Tag Archive | workplace

On Hiring: Developers Are Like Stocks

This post is for those of you who hire developers, and also junior developers who want to be hired. Let’s talk about how developers are just like individual stocks in the stock market. Time for a little role-playing: you’re now a stock market investor.

As a financial advisor, your company has given you $2,000,000 USD to invest in the stock market. It’s made very clear that the future of the company depends on the return on investment (herein called ROI) – “gains” – that your investments bring to the company. Your decisions will have a major impact on the company’s future. Given that kind of pressure, what’s your investment strategy for success? Begin by reviewing the kinds of stocks available to invest in.

Let’s Review Some Stocks

You take a look at stock #1. It has been on the market for a decade, has nearly consistently yielded high returns (with references you can investigate and check into), and is very reputable. Putting a good chunk of your money here is probably a reasonable call, since this stock is vetted and has historically provided value over time. It’s unlikely to suddenly drop to no value, and if you see it going south you can bail out before you lose it all.

Stock #2 is the interesting one. It’s brand new to the market. You can find no history on it, no performance trends, no reputation, nothing. It’s a total wildcard that has a reasonably low price tag – about 1/3 of stock #1. Its value could skyrocket resulting in incredible ROI. However, it could also end up being a dud, resulting in losing it all. You have little information to go on: this stock is truly a gamble. Do you invest heavily in it?

Given the two options above, what’s the smart move? In general, putting all of your money into a single thing is very risky, so you’re likely to diversify your portfolio a bit. It doesn’t make a ton of sense to invest heavily into stock #2 because it’s a major gamble, but there’s some room for potential and it might pay off. So why not put 80% into different stocks that fit the archetype of stock #1 and the other 20% in stocks that fit #2’s profile? That would make for a smart investment with some near-guaranteed returns, including some investment into gambles with high potential.

Stocks On Market == Devs On Market

Stock #1 is a senior developer with a proven track record and solid reputation. Stock #2 is a junior developer.

Hiring nothing but juniors is a recipe for high volatility and potential disaster, for reasons that become obvious when given the stock market analogy above. Hiring nothing but seniors is one way to get reasonable gains, however you miss out on significant potential to hire an incredible up-and-coming junior if you never hire any at all. A good strategy incorporates both, with seniors afforded time to mentor the juniors and develop their skills.

Getting Hired As A Junior

As a junior developer, the less artifacts that you can point to and show to companies, the more of a risk you are for them to take. You can mitigate some of this risk with a good interview, but if that interview doesn’t include coding tests which you ace then it might not be enough to get you in the door.

A junior should strive to create artifacts that reduce the risk of hiring them. These could take virtually any format, and given that everybody is different and we are not all afforded the same privileges and opportunities, one should strive to create artifacts that suit their situation. Single parent with 2 children and little free time? Put a few hours each week into an open source project (or contribute to other open source projects). You’ll be amazed how quickly that adds up. Unemployed with tons of free time? Create a project that shows off your skills and stretches your knowledge, which in turn causes you to learn. Struggling with the whole “I need a job to get the experience to get a job” thing? I’ve been there myself, and while my situation was surely not identical to yours, I found that investing some time into reading books and writing small applications to demonstrate my skills did wonders for potential employers.

The point is that all developers are going to sell themselves as hard as they can to a potential employer. To an employer, they may all look similar. Do what you can to stand out and reduce uncertainty by creating evidence of your potential and abilities, and show that to them instead. Talk is cheap, action speaks louder than words.

Dev Team Interactions: Conducting Good Code Reviews

In part 2 of my series on dev team interactions, I’d like to talk about conducting good code reviews. Most dev teams will find themselves in a situation where code reviews are necessary, and in my experience many do them very poorly. I’ve even worked in companies that had such a negative code review culture that people left the review sessions upset, even considering quitting. With a few easy adjustments, you can quickly learn to conduct excellent and positive code reviews with your team.

The Ground Rules

A code review is a process. Like any good process, clear rules need to be established and followed to ensure a consistent experience. Here are mine:

  • Attack the code, never the person. Criticizing code is OK, but people are not code. It’s never OK to criticize the person and make them feel bad. Focus strictly on the code output and never make it personal.
  • Don’t laugh or make negative jokes. A person who has their work on display – often on a projector in front of others – is feeling self-conscious as it is. Don’t snicker at their work. Avoid joking about their decisions. I assure you they are trying to do the right thing.
  • Set a strict time limit as a means of focus. Make the code review 15 minutes, 30 minutes, or even 1 hour. Stick to this schedule. This forces you to prioritize the important stuff and ensures (intentionally) that you can’t review absolutely everything the person has done. Don’t take unlimited time to scrutinize every single line of code written. Ever had someone comb through your code line by line, making commentary as they go? “And how did that make you feel?”
  • Thank the person for sharing their code with you. A code review is an intimidating, scary thing – especially for developers on the junior side of the spectrum. Set the tone correctly by being appreciative of their time and sharing. Make it known that they are valued and you appreciate their work up front. This will help them feel relaxed and learn to enjoy code reviews, which in turn will cause them to want to share more of their code willingly in the future as well.

The above rules serve only as an example from my personal experience. You should create rules that work for your company and work culture. Use real and practical standards that matter to your team, not just theoretical ideologies that someone on your team read in a book. Always remember: a process is only as good as the people that follow it, so try to be consistent with whatever rules you decide on. And if they aren’t working well in practice, change them up!

Seek Understanding, Not Power

The general goal of your code review attendees should be to seek understanding, not explanations. Avoid an us-them conflict or standoff. This can be easily accomplished with a subtle shift in communication approach. Rather then asking aggressive questions that demand the reviewee explain the code to your team such as “why would you do it that way?” or “how could that possibly work?” you need to ask questions to promote understanding the code instead. Once your team and the reviewee correctly understand the code being reviewed, you can proceed to discuss a different approach without conflict or hurt feelings.

When you see some code that makes you think “what the hell were you smoking?” (explain) you should instead ask “Can you tell me why you wrote the method this way?” (understand). These statements are similar but the former gives the power to you while the latter empowers the code reviewee to share their knowledge and thought process in a non-defensive way. This approach to questioning takes a bit of practice, but is very powerful. Some other examples of how you’d change common code review aggressive thoughts and statements from explaining to understanding:

  • “This class name is wrong” becomes “This class name doesn’t conform to our standards, was that intentional?” You’ll probably find that they say it wasn’t, and agree to fix it on their own volition.
  • “I see a bug in your code!” becomes “I think there’s a null reference exception on line 28 for variable X, do you see how it happens?”
  • “This is terrible” becomes nothing – keep your mouth shut. There’s no value in such a statement other than to make the person feel bad. If the code truly is terrible, express these concerns to the person (and maybe their manager) privately for further investigation and resolution.

