I think what isn't mentioned in this article are some of the unrealistic expectations posed from employers as to what a "skilled" software engineer is.
I have countless times seen job requirements demanding X+ years of some acronym when the technology has only been around for half of X.
Also, candidates are rejected by the people who interview them, each with a particular bias as to what they expect. Typically, a technical interviewer (i.e. fellow software engineer) will be heavily biased towards their own preferred technologies, philosophies or approaches. Anyone who doesn't share them with equal enthusiasm or depth of knowledge just isn't "skilled" enough.
Software people, and especially programmers have A LOT of ego, and it comes out especially strong when judging candidates.
I think startups probably do need an all star team to get off the ground and succeed. But once a company goes into operations mode, you need a mix of both stars and "average" programmers. The stars will probably tackle the new and untried while you also have a stable of people who don't mind doing the day to day boring maintenance bit without complaining too much.
You're right about the X+ years phenomenon, but I also see tons of job requirements demanding X/2 years of some incredibly obscure technology that maybe 1000 people even know exist. So maybe there's 100 competent engineers on the planet half of whom have less than one year of experience. Even if you're offering good money you just aren't going to find any candidates. It seems to be an enterprise thing with tech that is only used by top 100 companies or so. The problem isn't too little supply, but too little demand.
I have countless times seen job requirements demanding X+ years of some acronym when the technology has only been around for half of X.
Also, candidates are rejected by the people who interview them, each with a particular bias as to what they expect. Typically, a technical interviewer (i.e. fellow software engineer) will be heavily biased towards their own preferred technologies, philosophies or approaches. Anyone who doesn't share them with equal enthusiasm or depth of knowledge just isn't "skilled" enough.
Software people, and especially programmers have A LOT of ego, and it comes out especially strong when judging candidates.
I think startups probably do need an all star team to get off the ground and succeed. But once a company goes into operations mode, you need a mix of both stars and "average" programmers. The stars will probably tackle the new and untried while you also have a stable of people who don't mind doing the day to day boring maintenance bit without complaining too much.