Motivation of software professionals

[James Kanze]

On Feb 5, 11:19 am, Stefan Kiryazov wrote:

Strange question; the most efficient motivator of
professionals is money, and money is very popular.

Yes and no. Obviously, money plays a role---some of us have
expensive habits, like eating regularly, that have to be paid
for. But it has its limits, and I've rarely seen money alone
motivate the best performance (in anything).

 

[James Kanze]

[...]

That said, by definition professionals are, to some extent, in
it for the money. If they were not, they would be amateurs as
I am now. How that is balanced against interesting work,
physical working conditions, status, etc. varies.

I'm not sure if the word "professional" has the same conotations
in English as it does in French, but from the French meaning, I
don't think you can be truely a "professional" if you're only in
it for the money. "Professional" implies being paid for what
you do, but it also implies a certain degree of personal
standards with regards to quality and such---a "professional"
will take pride in his work.

 

[Dirk Bruere at NeoPax]

Hi all,
I am doing a research about motivation in software development,
the most efficient practices to motivate software engineers,
their popularity, etc.

Strange question; the most efficient motivator of professionals is
money, [...]

This was proven wrong by Science. Read Bruce Eckels excellent blog
entries about this topic, he always references relliable sources on
this subject.

Depends.
Right now I am primarily motivated by money, or at least the lack of it.

--
Dirk

http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
http://www.theconsensus.org/ - A UK political party
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/onetribe - Occult Talk Show

 

[MarkusSchaber]

Hi, Dirk,

I am doing a research about motivation in software development,
the most efficient practices to motivate software engineers,
their popularity, etc.
Strange question; the most efficient motivator of professionals is
money, [...]

This was proven wrong by Science. Read Bruce Eckels excellent blog
entries about this topic, he always references relliable sources on
this subject.

Depends.
Right now I am primarily motivated by money, or at least the lack of it.

I won't dispute that money is a motivator, but it is not the most
efficient motivator. The more money you pay, the more you will attract
those developers which are purely after the money, and not the really
good ones. For the latter ones, a certain level on the paycheck is
enough to give attention to fun, excitement, atmosphere and such
factors.

 

[Dirk Bruere at NeoPax]

Hi, Dirk,

I am doing a research about motivation in software development,
the most efficient practices to motivate software engineers,
their popularity, etc.
Strange question; the most efficient motivator of professionals is
money, [...]
This was proven wrong by Science. Read Bruce Eckels excellent blog
entries about this topic, he always references relliable sources on
this subject.

Depends.
Right now I am primarily motivated by money, or at least the lack of it.

I won't dispute that money is a motivator, but it is not the most
efficient motivator. The more money you pay, the more you will attract
those developers which are purely after the money, and not the really
good ones. For the latter ones, a certain level on the paycheck is
enough to give attention to fun, excitement, atmosphere and such
factors.

I once joked with an employer that if he paid me twice as much I would
only have to work half as long

--
Dirk

http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
http://www.theconsensus.org/ - A UK political party
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/onetribe - Occult Talk Show

 

[Lew]

I once joked with an employer that if he paid me twice as much I would
only have to work half as long

Given that nearly nobody gives a perfect working environment, or even close,
money is the primary distinguisher. As a contract worker, I've seen a few
dozen IT workplaces. The grass is never greener. Offer me twice as much
compensation as the other potential employer and my talents are yours to exploit.

It's not that money is the motivator. The question is leading and extremely
ill cast. I don't depend on anyone else for my motivation. Money is the
decider; it decides whether and where I work. It doesn't determine how.

To get meaningful answers, the survey would have to ask meaningful questions.

 

[Malcolm McLean]

    [...]

That said, by definition professionals are, to some extent, in
it for the money. If they were not, they would be amateurs as
I am now. How that is balanced against interesting work,
physical working conditions, status, etc. varies.

I'm not sure if the word "professional" has the same conotations
in English as it does in French, but from the French meaning, I
don't think you can be truely a "professional" if you're only in
it for the money.  "Professional" implies being paid for what
you do, but it also implies a certain degree of personal
standards with regards to quality and such---a "professional"
will take pride in his work.

Strictly a "professional" is someone who is a member of a professional
body which regulates itself and has the right to control entry to the
profession. For instnace I can't simply buy scalpels and antiseptic
and set myself up as a brain surgeon - I have to go throguh the
British Medical Association before they'll let me chop people up. the
same is true for lawyers, accountants, and some other more obscure
niches.

Most people aren't professionals, and the word has become misused to
mean 'skilled workers with high standards'. Bascially employers want
the advantages of professional status without conferring on their
employees the control that is the natural concomitant.