People are not robots, and will never conform perfectly to your shop’s coding standards. That’s OK. Pick your battles, and call out only the major violations. Let the little things (like naming and spacing) slide. If the dev is hitting 90% of the standards, the rest of the team can pick up on the 10% deviation without much worry or effort. That is to say, the code won’t be that different than what they expect to see.

If you seek understanding consistently, you’ll find that the person drops their defenses and ego, and instead feels encouraged by your positive approach and attitude. They’ll even start pointing out and suggesting fixes to their code themselves – right on the spot – which is the golden sign of trust and confidence. The best kind of code reviews are the ones that a person points out issues themselves to fix, rather than the team having to do it for them.

Avoid Opinion Wars

When reviewing code, there will be two general categories of issue:

  1. Objective, fact-based issues
  2. Subjective, opinion-based issues

Focus explicitly on objective issues, and disregard all subjective issues. An objective issue is an exception or oversight in conforming to well-defined coding standards. A subjective issue is you not liking the way the person solved the problem, or feeling that what they did is not what you would have done. You’re right because you’re different people. Striving to make others conform to your thought process as the one true standard is egotistical, destructive, and stressful. In the long run you will be unhappy because there will always be a gap between others and yourself. This is natural so go with the flow. Allow members of your team to be individuals and write code with their own flair and flavor. It’s OK, it will be OK, and you will be OK. I promise.

Be Humane

Code is for computers, but programmers are humans. Be kind to each other and always remember that the thing on the other end of the code review is a real live person with feelings and emotions. Treat them with respect in what you say and do. Recognize that they are valuable and thank them for their hard work. Together you will create a great team that others will love being a part of!

Dev Team Interactions: Accountability & Blame

As a developer working for a company, you probably work on a team. The interactions on these teams are sometimes pleasant, and other times hostile. What’s interesting to me is that a lot of the time, a hostile interaction could have been a pleasant one if only approached differently. Hostile teams are created by the actions of the people on them, not by the situations they encounter. One such hostile action is blame.

Blame

Blame is assigned externally – it comes from other people. You cannot control blame when it is directed at you. Blame tends to surface under tense circumstances, such as when the build has broken or a project has failed. It often rears its ugly head in the form of pithy and simplistic statements. “Jane broke the build again!” or “this is Mohinder’s fault!”

Blame is often facilitated – if not encouraged – by a poor workplace culture. When the patterns and practices of the management team demand that heads roll when mistakes are made, blame is the obvious solution. It allows you shift the burden of responsibility to someone else, forcing them to defend themselves from an attack while you retreat to safety.

Blame Never Helps Anything

Blame may solve the immediate problem of your head being on the proverbial chopping block, but it never solves the actual problem at hand. If anything it tends to distract from the issue as the discussion changes from “what went wrong” to “who caused this?” A challenging situation becomes even more complicated as strong negative feelings start to emerge.

Another effect of blame is that people feel alienated and attacked. Team members disengage, afraid to speak up or make changes because they may be attacked for doing so. In this way it damages the innovation and progression of your people, product, and entire company. Blame holds your entire organization hostage.

It’s not hard to see that a workplace which embodies blame culture is really the root problem in-and-of itself.

Accountability

Unlike blame, accountability is assigned internally – it comes from within. It is a positive force of empowerment that requires courage and compassion. Accountability allows people to take control over themselves and their own actions. It destroys “fault” culture while building trust and communication channels with other team members. Statements like “that was my fault team, sorry about that” are welcomed and encouraged, but not necessary.

Accountability can only thrive if the workplace culture is tolerant and accepting. In a blame culture, accountability cannot exist. The mere act of owning up to a mistake assigns the blame to you, and scrutiny and / or punishment is sure to follow. A good work culture is intolerant of blame, instead focusing on people learning from their mistakes and growing as professionals.

A Blameless Workplace

My personal take on accountability as a manager is that “everybody makes mistakes, and as long as you make new and interesting mistakes – rather than repeating them – you have nothing to worry about.”

Mistakes are normal; we all make them regularly. A workplace culture that understands this fact and incorporates it into professional and personal development is one that succeeds with vibrant and engaged teams. Allow people to make mistakes, and follow-up only if they do not learn and grow from those mistakes. Shut down any and all blame conversations immediately. Communicate the difference between assigning blame to someone for their mistakes, and taking ownership of those mistakes themselves. Foster a workplace culture that is blameless.

At Stack Overflow, we do this via a tool that we call the Wheel of Blame. When something goes wrong, anyone in a company chat room can say “not my fault” to spin the wheel. The wheel arbitrarily picks a person from those present in the room and blames them. With blame quickly and definitively assigned, we then move on to fixing the problem.

The Wheel of Blame in action. I'm bad at making gifs so it's not quite right but whatever, I tried.

The Wheel of Blame in action. I’m bad at making gifs so it’s not quite right but whatever, I tried.

Creating Accountability

Despite the Wheel assigning blame – which clearly goes against the blameless culture which I described earlier – this tool is very powerful. It’s a clear and obvious signal to seasoned and new employees alike that we don’t care about blame. When someone is randomly assigned, it’s almost always the case that the problem wasn’t actually their fault. More often than not they had nothing at all to do with the current situation. An ironic and hilarious side effect of the Wheel is that when it does randomly assign the blame to the person who is accountable to the issue, it results in uncontrollable laughter and joking. This alone makes the Wheel worth using: it lightens the mood and communicates our rules around blame in a tribal way (there is no policy written anywhere).

To shift a culture from blame to accountability, begin by shutting down blame discussions. Explain that blame is not helpful, and that the team needs to immediately focus on resolving the issue at hand. Once the problem is solved, consider doing a retrospective which explains what went wrong and who was involved. Circulate this retrospective to any and all interested parties with the clear intention of spreading information, not assigning blame. This allows people to learn and grow from what happened. Continuing this pattern will slowly shift the team away from blame. The trick here is that you don’t have to work on accountability: it will naturally follow when people stop fearing blame.

I encourage you to work towards a culture of accountability on your development team, starting today. Sometimes this transformation can be very difficult to accomplish; particularly when the blame culture starts at the executive level. Nonetheless, do what you can to change the behavior in the part of the company that you influence. Your peers and reports will thank you for it.

Our Industry Needs Compassion

Well, I’ve utterly failed to blog at regular intervals, writing only three posts in 2016. Ouch. To be fair, one of those posts is insanely famous (the one about NPM and left-pad.js), but still, I’ve really let my readers – and myself – down.

