Great post. Approached from an angle not often taken here.
Oddly, you said one thing that just didn't sit well with me. I re-read it several times trying to figure out why I was so uncomfortable with it:
Claude Shannon didn't have to satisfy any customers. He could spend years developing a theory, whose practical value was only clear after it was sufficiently developed.
This is exactly the opposite of my thinking. I've been in academia and in the trenches. I prefer the trenches.
Where I come from you don't have anything until you're able to satisfy customers. Building theories, tools, and new approaches is great, so great, in fact, that some of the best breakthroughs I've ever seen were because a customer demanded something people like us never imagined or thought possible.
I love satisfying customers with whatever I have in my back pocket. And lots of that stuff was developed by the giants whose shoulders I stand on. I always imagined that they were satisfying their own customers, but I guess quite a few of them were just doing "basic research".
You reminded us that there needs to be room for both the "trench warrior" and the "dreamer". When you're building a team, you need to decide who would be better for the role at hand and approach the recruiting accordingly.
Not relevant to the "hiring process" discussion, but I think the idea that:
Claude Shannon didn't have to satisfy any customers. He could spend years developing a theory, whose practical value was only clear after it was sufficiently developed
is historically wrong; certainly reading the wikipedia page on Shannon makes it sound like he developed his ideas while doing quite practical work during WW II.
Someone please correct me if my impression is incorrect.
With respect, isn't it normal to start with something less than would satisfy customers?
I think the difference you're describing is in direction, not position. On the side you prefer, you figure out what someone wants, and heads toward that. On the other, you head towards something you want or feel like doing. I assume you've found the right project for you when the sides are the same.
Comments
Great post. Approached from an angle not often taken here.
Oddly, you said one thing that just didn't sit well with me. I re-read it several times trying to figure out why I was so uncomfortable with it:
Claude Shannon didn't have to satisfy any customers. He could spend years developing a theory, whose practical value was only clear after it was sufficiently developed.
This is exactly the opposite of my thinking. I've been in academia and in the trenches. I prefer the trenches.
Where I come from you don't have anything until you're able to satisfy customers. Building theories, tools, and new approaches is great, so great, in fact, that some of the best breakthroughs I've ever seen were because a customer demanded something people like us never imagined or thought possible.
I love satisfying customers with whatever I have in my back pocket. And lots of that stuff was developed by the giants whose shoulders I stand on. I always imagined that they were satisfying their own customers, but I guess quite a few of them were just doing "basic research".
You reminded us that there needs to be room for both the "trench warrior" and the "dreamer". When you're building a team, you need to decide who would be better for the role at hand and approach the recruiting accordingly.
Not relevant to the "hiring process" discussion, but I think the idea that:
Claude Shannon didn't have to satisfy any customers. He could spend years developing a theory, whose practical value was only clear after it was sufficiently developed
is historically wrong; certainly reading the wikipedia page on Shannon makes it sound like he developed his ideas while doing quite practical work during WW II.
Someone please correct me if my impression is incorrect.
With respect, isn't it normal to start with something less than would satisfy customers?
I think the difference you're describing is in direction, not position. On the side you prefer, you figure out what someone wants, and heads toward that. On the other, you head towards something you want or feel like doing. I assume you've found the right project for you when the sides are the same.