

The Alpha Engineer - bdehaaff
http://blog.aha.io/index.php/the-alpha-engineer/

======
chaetodon
IMHO an alpha engineer should do one of two things:

1) Architect the application and divide the detail programming in enough well-
defined subtasks that lesser gods can start working on these subtasks while
the alpha starts engineering further. Well-defined subtasks need relatively
little communication, and economies of scale are used. 2) Add the brilliance
to an existing framework built by beta engineers (Like Rembrandt painting the
lace on the painting of an apprentice).

It basically depends on where a product is in the life cycle which of the two
strategies is most effective.

~~~
bdehaaff
Good addition. The Alpha needs to be cognizant of the lifecycle of a given
project and be able to motivate a broader team.

------
brent_noorda
Nice essay, but backed by these horrible examples:

* a group of mediocre architects could have built a better dome in Florence than Brunelleschi

* a group of mediocre stock pickers could have outperformed Buffett

* a group of mediocre designers could have built a better computer than Jobs

* a group of mediocre basketball players could have beat Jordan in the NBA finals

* a group of mediocre humanitarians could have had a bigger impact than Schindler

when the truth is:

* Brunelleschi did not lay the 4 million bricks of the dome, a large team did that

* Buffet outperforms the average stock picker by about 13% to 20%, it so happens that in the financial business 13% to 20% is a big deal, while 13% to 20% better is not disruptice startup-level improvements

* Jobs never built a computer, he needed to lord power over a large team to do that

* I believe that a team of 5 mediocre players could easily beat a team of 1 Jordan

* 1 Schindler saved 1200, while 2 million mediocre Nazis killed about 9 billion who they felt where ethnically inferior. In this case, I think the mediocre Nazis had a bigger impact.

So while my heart tells me to believe in the point you're trying to make, that
one alpha engineer is worth a ton of mediocres, the examples do not support
that point.

~~~
bdehaaff
Thanks for the comments. So you do agree that Brunelleschi lead with his
brilliant design and Buffett does dramatically outperform his peers. Jordan
never lost a championship and would handily beat 5 mediocre basketball players
from the general population -- remember that every player who makes the NBA is
an alpha. I edited out the final bullet as it unnecessarily complicates the
post.

~~~
brent_noorda
yes with Brunelleschi's lead (but he still needs a big team), but since Buffet
only outperforms by about 15% I wouldn't call that "dramatic" in the context
of your post. As for Jordan, I suspect five of me could beat one Michael
Jordon, and I suck at basketball.

Maybe you could better make your point by avoiding analogies and staying
within our hackery field for alpha examples. For example, a single Linus
Torvalds in a weekend could put together git, which could then keep thousands
of mediocre programmers confused for years :-)

~~~
rdouble
Five of you would not beat Michael Jordan, even now that he's 50. You're
underestimating how much better the best people are than the average. You're
really underestimating how much better they are than people who suck.

------
malandrew
That alpha engineer is only going to make a successful system if they know how
to work with others and produce maintainable code. For every one of the types
of alpha engineers this article deifies there is at least one other alpha
engineer that is difficult to work work, doesn't document their code and has a
NIH attitude that refuses to incorporate the work of others even when suitable
for the task at hand.

These guys are usually known as the BBM and are can appear to be awesome but
by the time you realize their shortcomings ultimately make them impotent and
their work irrelevant, it's too late.

I don't care how brilliant you are. If you don't produce maintainable code
with well thought interfaces, your brilliant code is going to rot by itself
after you are gone. Brilliant and productive programmers also exhibit empathy
for other developers who will maintain and extend the code or build other
systems to interface with the code written by the alpha coder.

~~~
k1w1
You are missing the point a bit - I don't think the OP is saying that a bad
engineer ("difficult to work with", "don't produce maintainable code", etc)
suddenly becomes better when they work by themselves. The point is that one
person working alone can sometimes be significantly more productive than if
threw more people at the project.

The natural engineering management answer to so many problems is "I need more
headcount" \- but often that can be the opposite of what the problem needs.

~~~
bdehaaff
Agreed. I considered referencing The Mythical Man-Month: Essays on Software
Engineering by Fred Brooks. The central theme is that "adding manpower to a
late software project makes it later". I think that this theory can be applied
to both new and late projects. More people does not typically increase
productivity.

------
adamnemecek
I'm not quite sure what is the point of this post. Being smart = good. Thanks
for the heads up? And I'm sure that building aha.io is extremely
intellectually demanding (judging by description on the splash page).

Also isn't this just that one thing that Steve Jobs used to say but in a blog
post form?

~~~
bdehaaff
The point is simple. Find the Alpha Engineer and put him or her in a position
to succeed, get rid of group think, and prosper.

~~~
k1w1
I don't know that it is always the case that putting a productive developer in
charge of a team is the best approach either. Just because someone can code
doesn't mean that they can lead - and anyway, by putting them in charge you
just added another distraction to the day anyway.

~~~
bdehaaff
I think you are misinterpreting the point and blog post. I am not arguing that
a lead engineer should be in charge of every team or even the broader
engineering team. The point is that great engineers are different and can have
an exponential impact on a product and company.

------
vrinek
"There is also less fear of upsetting the original creator [...]" <\-- this
part sounds childish on the side of the "alpha engineer".

Also, part of the team building process is done as a contingency plan on the
part of the company. If "the plan" is in the head of just one person, then the
rest of the company becomes that person's bitch and when that one leaves...

------
mdehaaff
I have led product in a number of software companies -- some with an Alpha
Engineer and some without. The companies with a dominate engineer have
outperformed the others when the lead engineer could relate to the other teams
and customers. This is a fine reminder, but you should note that no matter how
great the star is, he is still part of a team.

~~~
bdehaaff
Agreed. @malandrew mentioned something similar. The Alpha Engineer can be a
force for good if she works well and motivates the team.

------
postblogism
"a lovely group of third place finishers even with a ton of consensus will
never outperform one genius"

...providing that genius is a Leader and not a Cowboy.

------
peterchon
problem is that too many mediocre programers identify themselves as the Alpha
engineer.

~~~
bdehaaff
Indeed. 90% of people think they are in the top 10% of performers.

~~~
rxantos
And the other 10% are told by psychologist that they have a Self-esteem
problem.

Society as a whole is to blame for the 90% believing they are part of the 10%
best. If society had its way it would be a 100% of people believing they are
part of the 10%.

And the spark that created this was created by psychologist. Which are also
responsible for the high percentage of narcissist (compared to previous
generations) that our society have.

Before: you had to actually do something to prove you are an alpha.

Now: people believe by default that they are alphas while the rest are betas.

This is terrible, because those who would could actually become alphas would
not do it, because they believe they are already alphas, so they do not work
as hard.

Because of this society as a whole is getting worse, not better.

------
lightblade
Can't tell if sarcastic.