So, I resolve to write a blog post every single week of 2017, starting today. This will probably mean that I write slightly shorter posts, and maybe even multi-part series posts. My traditional style has been “come upon something that is really bothering me or is really tricky, and proceed to blog about it in great detail writing thousands of words for all to benefit from” which doesn’t really scale well. Instead I plan to take the approach of “write about a new or interesting topic each week, and see what people like and what they don’t like” which will hopefully be better.


This week’s post is about compassion, especially in the field of programming. Let’s use an example that is both recent and practical, if a tad emotional.

3 days ago our dog Ruby died. She was 16 and lived a good, long life. Having said that, her death was unexpected and rather painful to go through. My wife and I were up with Ruby all night comforting her as she slowly passed away from sudden heart failure. The last breath she exhaled will forever be seared into my brain. It feels like it’s all I can think about right now.

My wife and I have been grieving for the past 72 hours in our own ways. This has surfaced as mostly a mix of depression, tears, quick but sad chats about the things we miss about Ruby, and sorrow every time we look somewhere in the house for her only to find that she is no longer there. It sucks.

What’s important to realize is that I am not unique or special in this circumstance. Animals die all of the time, and you don’t feel sad about them because you never met them. They are out of sight, out of mind. Yet they are out there, and the passing of good dogs and cats – as well as other households pets – is happening every single day. Even as you read this.

These events occur in the scope of individual’s lives. There is no national news story about the passing of Ruby to make us all aware of it and help us all feel the effects of it. There never will be. This event is confined to the lives of me, my wife, and our extended family. We suffer through it silently (other than my writing about it and a few social media posts).

This silent suffering is the point that I want to drive home. Others out there are silently suffering too. It might be the death of a family pet, or it might be something else entirely. It’s not a contest of who has it the worst. I want you to simply realize that crappy things are happening to people, even if they are not in your domain and thus you are not aware.

Odds are that someone in your life or workplace is suffering with something that troubles them. Right now for me it’s the passing of my dog. For a close friend of mine it’s stress about work and finding the next permanent job. For another person I know it’s about being a brown man in America and how scared they feel about the future. We all battle demons every single day.

With this in mind, I ask you to be compassionate everywhere, but especially at work. You work with people, not cogs of some machine (even if management may think of them in that way). These people have real feelings and some of them are surely fighting battles you’ve never even fathomed.

Your responsibility as a good member of the IT field – and as a good citizen of this planet – is to demonstrate compassion. Be nice to everyone you work with until you are given a reason not to be. Consider that they might be having a bad day if you feel they’re lashing out or being an asshole, and forgive them. Try to sympathize with what frustrates them. Work to understand them beyond their role at the company and their job output.

We are all in this together. Now more than every we need to be compassionate, respectful, kind, and considerate to others. It is my opinion that our industry has a long history of being hostile to certain people and demographics – such as women – and we must each work individually to change that.

My last request to you: please think hard about what you’ve read here as you begin your first week of work in 2017. I know I will.

Let’s Talk About Rock Stars & Egos

On Plumbers

Picture this situation: you woke up this morning to find that there’s no water coming through your valves and taps. No sink water. No shower water. Having no plumbing experience, you call around for a plumber.

Plumber #1, let’s call him Mario, tells you he can’t be bothered to come check out your issue because it’s minor and he’s very important and too busy for it. You explain that you really need a plumber, and he explains he’ll do it for 1.5x what everybody else costs, and only if you have lunch and coffee ready for him when he arrives. You have no water, keep in mind, so making coffee is an extra special effort.

Plumber #2, let’s call him Luigi, agrees to show up and assess the damage. He walks in your door, doesn’t bother to shake your hand or introduce himself, and immediately gets to work. A few minutes of inspection later and Luigi is telling you that all of your plumbing is wrong. None of the pipes are plumbed how he’d plumb them, so they’re wrong. He needs to rip out the whole plumbing system and do it all again from scratch, which will cost you thousands of dollars. He has a reputation for being skilled: his past references love him, but this is going to cost a lot of money and take a lot of time. It’ll be at least a week before you have running water again.

Plumber #3, let’s call her Peach, asks you some detailed questions about the problem over the phone. “How long have you lived in the home?” “Have you had any prior plumbing issues?” “Has this happened before?” “Do you have any other sources of water?” Based on this analysis, she tells you she has a good idea of what the issue is and agrees to come over later that day, since she’s in the area anyway. She shows up, immediately discovers that the pesky neighbour kids shut off your water main, turns it back on, and then gives you some advice: “it’s not something you need to do right now, but you should upgrade to a locked main switch that operates with a key so that this won’t happen again! Call me if you want something like that installed.”

Now, which one would you hire?

Back to Programming

Let’s take this [terrible] analogy back to programming. Plumber #1 is a rock star developer who demands special treatment and pampering. Plumber #2 has a huge ego, a serious case of not-invented-here syndrome (they didn’t plumb the house so it’s wrong!), and might also be a rock star. Plumber #3 is pragmatic, friendly, sensible, analytical, and balances cost of time and money with urgency. For me personally, #3 is the only one I’d happily hire.

It seems so obvious that egos and not-invented-here cost a lot of money and do a lot of damage in that analogy. It’s less evident in the workplace. Some companies foster the ego and demand to hire rock stars, believing that the “ten ex” developer will outperform others they could hire. What they don’t realize is that the cost of this hire almost certainly outweighs the benefits.

There’s no place for ego in programming. An egotistical programmer does incredible amounts of damage to those around them. They do cultural damage to your company, emotional damage to their peers, and financial damage to your budgets. Those rewrites aren’t cheap!

Don’t be a rock star. Rock stars are cold, hard to approach, notoriously unfriendly and self-absorbed, make no time for others and teaching them (because everything’s about ME!), and are frequently dramatic and rude (to get in the “news” – after all, any publicity is good publicity).

I don’t know about you, but I want to work with Peach. I prefer a humble, thoughtful, talented peer that can teach me while maintaining respect and a relationship of trust. That’s the kind of workplace that I get up every morning excited to go to. Peach is probably not perfect, and has her flaws, but the lack of an ego and attitude means she’s willing to learn and grow – and that’s the key to success in this industry.

If this analogy hit a little close to home, it’s time for a little introspection. The beauty of the human condition is that we are always on a path, growing and changing. Who you are today is not who you are forever. Think about which plumber you resemble above, and then adjust. Next time you’re about to say “that’s all wrong!” or “we have to write it ourselves!”, pause and think: there’s probably a decent a reason that the code exists in its current state. Is now really the time to undertake a very expensive rewrite / greenfield project? Probably not.

Diversity Is Really Freaking Hard

Background

I’m going to discuss an important topic that affects everybody in tech: diversity.