Computer programmers are rarely professionals in the true sense, but
ususally professional in the bastardised sense of the term.

 

[Larz]

I have a pretty good idea on this, I may not be typical.

I basically was never convinced that work of any sort could be fun up
to my early 20's. No one ever convinced me of that or ever thought it
important enough to ever bring up the issue of whether work should be
enjoyable or not.

I was a paper boy, dishwasher, worked on farms, retail stores etc. I
always have enjoyed being a musician I would say, but even that can be
stifling depending on the situation. At one point in 1983 or so I
decided I needed a career and took a COBOL class which to my surprise
I found software interesting. After nearly flunking out of high
school, I got a degree in CS and made the honor roll and did very
well. When i started my career as a programmer, I discovered that
managers, co workers and the business world at times can take alot of
the fun out of it. On the other hand, this led me to discover
meditation and the spiritual side of life as the stress and
frustration inspired me to take up meditating on biblical psalms,
buddhist meditation and a few yogi masters ..

 

[Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn]

Strictly a "professional" is someone who is a member of a professional
body which regulates itself and has the right to control entry to the
profession. For instnace I can't simply buy scalpels and antiseptic
and set myself up as a brain surgeon - I have to go throguh the
British Medical Association before they'll let me chop people up. the
same is true for lawyers, accountants, and some other more obscure
niches.

Most people aren't professionals, and the word has become misused to
mean 'skilled workers with high standards'. Bascially employers want
the advantages of professional status without conferring on their
employees the control that is the natural concomitant.

Computer programmers are rarely professionals in the true sense, but
ususally professional in the bastardised sense of the term.

Your notion of "computer programmer" is a bit outdated to say the least.
This thread was about "software professionals".

You might also want to update other parts of your knowledge:

,-<http://www.britannica.com/bps/dictionary?query=professional&header_go=>
|
| Main Entry: ¹pro·fes·sion·al
| Pronunciation: \prə-ˈfesh-nəl, -ˈfe-shə-nəl\
| Function: adjective
| Date: 1606
|
| 1 a: of, relating to, or characteristic of a profession[1]
| b: engaged in one of the learned professions
| c (1): characterized by or conforming to the technical or ethical
| standards of a profession
| (2): exhibiting a courteous, conscientious, and generally
| businesslike manner in the workplace
|
| 2 a: participating for gain or livelihood in an activity or field of
| endeavor often engaged in by amateurs <a ∼ golfer>
| b: having a particular profession as a permanent career
| <a ∼ soldier>
| c: engaged in by persons receiving financial return <∼ football>
|
| 3: following a line of conduct as though it were a profession
| <a ∼ patriot>
| — pro·fess·ion·ally adverb
|
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| Main Entry: ²professional
| Function: noun
| Date: 1811
|
| one that is professional; especially: one that engages in a pursuit or
| activity professionally

[1]
| Main Entryro·fes·sion
| Pronunciation: \prə-ˈfe-shən\
| Function: noun
| Etymology: Middle English professioun, from Anglo-French profession,
| from Late Latin & Latin; Late Latin profession-, professio,
| from Latin, public declaration, from profitēri
| Date: 13th century
|
| 1: the act of taking the vows of a religious community
| 2: an act of openly declaring or publicly claiming a belief, faith,
| or opinion : protestation
| 3: an avowed religious faith
| 4 a: a calling requiring specialized knowledge and often long and
| intensive academic preparation
| b: a principal calling, vocation, or employmentc: the whole body
| of persons engaged in a calling

So much for "bastardised".


F'up2 poster

PointedEars

 

[Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn]

Strictly a "professional" is someone who is a member of a professional
body which regulates itself and has the right to control entry to the
profession. For instnace I can't simply buy scalpels and antiseptic
and set myself up as a brain surgeon - I have to go throguh the
British Medical Association before they'll let me chop people up. the
same is true for lawyers, accountants, and some other more obscure
niches.

Most people aren't professionals, and the word has become misused to
mean 'skilled workers with high standards'. Bascially employers want
the advantages of professional status without conferring on their
employees the control that is the natural concomitant.

Computer programmers are rarely professionals in the true sense, but
ususally professional in the bastardised sense of the term.

Your notion of "computer programmer" is a bit outdated to say the least.
This thread was about "software professionals".

