Archive for the ‘Research’ Category

Evolution of a Coder, Developer, Technologist in a Given Technology or Coding Cycle!

Tuesday, December 11th, 2012

Inspired by a tweet by Vivek Wadhwa -

“What’s the shelf life of a techie? Just 15 years http://bit.ly/TRT8A5 — Good advice from India. Applies here also”

and by drawing on Dr. Clayton Christensen‘s work on disruptive innovation for companies/businesses, here are my thoughts.

This is article is spot on – without really qualifying the “5 years” as the period, a techie/developer has to evolve to the next stage of their career or risk being “irrelevant” in tech industry completely.

Note: In this post I am treating Language & Technology as one and the same even they are not. Both languages and technologies go through similar cycles;

If you take a slice of the talent pool at starting of this 5+5+5 cycle, and study how their careers are evolving in the next 15 years, one will find many interesting trends that validate some of my assumptions I published in this post.

At the start of cycle, qualifications for entering and picking a new technology or programming language is much lower and new graduates are willing to jump in for few reasons. There is less competition, less compensation and less expectation of quality.

Forces impact Coder / Developer’s ability to enter, learn & thrive coding languages and technologies

During the middle of the cycle, once the technology/programming language starts to mature, more and more people enter the foray, comp inflation creeps in and higher barriers for new entrants to enter into the space as early adopters become incumbents and experts. This is the hardest phase/cycle for fresh graduates and inexperienced professionals to enter in the cycle. So, either they struggle to get into the current coding cycle or try to look out for a technology cycle that is just about to start or completely abandon the developer world and pursue managerial & other adjacent careers.

Professionals who are in the 3rd phase of their current cycle (10 to 15 years), will inadvertently become irrelevant to enter into the new cycle either in Phase 1 or Phase 2 for various reasons. To enter in Phase 1, its too beneath their compensation expectation or visibility. Also, their age, family and financial constraints create additional barriers for them. To enter Phase 2 of the new cycle, these people have to compete with incumbents who entered in Phase 1 of this new cycle. So the challenge for people who are in Phase 3 of their career is they either have to either be at Executive level who can leverage their financial and social capital to continue to generate value for themselves or fall of the cliff to go into other verticals like real estate investments, venture capital, advisory services, etc.

So, for each individual, the best choice to enter into a particular Tech Cycle is not only based on timing but also their individual constraints – age, financial expectations, burn rate, social/family pressures and fundamental aptitude to be good at programming/technology leadership. So, it is a very subjective decision for each of us to enter, stay, thrive or stay away in any particular tech cycle.

Entry Level Candidates:

While it is tempting to enter into maturing technologies (cycle 2/phase 2) as there are many opportunities and also attractive compensation trends, it is best for them to enter into brand new technology cycles/new entrants. This allows for them to dictate the future of the emerging technologies; also make them incumbents when these new entrant coding languages/technologies become mature/established technologies. There is also huge risk for new grads to bet on unproven technologies and coding languages. If they end up entering into unproven coding languages that don’t take off, they not only are stuck in their career path but also missed out on other proven & successful languages/technologies (Phase 1 technologies) but also current mature languages/opportunities (Phase 2 technologies) where despite competition and compensation pressure opportunities still exists.

Mid Level Candidates:

Ideal situation for coders/developers is to become incumbents in a coding language by the time that language is in its cycle 2/phase 2 of its existence. They are able to command higher compensation despite high competition from entry level candidates. People who have natural aptitude for coding and programmering could try to hedge in the current Cycle 2 programming language as well as keep a close eye on newer languages that are in their cycle 1. In the language that is in cycle 2, assuming they have gained expertise, mid level candidates can thrive and command higher compensation and visibility.

Experienced Level Candidates:

These candidates have the greatest potential or greatest risk based on their expertise, knowledge and visibility in a particular coding language or technology. If these individuals grew with the language from its cycle 1, their potential to thrive is huge. If not, there is a risk of these professionals becoming irrelevant.

In the age of automation, how relevant is SpellingBee for the future generation?

Friday, January 15th, 2010

SpellingBee – A tradition that started somewhere around 1875 as fun and friendly exercise is becoming irrelevant in the information age by the minute. I got that realization when my 9 year old nephew didn’t have to know the exact spelling to a word while typing his school home work in Microsoft Word.

So, is the SpellingBee

spelling bee

heading into a Web …..biting the dust?

deadbee

Over the decades until 1980s, with heavy use of Typewriters and less intelligent early computers, spelling accurately carried its cache. In the age we live in with teens spending 80% to 90% of their writing either on a computer or on a cell phone/text, how relevant is Spelling for the next generations? I proved my case if you know these acronyms – LOL, JK, TC, TXT or these emoticons – ;) , :( and so forth …..

Unlike the title suggests, the issue at hand is much larger than Irrelevant SpellingBee …..

Over the years, in the civilized world, we have dropped few habits and picked up some newer ones -

For example …..

During the early days of Automobile, drivers mentally calculated the distance they were traveling and made sure there is a gas station (near by) or have enough gas for their trip. Today, we get an alert in our dash board when we have 1/4th tank.

We used to manage our circadian rhythms to wake ourselves in the morning and now depend on Alarm clocks.

I used to remember all the phone numbers of my friends and family. Today, I need to look up my address book even for my own number, sometimes.

While driving I don’t have to remember which way I go to my destination. My GPS takes me where ever I want and brings me back home.

This generation has lesser physical activities than the previous generation – as part of their day to day routine.

We live an age of abundance and automation. We can get away giving less work for our brain to get through our day than ever before. While some of us are making use of that unused brain power for more complex thinking where as most of us relish the opportunity not to use the brain power at all.

The issue is not how much of memory or brain power we use but how we use it and what are the long term physiological and biological implications of that change. For example, what part of our brain or memory do we use when we remember and retrieve phone numbers and directions? Would that activity be replaced with something else to keep those parts of the brain active and sharp? In the book Think Smart author Richard Restak suggests that all parts our brain need regular exercise to avoid neurological and other ailments at later stages of our life.

Just the way current generation Gyms and Workout franchises have made their way to get us into shape, should we have clinics and gyms for training and keeping our brain and its parts active?

physical-labor-copy

to

women-computer

to

effw circuit women in gym

Just the way Physical labor (where you get paid for physical activities) replaced by Gyms (where you pay to get physical activities) in the desktop age, are we to see businesses where we pay to use our brain and keep our memory sharp in the near future?

I think governments, universities and educational institutions should collaborate with citizens to refine and redefine school curriculum based changing market needs – on a 3 to 5 year basis.

I will leave with you a fascinating talk by Ken Robinson who talks about a complete overhaul of our current education system at TED Conference.

—–

@Vsistla

Opinions expressed are mine own