No, this won’t be some preachy post about how diversity is great and how you should be a better human being. Rather, I’m going to tell you about the things I’ve experienced working on diversity – particularly the interesting events of the last few days that happened internally at Stack Overflow.

It’s no secret that the tech industry is not that diverse. It’s mostly dominated by white males, with a few women and minorities making appearances. Those who do enter the industry as a minority often feel marginalized and excluded.

Of about 40 engineering employees at Stack Overflow, maybe 8 are not white men. We can clearly do better.

As you may have learned in my last post, earlier this year I was promoted to Engineering Manager at Stack Overflow (formerly Stack Exchange (formerly Stack Overflow)). One of my first projects was to work on diversity at our company. As a part of this goal, I was given the opportunity to create a new diversity page to showcase our efforts.

There’s a volunteer group that we have internally called the Diversity & Inclusion Panel (DIP). This group works to make Stack Overflow a more open, diverse, and welcoming environment.

There were some awkward feelings that came with taking the lead on the diversity page project. For one, I was a straight white male running a project about diversity, which might raise some eyebrows or make people feel weird/jaded. To mitigate those feelings, and also because I value their opinions, I took the approach of including the DIP in the creation and review of the page. My rationale was that by including a group of self-selected folks who are passionate about diversity, we could reach a solid page design that wasn’t biased by building it myself. To this end the DIP were consulted multiple times and ultimately had the final say on the copy of the page.

Diversity Page Goes Live

After a few months of iterating with designers and the DIP, last week we rolled out the new page. Here’s what it looked like in all its glory (please don’t critique it in the comments – if you do, you missed the point of this post):

Our Shiny New Diversity Page

Our Shiny New Diversity Page

I was excited that we had made progress on such an important and sensitive topic. I announced the roll-out to the DIP group with little feedback or response, which at the time I didn’t think much of. I also broadcast it on Twitter, with very few others from Stack Overflow doing as such themselves. Again, I thought nothing of the lack of engagement.

A few days go by with the new page rolled out where things are mostly business-as-usual from my perspective. And then, last weekend, something really interesting happened.

The Blog Post

An employee at our company wrote a blog post titled “Discussing diversity terrifies me” on their personal blog. They have since taken the post down – a decision they made themselves. The post described this person’s feelings about our new page and how it made them feel uncomfortable in ways that they couldn’t fully explain. This person also explained how they felt terrified to discuss diversity with anyone, ever – even their best friends. This was because of prior experiences at prior companies where the discussion went poorly.

I came across the post on Saturday night at about 9pm. It did not call out me or the page as doing something wrong; it was a way for this person to express some thoughts that were very important to them, but that they otherwise felt they could not bring up.

I Felt Wronged

Upon reading it, I was really pissed off. I couldn’t believe that this person, given numerous opportunities to shape the page as part of the DIP, had remained silent during the project. I couldn’t believe that they didn’t come to me or anyone else at work, and instead took to talking about their issues on their blog, in public, which at the time I felt served to embarrass me in front of the company. After all, they were given tons of opportunities to talk about it internally, so why didn’t they? I felt slighted and wronged. I selfishly felt that this was all a personal attack on my work. I wasn’t happy.

The Company-Wide Revelation

On Monday afternoon I had a private conversation with the person who wrote the blog post. We had a really constructive chat about how the person felt, and ways to improve upon the new page and make it more sincere and reflective of our true values and current workplace diversity. It ended on a positive note. Later Monday evening, I sent out an anonymous survey to solicit broad feedback from folks on how to improve the page. The plan was to iterate to a better version ASAP. Satisfied with trying to improve the situation, I went to bed.

On Tuesday I found myself in a few conversations about our new page. The people engaging me were mostly straight white males (not unlike myself) who all said something similar: “talking about diversity scares me to death” and “it feels like one wrong word and I’m fired.” These conversations continued until about 1pm, when a forward-thinking co-worker realized that we all needed to get on the same page. They brought the diversity page controversy up in our company-wide chat room for literally anyone and everyone to discuss. Many people jumped in and what followed, for lack of better description, was quite an epic conversation. It involved a lot of people from a lot of departments – both people who were visibly diverse and those who were not – and even included 4 executives. The conversation rolled on for a few hours and culminated in a few important outcomes:

  • The person who wrote the blog post felt very uncomfortable talking about diversity at all, with anyone
  • Their blog post gave a voice to many others who felt the same way but were afraid to speak up
  • The diversity page was making people within Stack Overflow uncomfortable

As a result of the company-wide chat, the new diversity page was taken offline.

I Felt Even More Wronged

Conveniently, all of this discussion happened while I was at the doctor’s office for a check-up. As a result of the timing I didn’t get to participate at all. When I returned from the doctor and read the chat transcript, I became very, very upset and angry. I felt betrayed by the company and wronged by almost everybody who participated in the conversation. In hindsight, I think that I probably would have said some things that I’d now regret had I been around to participate in the chat. Ignorance is sometimes bliss.

I was boiling over. Many unfair, selfish, and angry thoughts crossed my mind as I read the chat transcript. I thought things like “f*** it, I’m never touching another diversity project ever again” and “how could these people do this to me?” and even, for a brief moment, “what am I doing working somewhere where I’m undermined and treated unfairly?”

I called it quits a few hours early on Tuesday and had a few drinks of the alcoholic nature. I was fuming, and ranting to my wife, and otherwise upset about how I had been so wronged by the people that I was trying to help. I took some ibuprofen (for the impending hangover and headache) and passed out, unsure of what Wednesday would bring.

Worth noting, I don’t recommend self-medicating with alcohol when you’re upset – it’s a bad strategy.

This Wasn’t About Me At All

I awoke Wednesday morning with a clear mind and new perspective on the events of the past few days. I realized some really important things:

  • Absolutely, literally, none of this was about me. I was being selfish and making it about how I felt, when in reality it was about how we all felt.
  • We had created a diversity page that did a poor job of accomplishing our goals on diversity.
  • Taking the page offline was the right thing to do, because it was making a lot of people in our company uncomfortable. If it had this effect internally, it surely had a similar effect externally. In this case, the page existing was perhaps worse than having no page at all.
  • The person who wrote the blog post was completely in the right, and arguably did the right thing. The alternative was that if they hadn’t spoken up on their blog, nobody may have. This would leave everyone silently feeling uncomfortable.
  • The person who wrote the blog post felt uncomfortable speaking up about diversity at work. They talked about it on their personal blog to keep it outside of the company. This was an important revelation as it showed me that we have a serious issue at our company: people feel as if they don’t always have the right to speak up about difficult subjects like diversity. One person described it as “a manager’s word being law and difficult to contest.”
  • Nobody had been malicious at all. We were all trying to do the right thing, assumed the best of intentions in each other, and were simply expressing our honest feelings on the topic. Feelings are always valid.

