Thomas said:
I think it entirely depends upon who you hire.
In my first job I was in charge of development of the (small) division's
product. Joined a week later by the best programmer I have worked with,
who likewise was starting his first programming job.
The vast majority of companies aren't quite so smart about hiring. If a
developer still needs "supervision" after six months, I doubt if they
will ever become competent.
To be honest, the best programmer I ever hired - a person I really enjoyed
working with and with whom I had a very creative working relationship,
which resulted in some very good software getting shipped - had quite
severe drink and depression problems. I knew this when I hired him. He'd
just failed a Comp Sci degree at Cambridge, but I knew from one of his
tutors whom I knew from a language standards committee we were both on
that the guy was good. So I hired him.
At work, he needed no supervision. His work was consistently better than
mine, and I learned a lot from him. But his private life did need some
supervision. Occasionally I needed to go round to his house and drag him
protesting out of bed to get him to work... which is not what a technical
director is normally supposed to do, I agree, but it worked for him and it
worked for me.
It's whatever gets the job done, after all.
--
(e-mail address removed) (Simon Brooke)
http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
Ye hypocrites! are these your pranks? To murder men and give God thanks?
Desist, for shame! Proceed no further: God won't accept your thanks for
murther
-- Robert Burns, 'Thanksgiving For a National Victory'