> He goes on to explain that because the primary cost in software development is the overhead of coordinating minds, a company is far better off paying for just a few really good programmers than they are 10 times that number of mediocre ones.
If that’s really the primary cost, surely one of the metrics they studied variation in is the coordination cost imposed by the programmer on the company, they didn’t just naively assume the cost was the same but output different, right?
Because it seems like if it does vary, you’d want to minimize it by hiring the easiest to coordinate, and that might offset output differences in sone cases.
If that’s really the primary cost, surely one of the metrics they studied variation in is the coordination cost imposed by the programmer on the company, they didn’t just naively assume the cost was the same but output different, right?
Because it seems like if it does vary, you’d want to minimize it by hiring the easiest to coordinate, and that might offset output differences in sone cases.