Diversity At Stack Overflow

Through all of this I realized a some of why diversity is such a hard topic for people to discuss: no matter what position you are in, you probably feel like you’re not entitled to participate in the conversation. When nobody feels like they’re able to talk, silence soon becomes apathy.

On the topic of diversity issues, apathy rules all. It’s a safe and easy play to do nothing at all. Taking a stance means meeting resistance and having conversations where everyone feels invalidated. Unfortunately, doing nothing enables and furthers the issue.

One of the mistakes that I made was not considering the emotional response of the new diversity page that we created. How the page makes people feel is the only measure of success. The people in our company felt that the page was insincere and made them uncomfortable.

Here’s the truth: despite what the page said, we’re not great at diversity. We have about 40 engineering team members, and only 4 of them are women. At most, 8 or 9 total are of a visible minority. We certainly have a diverse team in the sense that we’re located all over the world, but that isn’t how everybody defines diversity, and maybe isn’t even the most important form of diversity since those geographically diverse people aren’t necessarily marginalized.

It’s really easy to feel as if your company sucks at diversity when any discussion is met with frustration and hurt feelings. However, I am really proud of the fact that at Stack Overflow we are able to have these conversations. We had a company-wide discussion on how the page made everybody feel, and even though that discussion got extremely heated and many people felt many strong emotions, not one person made it personal. There were 4 executives in the conversation and nobody quit or got fired.

I’m thankful that one person had the courage to write a blog post and speak up about their overarching fear of discussing diversity. What scares me as a manager is the idea that people might feel as if there’s no channel to talk about things that make them uncomfortable. If people don’t express their concerns, they suffer silently. It was the actions of one person that saved us all from a much worse outcome.

Ultimately, we made a company diversity page that’s like every other company’s diversity page, at a company that prides itself in not being like any other company. We’ve identified that people at Stack Overflow sometimes feel like they are unable to speak up on difficult topics – both inside and outside of the company – and that’s something that we need to work on.

What’s Next

As I said earlier, the easy and safe play is to do nothing. We could leave things in their current state of no longer having a diversity page, but it would also be the wrong thing to do.

What we must do now is continue the conversation. We need to talk honestly about diversity and discuss the feelings that we have around it. We need to channel those feelings into a better diversity page that accurately reflects our company and how we feel on the subject. We need to admit that diversity is hard, but that we’re working on it. Most importantly, we need to assume the best intentions of each other and make progress together in all of our diversity initiatives.

I hope that in reading this, you feel inspired to start or continue the conversation about diversity in your workplace. Like many companies, we have a long way to go. It’s challenging, but as a co-worker said, “the hardest conversations are often the ones most worth having.”

The Recruiting Competitive Advantage

Let’s say you were walking down a street one day and noticed an ad for help wanted. It is posted in the window of a bakery. It reads:


HELP WANTED:
Need a baker for FT work. Must be familiar with modern baking methods such as ovens, barbecuing, and deep fryers. 5+ years experience with the Super 6 commercial baking oven required (aside: came out in 2014). Nice to haves include experience with butcher’s blocks, chopping meat, and making candles.

Given that most of us understand the high-level job of a baker pretty well, it’s easy to see how totally ridiculous this job listing is. Let’s break it down:


Need a baker for FT work.

Doesn’t say too much, but it makes sense and describes your need accurately.


Must be familiar with modern baking methods such as ovens, barbecuing, and deep fryers.

Most bakers would be familiar with ovens, but no baker in their right mind would ever “bake” with a barbecue or deep fryer. At this point we begin to question whether or not this bakery has any idea of what it’s doing at all.


5+ years experience with the Super 6 commercial baking oven required (aside: came out in 2014).

Well, they want me to have 5 years of experience (or more) with an oven that has existed for only 1 year? That’s just silly. Now I think that they’re sort of out to lunch and don’t really want to work here.


Nice to haves include experience with butcher’s blocks, chopping meat, and making candles.

A baker is a very specialized position. There’s rarely going to be one who has specialized in not just baking but also butchery and candlestick making (catch my sly joke there?). A place asking for all 3 is really asking for 1 person to do 3 jobs for the price of 1 job. This isn’t fair and further dissuades the candidate.

This job posting sounds funny because it’s plain to see just how insanely off-kilter it is. However, recruiters are out there right now posting tech job listings that are just as ludicrous. The problem is that they haven’t bothered to learn much about the field that their job is focused around. So, they end up sounding as silly as the bakery owner does above.

Recruiters: this is how silly you sound to developers when you post a listing full of jargon that you don’t understand. Most of us don’t want to ever work on both C# and Java at the same time, and the odds of finding both an iOS and Android pro in one human being are slim-to-none.

All that is required for a recruiter to gain a significant competitive advantage over their peers is a little knowledge. Knowledge that could be learned in weeks. Knowledge of a standard tech stack, and the ability to Google technical acronyms like MVC and EF when they show up. If you just took a little time to make sure that your job listing was not a walking contradiction – full of statements that counter each other, technologies that don’t work together, and demanding 5+ years of experience on things that have existed for less than 2 years – you’d have a huge leg up on your peers.

Developers are rational, logical people. We will engage in the jobs that make sense. If your listing is irrational or illogical, we will avoid you like the plague. We will also make fun of your job listing to our friends, especially when you spammed e-mailed us with it directly.

So, if you’re a recruiter reading this, and you want to get ahead, it’s very simple. Learn the tech that your listing is based around at a high level (in my opinion a basic proficiency of your profession), or failing that, consult a developer to make sure that your listing doesn’t sound crazy!

On Credentialism In Software Development

We’re just two days from a brand new year and yet the primary measurement of a developer’s skill seems to be the same as it was 20 years ago. The most important classification to most companies is job title, as I talked about in great detail in my last post. The job title is acquired via working for a veritable slough of credentialist companies whose HR departments break it down very simply:

  • You’re a Junior Developer if you have 0-2 years of professional experience
  • You’re a Developer if you have 2-5 years of professional experience
  • You’re a Senior Developer if you have 5+ years of professional experience
  • You’re a Team Lead, Architect, or Manager once someone promotes you from Senior Developer

The problem with this sort of classification is obvious. The truth is that one person has 10 years of development experience, and the person standing next to her has 1 year of development experience repeated 10 times. The people that end up in the latter category tend to be “company [wo]men” – the ones who stick with a job forever and never try something new.

