Interesting, the programmer/company model you describe is almost exactly how I would describe the Biotech research company model.
Basic and pre-clinical research which includes animal testing are treated exactly the same. These researchers are viewed as 'overhead' even though they are creating future pipelines and products. The fewer resources a company can give to this branch of the company and the quicker these scientists can produce anything close to a product the better overall for the company. Ironically, historically 'basic' research over the last century has actually been the area where science has (arguably) achieved the largest gains.
Similarly, those in Manufacturing/production, for example those making vaccines for people, are viewed as the most valuable employees by upper management.
A friend of mine summed this idea up by saying. Manufacturers of drug substances are the closest to the cash cow. The father one is away from that cash cow the less important you are.
The model is not just tech but maybe any science endeavor when it meets business. lol
That's what happens when CEOs are accountants... Sometimes hired by other accountants (the shareholders & investors) to merely balance the books and cut costs. All those guys see and understand are spreadsheet, business plans, and financial reports.
Sometimes (5% of the time?), a visionnary CEO may convince them to bet on ideas, innovation, research etc. But most of the time they'll stick to the safe route. They'd rather have $1 with 100% certainty than $100 with 1% certainty.
Also the bigger the company, the stronger the effect. Rendering some of them incapable of innovating because of the fear factor and the "what ifs".
So yeah, the farther you are from the "cash cow", the less the value is tangible, both in minds (it's difficult to understand what those shady scientists are up to, we don't understand a word of these devs mumbo-jumbo...) AND in the spreadsheets - they produce derivative value, not actual value, that is to say value whose yield depend on something else.
Interesting, the programmer/company model you describe is almost exactly how I would describe the Biotech research company model.
Basic and pre-clinical research which includes animal testing are treated exactly the same. These researchers are viewed as 'overhead' even though they are creating future pipelines and products. The fewer resources a company can give to this branch of the company and the quicker these scientists can produce anything close to a product the better overall for the company. Ironically, historically 'basic' research over the last century has actually been the area where science has (arguably) achieved the largest gains.
Similarly, those in Manufacturing/production, for example those making vaccines for people, are viewed as the most valuable employees by upper management.
A friend of mine summed this idea up by saying. Manufacturers of drug substances are the closest to the cash cow. The father one is away from that cash cow the less important you are.
The model is not just tech but maybe any science endeavor when it meets business. lol
That's what happens when CEOs are accountants... Sometimes hired by other accountants (the shareholders & investors) to merely balance the books and cut costs. All those guys see and understand are spreadsheet, business plans, and financial reports.
Sometimes (5% of the time?), a visionnary CEO may convince them to bet on ideas, innovation, research etc. But most of the time they'll stick to the safe route. They'd rather have $1 with 100% certainty than $100 with 1% certainty.
Also the bigger the company, the stronger the effect. Rendering some of them incapable of innovating because of the fear factor and the "what ifs".
So yeah, the farther you are from the "cash cow", the less the value is tangible, both in minds (it's difficult to understand what those shady scientists are up to, we don't understand a word of these devs mumbo-jumbo...) AND in the spreadsheets - they produce derivative value, not actual value, that is to say value whose yield depend on something else.
The more things change,
The more things stay the same.
Haha