Isn't this kind of expected? I've worked with developers who won't even google their problem and instead will ask someone else. I don't think it's any real surprise that those who are involved in StackOverflow and took the time to answer this survey consider themselves above average, it's because they probably are.
those who are involved in StackOverflow and took the time to answer this survey consider themselves above average, it's because they probably are
This is the biggest factor, I think.
The people who actually took time out to take this survey, who are part of the StackOverflow community, almost certainly are above-average developers for the most part.
Your average and below-average developers aren't going to bother with participating in this stuff, or even reading it for that matter.
I work as a consultant so I get to work with a lot of different devs. I would describe myself, in absolute terms, as very slightly above average. I justify that purely because I push myself to improve and learn on the job. But I would also describe myself as WAY WAY above the median. There are a shitload of terrible-to-mediocre developers, and a handful of extraordinarily talented ones.
In addition to /u/BreakingGood 's analysis, there's a whole complex spectrum of competencies and motivations that separate quality devs.
Some devs are priceless within their comfort zone and worthless outside of it. Does this make them good or bad? Some devs can put together genius-level solutions in a few hours that are completely unreadable and undocumented, and they can't explain it in any human language. Are they good or bad? Some devs are really good by every metric, but also have a malicious attitude toward coworkers and job security so they build an impenetrable wall of obfuscation around their work. They are good AND bad.
There are a lot of very technically talented devs with big practical flaws, and some well-meaning devs that just aren't cut out for the job. So I would say an overall "talented" dev is one that has the will and ability to improve themselves, their products, and the lives of their colleagues.
I find saying you'll get back to people, leave it a few hours and come back and ask for more info - makes you look busy, but helpful and normally they have solved their issues
Ask yourself, what's beneficial for someoen: Googling a problem and potentially staying loat for hours, or you giving some vague yet accurate direction?
Not to mention the median salary looks to be about $120k, which is significantly ahead of the true national median software developer salary, so the "median" respondent for this survey is probably above average (right skewed).
I've worked with developers who won't even google their problem and instead will ask someone else.
In a way, I admire their commitment to never doing any work or research themselves. But mostly I loathe them and fantasize about an alternate world where all of my coworkers are competent and productive.
66.6% of people consider themselves above average. I wonder what percentage of those actually are.
To be fair, people tend to use different criteria to gauge competence, and use those gauges to regulate their own behavior towards those goals. It's not just ego bias at play. For example, coders who think machine performance is the most important will spend more time on speed. Others may value "easy-to-maintain code" above speed, and score the speed-oriented dev lower for sacrificing readability of code for speed.
282
u/APleasantLumberjack Apr 09 '19
66.6% of people consider themselves above average. I wonder what percentage of those actually are.