You might also want to update other parts of your knowledge:

,-<http://www.britannica.com/bps/dictionary?query=professional&header_go=>
|
| Main Entry: ¹pro·fes·sion·al
| Pronunciation: \prə-ˈfesh-nəl, -ˈfe-shə-nəl\
| Function: adjective
| Date: 1606
|
| 1 a: of, relating to, or characteristic of a profession[1]
| b: engaged in one of the learned professions
| c (1): characterized by or conforming to the technical or ethical
| standards of a profession
| (2): exhibiting a courteous, conscientious, and generally
| businesslike manner in the workplace
|
| 2 a: participating for gain or livelihood in an activity or field of
| endeavor often engaged in by amateurs <a ∼ golfer>
| b: having a particular profession as a permanent career
| <a ∼ soldier>
| c: engaged in by persons receiving financial return <∼ football>
|
| 3: following a line of conduct as though it were a profession
| <a ∼ patriot>
| — pro·fess·ion·ally adverb
|
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| Main Entry: ²professional
| Function: noun
| Date: 1811
|
| one that is professional; especially: one that engages in a pursuit or
| activity professionally

[1]
| Main Entryro·fes·sion
| Pronunciation: \prə-ˈfe-shən\
| Function: noun
| Etymology: Middle English professioun, from Anglo-French profession,
| from Late Latin & Latin; Late Latin profession-, professio,
| from Latin, public declaration, from profitēri
| Date: 13th century
|
| 1: the act of taking the vows of a religious community
| 2: an act of openly declaring or publicly claiming a belief, faith,
| or opinion : protestation
| 3: an avowed religious faith
| 4 a: a calling requiring specialized knowledge and often long and
| intensive academic preparation
| b: a principal calling, vocation, or employment
| c: the whole body of persons engaged in a calling

So much for "bastardised".


F'up2 poster

PointedEars

 

[Lew]

The 1950's [sic] were totally awesome.

Oh, yeah - the twin evils of McCarthyism and Communism. Racism. Sexism. The
Cold War. Superpowers playing chess with smaller countries. Wars everywhere.
Dictators. Massive stockpiling of nuclear and chemical weapons. Rapine of
the planet. The birth of AIDS. Hideous fashions.

Totally awesome.

 

[Dirk Bruere at NeoPax]

Given that nearly nobody gives a perfect working environment, or even
close, money is the primary distinguisher. As a contract worker, I've
seen a few dozen IT workplaces. The grass is never greener. Offer me
twice as much compensation as the other potential employer and my
talents are yours to exploit.

It's not that money is the motivator. The question is leading and
extremely ill cast. I don't depend on anyone else for my motivation.
Money is the decider; it decides whether and where I work. It doesn't
determine how.

To get meaningful answers, the survey would have to ask meaningful
questions.

Some places you go, however, you never want to return.
They are real tech sweatshop hellholes with everyone looking for a new
job. Last place like that I was at the boss said: "This project is
behind schedule and if it is not on time heads will roll. I am now off
on holiday". I suspect he returned to an empty office.

--
Dirk

http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
http://www.theconsensus.org/ - A UK political party
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/onetribe - Occult Talk Show

 

[Ian Collins]

[...]

That said, by definition professionals are, to some extent, in
it for the money. If they were not, they would be amateurs as
I am now. How that is balanced against interesting work,
physical working conditions, status, etc. varies.

I'm not sure if the word "professional" has the same conotations
in English as it does in French, but from the French meaning, I
don't think you can be truely a "professional" if you're only in
it for the money. "Professional" implies being paid for what
you do, but it also implies a certain degree of personal
standards with regards to quality and such---a "professional"
will take pride in his work.

Strictly a "professional" is someone who is a member of a professional
body which regulates itself and has the right to control entry to the
profession.

In some contexts maybe, but golf and cricket clubs had their
"professional" long before anyone thought of developing software. It
isn't the term "professional" that has been bastardised, it's "Engineer".

 

[Dirk Bruere at NeoPax]

[...]

That said, by definition professionals are, to some extent, in
it for the money. If they were not, they would be amateurs as
I am now. How that is balanced against interesting work,
physical working conditions, status, etc. varies.

I'm not sure if the word "professional" has the same conotations
in English as it does in French, but from the French meaning, I
don't think you can be truely a "professional" if you're only in
it for the money. "Professional" implies being paid for what
you do, but it also implies a certain degree of personal
standards with regards to quality and such---a "professional"
will take pride in his work.

Strictly a "professional" is someone who is a member of a professional
body which regulates itself and has the right to control entry to the
profession. For instnace I can't simply buy scalpels and antiseptic
and set myself up as a brain surgeon - I have to go throguh the
British Medical Association before they'll let me chop people up. the
same is true for lawyers, accountants, and some other more obscure
niches.

Most people aren't professionals, and the word has become misused to
mean 'skilled workers with high standards'. Bascially employers want
the advantages of professional status without conferring on their
employees the control that is the natural concomitant.

