But what if a programmer is VERY good at generating clean, concise, and maintainable code but not so good at networking?
Is the US supposed to deprive itself of this worker's skills and abilities because he doesn't know how to gladhand or he's too busy becoming a super C expert to become a jerk-of-all-trades in JAVA, Python, XML, etc.?
I thought is was the job of managers to identify these folks and put them into situations where they can thrive without having to do a mass rework on their personalities.
I think the real problem is that we have gotten to a place where maybe we have so much more technology than we need to survive that managers can get away with hiring inferior programmers to generate mediocre applications.
There's so much slack in the rope that noone will hang for what they are doing.
If he's REALLY that good, the jobs will be there.
However, most programmers vastly overestimate the quality of their own code.
I thought is was the job of managers to identify these folks and put them into situations where they can thrive without having to do a mass rework on their personalities.
Gosh, I thought that managers were supposed to ensure that projects met their performance targets on time and within budget.
My question is, how can you stand out when your resume is competing with thousands of others??? As we see in the business world, it is not always the best product that gets sold, it is the product that has the best marketing. Programmers are no different. How can you prove your skills in 15 seconds to someone who doesn't know you from Adam? Everybody else is just as good as you, or at least can convince a potential employer of that. If you are a graphical designer, you can present a portfolio of work you have done, how can you do the same thing with code?