I am not one to believe that rockstar developers are valuable. As Scott Hanselman writes, rockstar developers do much more harm than good. I do, however, believe that the proper classification of developer skill lies in my paraphrasing of Nate Waddoups’ description:

  • A Junior Developer creates complex solutions to simple problems. You see these people across all companies and in all kinds of positions: from Junior Developer to CIO. They take a one-off batch service that processes requests and make it into a 40 class, 2000 line monster that involves a ServiceFactoryFactory and a ServiceDecorator.
  • A Developer creates simple solutions to simple problems. They’ve gotten past the pattern-itis and realize (for the most part) when to use design patterns, and when to just write simple code that works. These people tend to write the batch service in 100 lines and it works correctly 99% of the time (and is easy to maintain too).
  • A Senior Developer creates simple solutions to complex problems. These people have begun to truly master the art of software development and can whip up a highly scalable e-commerce app in fewer assemblies, classes, and lines than most of us would have used to create “Hello World” as a Junior Developer. They would be incredible role models if only they’d drop the ego.
  • A Truly Exceptional Developer is a rare thing. They don’t just make complex problems simple – they make complex problems disappear entirely. These people wield code like I imagine ancient Samurai wielded the blade: with great precision and skill. They dropped their ego years ago. In doing so, they empowered themselves to continue to learn from others which ultimately caused them to excel far beyond their Senior Developer peers. They are incredible role models and all around must-haves on any high performance team. They love to teach as much as they love to learn.

Notice that I never gave a time frame to any of these levels of skill. I don’t believe that 1 Truly Exceptional Developer can be faster than 10 Senior Developers. I do believe that in the long run they save you 10x your time and money. They write extremely maintainable code which has few bugs and even fewer scaling issues. They can quickly learn and do anything asked of them. They are truly versatile and efficient.

What would be required for companies to finally start hiring based on skill as opposed to credentialism? The reality is that some already do. To hire skill takes nothing more than ignoring the number of years of experience written on paper and simply administering a few code tests to a candidate that appears to have the desired personality traits. These tests should be moderately difficult and focus on a problem that has many answers – only a few of which are good.

A great example (though well known at this point) is the FizzBuzz test:

Write a program that counts from 1 to 100. If the current count is evenly divisible by 3, output “Fizz”. If the current count is evenly divisible by 5, output “Buzz”. If the current count is evenly divisible by both 3 and 5, output “FizzBuzz”. Otherwise, just output the current count.

This task is fairly simple but has many solutions – only a few of which are good. In tasking a candidate to complete FizzBuzz, their skill (or lack thereof) will show itself immediately:

  • The Junior Developer will write a whole ton of if statements, possibly even hard-coding all of the multiples. This section of code is probably in its own class, injected via the constructor and provided by the DivisorCounterFactory. Also, there will be as many lines of comments as there are code.
    // Count to 100
    for (int i = 1; i <= 100; i++)
    {
        if (i == 15 || i == 30 
            || i == 45 || i == 60...)
        {
            // Write "FizzBuzz" to the console
            Console.WriteLine("FizzBuzz");
        }
        else if (i == 3 || i == 6 
            || i == 9 || i == 12...)
        {
            // Write "Fizz" to the console
            Console.WriteLine("Fizz");
        }
        else if (i == 5 || i == 10 
            || i == 15 || i == 20...)
        {
            // Write "Buzz" to the console
            Console.WriteLine("Buzz");
        }
        else
        {
            // Write current count to the console
            Console.WriteLine(i);
        }
    }
    

    This is not a very scalable way to solve the problem.

  • The Developer will whip together a few if statements using modulus to solve the problem.
    for (int i = 1; i <= 100; i++)
    {
        if (i % 3 == 0 && i % 5 ==0)
        {
            Console.WriteLine("FizzBuzz");
        }
        else if (i % 3 == 0)
        {
            Console.WriteLine("Fizz");
        }
        else if (i % 5 == 0)
        {
            Console.WriteLine("Buzz");
        }
        else
        {
            Console.WriteLine(i);
        }
    }
    

    Decent solution, fairly simple and by-the-book answer.

  • The Senior Developer will realize that they can combine the statements.
    for (int i = 1; i <= 100; i++)
    {
        string result = "";
        if (i % 3 == 0)
        {
            result += "Fizz";
        }
        if (i % 5 == 0)
        {
            result += "Buzz";
        }
    
        Console.WriteLine(result.Length > 0 ? result : i.ToString());
    }
    

    Clean, simple code that takes up maybe 10 lines when you get rid of my Allman style code indentation. Then, if the ego remains, they’ll ask you why you make developers jump through interview hoops, and possibly berate you for wasting their precious time and skills on such a remedial task.

  • The Truly Exceptional Developer, having never before heard of the FizzBuzz problem, will write the Senior Developer solution in a matter of 2 or 3 minutes. They’ll then discuss the ways in which it could possibly be improved. Things like how a case statement might technically be faster than an if statement in some cases due to omitting an op code at the assembly level, or how to optimize appending immutable strings together in order to avoid creating additional objects which would later have to be garbage collected. They’ll thoroughly enjoy the problem and be enthusiastic in the discussion.

A 30 minute code test immediately gives you more insight into the candidate’s skill than a whole day of discussions ever could. You can proceed to hiring with confidence (perhaps after a few more code tests administered by different people in order to observe the candidate’s ability to work with others). You can also reject a candidate with confidence. No matter how good of a salesperson they are, they will not be able to talk their way past the code test.

In summary, my unsolicited advice to you is this: if you want to work with good developers, just reject any interview process or job offer that doesn’t involve a code test. A lack of code testing means that all manners of developer will slip through that company’s hiring process (including those at the very low end of the bell curve) and that they will be your coworkers.

Via this hiring approach, you’ll meet Junior Developers with 25 years of experience, and Truly Exceptional Developers fresh out of school – and everything else in between.

Doesn’t it seem obvious that we should be tested on our coding skills, given that coding is literally the primary task that we are hired to do for 40+ hours a week? Do you think that a hospital would hire a surgeon without testing their skills? Would the NFL or NHL recruit a player without testing their skills (or at least seeing their skills in action)?

In all professions, the top tiers test their candidates for practical skills. This filters out the unskilled, resulting in awesome teams of incredibly skilled people. These are the teams we want to be on. These are the companies we want to work for. These are the environments in which we learn and become Truly Exceptional Developers.

PS – I hope that you had a terrific Christmas and will have a Happy New Year!

The Trouble With Job Titles

I’ve had a good career so far. I began working full-time as a programmer in 2008. At that time my title was Junior Developer. I had a decent boss and cool co-workers, and I cut my teeth on Java and .NET. It was a good experience. After 2 years at that gig, I felt that it was time to move on.

I contacted recruiters, and one eventually found me a promotion: Systems Analyst. It came with a decent pay bump and so forth, as well as the luxury of dropping “Junior” from my job title. As this was a good deal all around, I took the offer.

