The Technology Stig

A common question  faced by programmers,  who’ve spent a decent amount of time coding applications in a software firm  is whether moving up the value chain in the organization directly translates into writing less code.This is because unfortunately in many organizations coders are at the bottom of the heap.Once a person moves up the chain there seems to be an aversion to coding,which is strange considering that the person’s good coding skills is what made him move up the chain.I personally think the right way to approach this is to think of coding as a way of keeping in touch with relevant technologies and trends in the industry.Performing in our  primary work role does not imply that we loose touch with all the previous roles we have performed in our careers.In the end it is upto the induvidual to decide as to how he balances his time between his primary work role and his passion for coding.

Everyday we come across people who belong to either of the two categories, talkers or doers. With the explosion of the social media favourites such as twitter and facebook the differences between the two seems to have accentuated.From a purely technology perspective,  *most of the people on these social media sites are essentially good talkers. They have good communication skills, have an urge to speak out their mind,want to get noticed or are simply there to promote themselves or their products.There are doers on these sites as well, but they tend to join in to get an understanding of what this whole phenomenon is all about,trying to figure out where they stand in between all of this.Some stick on for extended periods while others quit after a brief fling.The biggest difference between the two is this, while the doers can acquire a decent amount of social skills  and climb the popularity charts, the talkers will find it hard to acquire skills required(i.e technology acquisition and implemnetation) to do what they talk about .People who manage to do both are generally the ones who are succesfull in their field of work.

Being a technologist working in a company which churns out products, the constant conflict that arises in the mind is to weigh each & every new concept that comes out of the company stable ,evaluate it’s technical feasability and figure out how soon it can move from concept to a complete product.Some concept ideas are simple in what they do, you try to do them differently and effectively,while some concepts are outrageously good(backed with an effective presentation) but something which would take significant effort and time to churn out. Although the overwhelming tendency of the powers that be in a company tend to nudge it in the direction of going for concepts which induce awe, in most such cases people tend to bite off  more than what they can chew.In the quest to do something pathbreaking,companies forget what their core strenghts and track record tells them.Once on the track to developing something spectacular, their perspectives are shaped by what they think is right rather than listening to what the market is telling them.Over time this leads to dissapointment  when things do not go as planned.A good way to avoid this from happening is stay grounded, know your strengths and go for concepts which solve a known problem in a better and effective way.Cause a ‘great’ concept will remain just ‘another’ concept till it manages to go through the development cycle and become a finished product.