Codewright Mentality I had some fun at the expense of consultants. When my friend Paul, whom I met while he was a consultant, pointed out my over-generalized stereotyping of consultants, I felt that I needed to clarify my point. Being a consultant does not imply lacking drive to improve. I was going for humor but instead stepped on some toes. Don't get me wrong, if there are toes that need stepped-on I'm all for it, but this time he had me dead-to-rights.

Maybe I should have said contractors instead of consultants but that would have traded one set of toes for another. The truth is nobody has a monopoly on the lack of drive; this means contractors; as well as consultants; as well as full-time employees. I'm not sure there is a consistently used differentiation between consulting and contracting. The behavior in question is, for contractors they either did what we asked but no more or for consultants they gave us the answer to our question but no more. You would hope that if there was a better way to do something or a better question to ask, the contractor / consultant would mention it. Both assume the client being open-minded enough to listen. What we're describing is being optimistic about the intentions of those involved.

Paul's observation:
I also have noticed a tendency to blur the distinction between a consultant and a contractor in the IT world. I tend to perceive "contractors" as being hired for very specific skills (C++, Oracle, whatever) and as being mostly just complements to a team, rather than a facilitator/leader. The "contractee" often doesn't make the distinction because "consultants" are, like "contractors", just "not full time employees but being paid by us, directly or indirectly". Doesn't much matter, I suppose, so long as both parties agree on expectations.
I give Paul a lot of credit for helping me start thinking about programming as a craft and worthy of study in it's own right.

Here is what Paul had to say about what it means to be a Codewright:
For me, codewright-ship is...
  • About not settling for intention-obscuring code
  • About not settling for inarticulate requirements
  • About seeking out other codewrights to learn from
  • About seeking out codewright apprentices to teach
  • About not settling for code without tests
  • About believing there is something noble about programming
  • About tuning out the voices of developers past who want you to think that coding is monkey business, or that quality is the testers' job, or that you have to figure it all out ahead of time before you write even one line of code.
  • About realizing that simplicity is beautiful; and that the simplest things that could possibly work probably isn't the first thing you think of.
  • About building systems people are passionate about using.
  • About realizing that developing such software is difficult-- that maybe it shouldn't be easy -- that maybe gains in software productivity needn't or can't keep pace with such gains in hardware performance
  • About creating sustainable solutions -- software that future maintenance programmers don't mind maintaining (as opposed to the mind-bogglingly putrid legacy code much software is).
Delicious Bookmark this on Delicious

1 comment:

  1. This is the best explanation of what draws me to the discipline of programming again and again. Well said!

    ReplyDelete

I reserve the right to delete inappropriate comments at my discretion