A few more years went by and I found myself once again looking for “the next step” in my career. Lo-and-behold my current company had appreciated my skill as a Systems Analyst and wanted to bring me on as a Developer. Before I knew it I was a .NET Developer which, as my other job changes had previously, came with a pay raise and better perks. Things were going great.

I did 3 years total with this company, during which I was promoted to .NET Development Team Lead – a terrific title in the realm of programming. I ran a small team of 4-5 people and things were going pretty well.

Eventually, having maxed out my skills and knowledge at this company, I moved on. I became a .NET Architect with appropriate pay and benefits. It was a reasonable gig.

This is where I’ll introduce a sideline fact: during my entire career to this point, recruiters (both in-house and third-party) had been cold-calling and contacting me with jobs that matched my current title (with more contact as I got further in my career). As a .NET Development Team Lead, I was offered jobs that ranged from Senior Developer to Team Lead to Architect. As a .NET Architect, I was offered titles from Team Lead to Architect to Manager. So far things made sense.

About 5 months ago I took a job with a company that I love, Stack Exchange. Things are going great so far, and I’ve never been treated better in my entire development career. My pay and benefits are top-notch, my job perks are incredible, and my boss is a genuinely competent, solid human being – as are all of my co-workers. It is the current high-bar of my career track record.

Where it becomes interesting is in my job title. At Stack Exchange I am a Web Developer. That’s the whole title. Not Manager, or Team Lead, or Architect, but Web Developer. The reason for this is that Stack Exchange is not a company that cares for credentialism. We hire smart people who gets things done (their words, not mine) and developers here handle projects from start to finish. This means that we sometimes act as a Manager of others, sometimes a Team Lead of others, and often an Architect as we discuss and debate the best way to solve a particular problem or design a particular system.

It was not until I got this job that I realized how broken the current recruiting industry is. Just 6 months ago I was receiving cold calls and offers to interview for Team Lead, Architect, and Manager jobs (with expected pay). Can you guess what jobs they contact me with these days?

Junior Developer and Intermediate Developer. Complete with massive pay and benefits cut. Offering these positions to me is a complete waste of both my time and the recruiter’s.

It’s pretty obvious why this happens: recruiters are usually not contacting me personally based on researching my career and goals. They are contacting me as 1 of 10-50 others that they will contact via cold-call or e-mail on any given day. A shotgun approach of “fire it off and see what hits” as it were.

I am certainly not egotistical enough to be offended by being offered titles and pay well below my current skill set. What does bother me, however, is the fact that I cannot convince most recruiters of anything otherwise. I took it upon myself to explain to one recruiter that Web Developer at Stack Exchange is about the equivalent (in my opinion) of a Team Lead or Architect at many other companies. Their response was that if that were true, it would be my title here. I was dumbfounded.

Given that there are no current standards for developer titles, it is plain to see that a Developer at Company A could be anything from a Junior Developer to CIO at Company B. It’s a crap shoot. Especially when you consider the fact that some companies inflate the titles of their employees as a “free” form of making them feel valued (as opposed to, say, paying them properly).

I don’t know what the solution is to the recruiting industry’s problem, but it does make me realize the value of Stack Overflow Careers. We match candidates with jobs based on experience, interests, and open source projects, not via titles and credentialism. We explicitly ban companies that spam candidates with a job offering. This means that every single message written to you as a candidate is personalized and written by hand by the recruiter. Very few recruiting companies can claim similarly. We continue to evolve this product, and I hope that one day it sets a new standard for recruiting where people don’t blindly call you up with jobs that match your current title.

This lack of standards is a difficult problem to solve. I don’t pretend that I have the answers. It does show me precisely how you end up working with incompetent people though.

John Doe is an incompetent developer who works for a small dev shop that gives him low pay but a big title such as Senior Developer. A recruiter eventually offers this developer jobs of a similar title but that have the appropriate pay. John jumps at the giant raise and heads to the next company. What happens next is something we’ve surely all seen a few times… John can’t hack it, John gets 3-6 months in and gets let go. John was cheated by the system of credentialism. Who can blame him directly for grabbing the highest value offering he can get? We all would.

This broken system wastes time, tons of money, and screws up company culture. Nobody likes working with John as a peer when he knows 1/10th of what they do, does even less work, and gets paid the same or better. That causes your good developers to run for the hills, and your workplace culture to suck as another John fills the now open role of a good dev.

The current state of the recruiting industry is fairly toxic. Most recruiters will put anyone anywhere to make a buck and meet their draw or quota.

The question becomes: how do we, with Stack Overflow Careers, completely dismantle this system and rebuild it properly? Time will tell, and I’m excited to see the results.

How I Got A Job At Stack Exchange

Almost exactly 1 month ago today I found myself on a video call with Joel Spolsky. It feels insane to write that, even now, as it was a banner moment in my career. For me it was the equivalent of meeting a movie star who I had idolized since I was old enough to know what movies were. There had always been this Joel Spolsky guy throughout my career that I regularly read about and whose opinions on software development agreed with mine, and suddenly I was talking with him face to face. It was awesome.

Reaching this conversation was not the easiest thing I’ve done in my life. It took a few weeks and in all honesty it was a bit trying to find time to have so many interviews. How many interviews, you ask? Prior to Joel I talked with 5 or 6 other amazing people (Marc Gravell and Nicholas Larsen included). Somehow I managed to impress each of them enough to reach the end boss: Joel Spolsky.

The conversation lasted about an hour. It felt like 5 minutes to me, probably because of the excitement. Joel and I discussed the pros and cons of various software methodologies, mistakes each of us had made in our careers, some of the challenges of Dache (my open source software), and a few other topics. Then he said something awesome: “We’d love for you to come and work with us at Stack Exchange!” So much adrenaline hit me at this moment that I could have lifted a car with my bare hands. It was surreal.

A few days from now I officially start working with Stack Exchange. I feel very fortunate and excited for the opportunity. So far the Stack Exchange team have proven themselves an insanely skilled and professional organization that treat employees as human beings instead of expendable resources. I’m already loving the culture and interactions with my coworkers.

IMPORTANT NOTES: First and foremost, the commentary here consists of my views alone and not those of Stack Exchange or any other entity. This post is merely to reflect upon the interview process and discuss the aspects and traits of my career and knowledge which I feel helped me get the job. This is not a tell-all or any sort of shortcut or easy way out. If you want a job at Stack Exchange, you will have to endure the same technical and soft skills challenges that I did – the details of which I will NOT be disclosing. 🙂

So, with that disclaimer out of the way, here are my thoughts on how I got a job at Stack Exchange, and how you can too:

Ego is the mind killer, so kill the ego. Most developers that I’ve met (including some prior versions of myself) have massive egos. Egos so big that the room can barely hold them. Egos that even put the illustrious Kanye West’s attitude to shame. This is natural given that we spend all day creating things from scratch (which is a god-like quality) that often generate significant revenue for companies. We start to feel very powerful and even fawned over. We learn the entirety of the software and hardware vertical of our current job’s domain, and then make a Superman-like flying leap to conclude that we know EVERYTHING about ALL software and hardware.

