Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Why Student Programmers Rant about Business Students with “Ideas”
(as inspired by this and my pledge to positively contribute thoughtful ideas with less ranting)
I understand the frustration that engineering students and fledgling programmers feel when they first experience petitions from business students with startup ideas because I’ve felt that frustration myself. It’s a social struggle for status and identity which intrinsically favors business student. The engineering student is learning that their hard work in school does not entitle him to recognition and respect, and the business student is learning that he has no means to create anything alone. So the engineer seeks somebody to reward him, and the business student seeks somebody to reward —to create greater value for himself. As students are products school, the dynamic resembles school. Once again, the student programmer will work unhealthily hard to earn a reward imposed by others (like honor students), and the business student will work less but be respected more by capitalizing on his identity as a “social leader” (like football players).
Further, as business students almost always initiate the engagement, they lead relationship dynamic —to be in their favor. Often, the justification is that because the business student approached the programmer, the programmer works for the business student. This is called “having the idea,” but in practice, a startup idea is merely a decision to execute, not an idea of intrinsic value. [1] Leadership and the ability to make decisions is valuable, but only in groups with realizable ability to execute. Leadership of zero people is like division by zero: it’s undefined. Leadership of one people is like 1/1: two people to produce a one functional person. A 1 leader / 1 follower works for an Olympic gymnast and her coach, but in a startup, it’s a frustrating waste.
Since the business student needs the programmer, why doesn’t the programmer demand control of the engagement like, for example, an investor? Because the business student sets the initial expectations of the relationship, and changing those expectations may be very difficult or impossible for the programmer. For example, assume the business student suggests 10% equity for the programmer. To counter with 90% has been maneuvered to be too aggressive and would kill the deal. Even ambitious programmers will probably counter with 50%/50% (”fair”) and then compromise down to close. But even if a deal is reached, the programmer will feel offended and abused if they first thought that they deserved the better share.
Why don’t programmers approach business people to pay them to contribute their ideas? They do, for patent licenses, for example. But if my hypothesis is correct —that most startup ideas are merely decisions to execute rather than ideas of intrinsic value— then who would pay for a decision to execute? Nobody would unless they were convinced by others that they cannot make their own decisions. And to be convinced of that, I can see, is frustrating.
Programmers have a status inferiority complex, and ambitious engineering students feel entitled for respect for their “sacrifices” in school and esoteric technical skills —an expectation rarely socially realized outside of a geeky clique. The truth is that “engineer” and “programmer” are not high social status identities (they’re for “nerds”)[2]. Compounded by the introverted, intelligent, yet naive tendencies of engineering students, programmers may intellectually recognize that they are valuable yet do not command the respect they feel they deserve. Unfortunately, they have little ability to positively confront this frustration. So these humiliated ambitious programmers vent their frustration with violent outbursts against higher status people (business people) or retreat to status-supplements like video games like World of Warcraft. This dynamic may be intrinsic to being human, but it’s still unpleasant to be at the bottom of it.
Many business students are aggressive and gregarious, many programmers are socially awkward, and most inflammatory, the business student has no money to pay the programmer. So not only is the business student equipped to abuse, not only is the programmer equipped to be abused, but the situation forces business student to try to get more work for less. He can’t afford better behavior. [3]
Traditionally, when programmers contribute their programming skills to a business, it’s called “employment.” This is the cultural norm. So business students, despite paying less, try to mimic the employee-boss relationship model like how young girls try to mimic their parent’s dinner conversations with dolls. To them, that’s what “business” is. Programmers ambitious enough to want to start a startup will resent being treated like an employee, even if they’re called a “founder” and have an equity stake. Proud but resentful becomes humiliated, and humiliated becomes irrational and violent. Hence, a violent and socially destructive programmer rant explodes onto a blog.
[1] An idea like “let’s make a Facebook application about X (in March 2008)!” could lead to the realization of that idea which can be valuable (and thus the idea itself is valuable, since it initiated the effort), but such an idea by itself seems to have about a “n/0″ value, like a leader with no followers or a donut hole without a donut. …or maybe a “n/0 + n” value.[2] Is programming and engineering lower status that business? A programmer will try learn business, but a business man will avoid learning programming. Or, successful tech entrepreneurs with a programming background become “business people,” but successful tech entrepreneurs with a business background never become “programmers.” (both groups, if unsuccessful, become “technologists.”)
Note: “trying to” is not a sufficient condition for “succeeding at.”
[3] While gregarious programmers and awkward business people exist, the model is the other way. Claiming a counter example to a generality is not relevant to this essay, particularly since I assume such a dynamic would not produce the typical student programmer rant. Yes, it’s an unfortunate stereotype, and if I could discuss it without perpetuating it, I would. But unpleasantness doesn’t make a stereotype baseless.
