We fired our top talent. Best decision we ever made.
Jonathan Solórzano-Hamilton
83K509

As QAE for the past decade, I’ve honestly seen both sides of this coin. There are times when the ‘delicate genius’ has been given far too much power and leeway, and times when firing the head architect because he’s a night owl, who doesn’t want to show up for morning stand-up, has caused major, unnecessary set-backs in a project, and that was actually a QA nightmare for me, personally.

Also, if a developer is personally abusive or exploitative towards his team members, off-hours and off-site, it’s a crummy situation, and yet technically, he has violated no laws or company policies.

Finally, good on you for standing up against what I call ‘technical extortion’ or ‘a cult of dependence’ as you call it… Uncommented, unmaintainable code is deliberately obfuscated for purposes of job security, and there should be policies against it. On the other hand, it’s also bad when the Corporation appropriates someone’s code, collectively, and then kicks that person off the payroll, for petty excuses. That’s Stalinesque, and recently happened at Google, with James Damore…

Like what you read? Give Justin Weiss Smith a round of applause.

From a quick cheer to a standing ovation, clap to show how much you enjoyed this story.