Thinking you know everything is the easiest way to suck as a programmer. If you believe that you know everything, you stop trying to learn new things (since you already know them, duh). So, while you’ve mastered ASP.NET MVC 3 at your current gig, 4 and 5 came out… the catch is that your company never upgraded because it’s too risky, and so you never learned them (or cared to). Now a year or two later you’re so far behind the current development stack that you can’t even see it with binoculars. And did I mention those little things called Ruby and PHP and even Java that you’ve never written a single line of? And how about MongoDB, Couchbase, Azure, EC2, and the literally thousands of other platforms and programming languages? I should hope that by now you realize that you know a little bit about a handful of languages and hardware configurations amidst a sea of thousands… By percentage, you’ve conquered maybe 0.1% of all that there is to know about development. So have I, and that’s OK.

Don’t be a rock star developer. This is something that I did for a few years and it only hurt my career. Many companies employ a strategy of intentionally furthering the developer ego in order to make them feel valuable (often without handing out appropriate compensation). Being a rock star sounds cool, but really it’s a nasty strategy that can cultivate incredibly destructive developer attitudes. Companies seek out and hire rock stars, and rock stars have a sense of entitlement. They develop huge egos and run their mouths at meetings, interrupting and talking over others. They seem to love circular logic (they’re right because you’re wrong because they’re right). They feel that all other team members exist simply to serve their every whim… and everyone loathes working with them.

The thing is – while you may actually be a 1 in 1 million bona fide rock star developer – nobody cares. Talk is cheap and in my experience people will say nearly anything and everything to portray an image of who they want you to believe they are. If you are really good at what you do, telling people doesn’t do anything other than make them despise you… Hearing about how amazing your proprietary code is gets annoying – especially when it’s the 5th time this week you’ve said it. A good developer doesn’t need to brag about how good they are: their work speaks louder than any boastful words could. People around them will naturally do the bragging for them. Hallway conversations to the tune of “wow, he’s really smart” or “she knocked that out in hours when we thought it’d take days” will be fostered, and that isn’t a bad thing. Let people talk about you all they’d like, but maintain a sense of humility and reality. You might be the best developer on your team or even at your company, but you are still a human being and this is still a job. Nobody has been hired to serve your ego (even if their job is to serve you). Being a good developer doesn’t make you better than anyone as a person; it just makes you successful in your career. Never lose sight of the fact that thousands of other developers are great at their jobs too. What separates you from the pack is being a great developer AND modest. It is a very rare combination in my experience, and the complete package that many companies are striving to hire. So, while it’s cool that you’re the very best developer that there ever was, stop believing your own hype and telling everyone who will listen. They don’t care, and you shouldn’t either.

Know that you know enough to know that you don’t know enough. Know what you do know, and know what you don’t know, and never be afraid to say “I don’t know” when it’s the truth. A developer who isn’t afraid to say “I don’t know” in front of a room full of people is a rare gem. By being honest you create trust and credibility. You also foster positive relationships with your peers and company. Nobody will remember that you’ve never heard of Angular.js or Couchbase, though they’ll always appreciate that you didn’t waste their time or money by pretending that you did. You can’t trust a developer who doesn’t know what they don’t know.

Know your data structures and algorithms. High level programming languages such as C# abstract so much away from the modern developer that many of us have no idea what’s actually happening “under the hood” when it executes. It’s cool that you can sling LINQ everywhere, but do you know the computational complexity of what you’ve done? Do you know what a hash table is and why it is useful? Could you sort a list of things efficiently? Can you think of a scenario where a stack is the best option? Note that you don’t need to memorize things like sorting algorithms (hell, I couldn’t if I tried), but a working knowledge of data structures such as trees, hash buckets, lists, queues, and stacks combined with the rudimentary knowledge of things like sorting, searching, and caching is a very valuable skillset. It’s the difference between a good programmer and a great one. Anyone can write C#, but only those who understand even the low level operations of each deliberate method call will write good, clean, efficient code. You owe yourself a fundamental understanding of how data structures like stacks and heaps work, as well as by-value vs by-reference memory addressing. These core concepts apply to ALL programming languages. Too many developers ignore the complexity of their algorithms and just call pre-made methods without understanding the implications. Educate yourself on data structures and algorithms and suddenly you’ll be ahead of the pack.

Know why your code works and why your code doesn’t work. Have you seen this image circulating on sites like Reddit?

Clueless

Despite being funny, the popularity of this image pisses me off. It claims that the essence of programming is having no freaking clue why your code does or does not run. I feel that this is unacceptable. A great developer strives for the WHY in every single thing that they do, not just HOW to quick-fix it. Code doesn’t compile? WHY? Race condition across threads? WHY? In asking “why” you further your knowledge and expand your skillset with the functional, rational “how” which allows you to become a better programmer. Most great programmers don’t repeat the same mistakes over and over, though they of course make mistakes… They just make new and interesting ones!

I remember the days of slinging shoddy code and then copy-pasting lines from blogs and sites like Stack Overflow until my code seemed to work (though I wasn’t sure if or why it did). Those days are long behind me. When my code doesn’t compile, 99% of the time I immediately know how to fix the issue. When my code has a bug, I usually know exactly how to track it down and resolve it, and in doing so I often learn how to avoid it in the future. Having no idea why your code works is like being a lawyer who has no idea why their client is not guilty: fairly useless, overpaid, and an amusing spectacle at times. Make sure that you know why your code works and why it doesn’t. In my opinion this is a basic competency of being a professional developer. It’s OK to create bugs and make mistakes – it’s not OK to make the same mistakes repeatedly.

At this point I feel that I’ve done a reasonable job of representing my skillset and core competencies. These are the things I showed to the Stack Exchange team in my interviews. I didn’t necessarily have the exact answer (or even most efficient answer) to each of their technical questions, but I was modest and never afraid to ask for help or say “I don’t know” when I got stuck. My answers involved efficient data structures and algorithms, and I was able to explain why the data structure was the best choice in solving the problem. When I created bugs I was mostly able to identify them and indicate how to fix them. In doing all of this, I demonstrated competency and confidence as a developer and fortunately ended up with my dream job.

If you think you’ve got the chops to join us at Stack Exchange, apply today!