Programming is expensive in both time and money. I try to look for solutions where programming is needed as little as possible. Solutions like that are infinitely more expensive in the short term but are quicker to implement and shorter in the long term in general.

There just aren’t enough Logtars around.

BTW : Artists stereotype is : We know what looks cool, we like Siouxsie & the Banshee’s as well as having an extensive collection of The Smiths & Bauhaus. We like Helvetica & can’t stand PC’s. Porn is Art as long as it’s in Black & White or Sepia Tone.

But you are correct that there needs to be “someone in the middle” like a Systems Analyst or a Project Manager to facilitate clear communication and to buffer the B.S.

The good developers try to really get in touch with their customers. In larger companies there is often a disconnect between developers and customers. I understand that customers shouldn’t necessarily be able to directly contact the developers—productivity would be lost, and there is definitely value in having someone in the middle to manage tasks. On the other hand, I strongly believe that developers should be able to get in touch with customers very easily. They need to see exactly how the customer works, what is expected, why such-and-such interface makes sense, and really get a sense of how the end product will be used. Only then can the developer go and truly build something great…

In my experience, the business people get involved in details that really shouldn’t. If they need xyz data displayed, they shouldn’t be telling me how to write the SQL statement to pull it.

If companies could actually execute what you said, “The consensus should be that a set of clear, complete specifications should be provided, and feature-creep and moving-target syndrome should be avoided as much as possible.”, then that would be almost the whole battle!! I don’t think I’ve actually seen a complete spec in my life. But that is more managements fault I think because when the spec is written and the application is delivered, the spec writers always come back and say, well of course I need this, this and this too! Duh! How did you not know that, dumb IT people! =)

What you are talking about was one of the reasons that I hate the term black box. While in big development shops it is necessary for people to be able to compartmentalize development and just worry about the links, it is almost impossible to do in smaller shops where nobody is responsible for cohesiveness. I don’t get why our industry started falling in love with a term that is used to described the only thing recoverable from a tragedy.

I am not a code monkey, but can say that arrogance is not restricted to programming types. In a big enough company you have one or two from every technical department that gave them a bad rep to the rest of the company.

People close of their minds about something, and then withdraw from meaningful communication on the topic. This makes the project many times more difficult, and many times less likely to satisfy anybody involved.

As a Systems Analyst with 20+ years in the business, I’ve made a few observations. The “programmer arrogance” you describe is quite real. As is the willfull, almost joyfull embrace of technological ignorance by the business folks who pay the bills.

They don’t want to know how the sausage is made. Just make it taste “like this”.

I have found that some of the very best programmers are very detail oriented and very literal. The “thing” is this or it’s that. The answer is yes or no. The switch is on or its off. They are binary people. Thats what makes them so good at talking to machines.

The business people tend to be “fuzzy” people. Everything is nuanced. Everything is a shade of gray.

This is why business folk and technical folk don’t communicate very well. They speak different languages.

That is where people like me come in. My job is to take the unicorn and rainbow dreams and wishes of business folk, and translate them into the switch position functionality and requirements that the technical folk can actually use to code.

I know this is a long comment, but a quick story before I go.

There was a bank whose first foray into the online world was to automate a loan application.

A brilliant programmer said “I can do that. That’s easy! Just give me a copy of the form and turn me loose”.

Which they did.

Some time later, the programmer proudly unveiled his automated loan application.

The very first question on the form, before even asking for the customer’s name, address, employment, etc. was this:

“Have you ever declared bankruptcy?”

From the programmer’s “logical” perspective, this was the most efficient path. If the answer was “Yes”, no further information needed to be collected or stored. End of loop.

But from a business perspective…absolute crap.

The business folk may not always know what they want. But programmers (without guidance) often give the customer exactly what they ask for instead of what they need.

OK, I’m done.

Our company’s problem always seemed to stem from developers mistakingly thinking that they are industry experts. Ouch.

Good post