Computer programmers are rarely professionals in the true sense, but
ususally professional in the bastardised sense of the term.

Come to Britain where we have "boffins" or occasionally "eggheads" and
where the gas company will send round an engineer to fix your appliance.
Or, if he cannot manage it, a technician (yes - that's what they really
said).

--
Dirk

http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
http://www.theconsensus.org/ - A UK political party
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/onetribe - Occult Talk Show

 

[Seebs]

Some places you go, however, you never want to return.
They are real tech sweatshop hellholes with everyone looking for a new
job. Last place like that I was at the boss said: "This project is
behind schedule and if it is not on time heads will roll. I am now off
on holiday". I suspect he returned to an empty office.

I should hope so!

Last time we had a thing behind schedule, the management sent out a request
that we put in extra time to bring it on schedule. They had already cut
product specs in a few key places to try to make things better, and they
told us they'd make it good if we helped them out. We had very close to
24/7 management coverage, and they helped out as much as they could. And
yes, we made the deadline, and they rewarded us suitably.

The primary motivation there wasn't the money, it was the visible
demonstration that the management felt it was their problem more than ours
that the schedule had been wrong. (Note the emphasis; it was not that we
were behind the schedule, it was that the schedule was, empirically, wrong.)

-s

 

[Dirk Bruere at NeoPax]

I should hope so!

Last time we had a thing behind schedule, the management sent out a request
that we put in extra time to bring it on schedule. They had already cut
product specs in a few key places to try to make things better, and they
told us they'd make it good if we helped them out. We had very close to
24/7 management coverage, and they helped out as much as they could. And
yes, we made the deadline, and they rewarded us suitably.

The primary motivation there wasn't the money, it was the visible
demonstration that the management felt it was their problem more than ours
that the schedule had been wrong. (Note the emphasis; it was not that we
were behind the schedule, it was that the schedule was, empirically, wrong.)

-s

The best place I ever worked was in a small R&D dept run like a
skunkworks. We reported directly to the owner and all other layers of
management eliminated. The most productive place in over 30 years of
design. All went to shit when the owner was persuaded to get in "real"
management. 3 years and the company went from $30m to bust.

--
Dirk

http://www.transcendence.me.uk/ - Transcendence UK
http://www.theconsensus.org/ - A UK political party
http://www.blogtalkradio.com/onetribe - Occult Talk Show

 

[Martin Gregorie]

In some contexts maybe, but golf and cricket clubs had their
"professional" long before anyone thought of developing software. It
isn't the term "professional" that has been bastardised, it's
"Engineer".

That's easy: anybody who isn't a member of a recognised engineering
society should not be called an engineer and should be laughed out of
town if they call themselves one.

 

[Seebs]

That's easy: anybody who isn't a member of a recognised engineering
society should not be called an engineer and should be laughed out of
town if they call themselves one.

This strikes me as the polar opposite of an engineering mindset, which
would be that a thing is what it is, and isn't what it isn't, regardless
of any labels.

-s

 

[James Kanze]

Dirk Bruere at NeoPax wrote:

Given that nearly nobody gives a perfect working environment,
or even close, money is the primary distinguisher. As a
contract worker, I've seen a few dozen IT workplaces. The
grass is never greener. Offer me twice as much compensation
as the other potential employer and my talents are yours to
exploit.

That's completely wrong. The effect of money depends on a lot
of things: someone who's just coming out of an expensive
divorce, heavily endebted, will doubtlessly put more importance
on it that a young, single person who has no debts and is making
enough to comfortably sustain the lifestyle he likes. But
environments do vary, enormously, and unless I'm under duress,
I'll always go for the position which seems to offer the better
environment. (But of course, at my level, even those positions
offer a comfortable level of life. It's generally a question of
being well off, rather than very well off.)

It's not that money is the motivator. The question is leading
and extremely ill cast. I don't depend on anyone else for my
motivation. Money is the decider; it decides whether and
where I work. It doesn't determine how.

I'll refuse jobs that aren't sufficiently paid. But I recently
changed jobs more because I was bored than because I make more
in my new job. (Formally, my income is considerably higher.
But so are my expenses---my living standard is basically
unchanged, or even a little lower than it used to be.)

 

[James Kanze]

[...]
The primary motivation there wasn't the money, it was the
visible demonstration that the management felt it was their
problem more than ours that the schedule had been wrong.
(Note the emphasis; it was not that we were behind the
schedule, it was that the schedule was, empirically, wrong.)

Yes! I think that most people fundamentally like to help
others, in one way or another. And someone saying that they
screwed up, and asking for help, is a strong motivator for most
people. On the other hand, threats almost never work. People
don't work well when they feel threatened.