Normal Users
Mithra Mayadunne | | Kasun Senanayake | N.P. Ruwanpathirana | Andruw Arafuz | | | Yarui Nokalaya | Lakshani Weragama | Rocky Rozal | Piranik Goya | kusal Jayarathna | Janahitha Kumara | Pasan Milinda | Saumya Sooriyaarachchi | S.D.Sanath Kapila Kumara | Ranil Algama | Dhammika Walisundara | Sujeewa Suraveera | Wumekhala liyanage | Test Test | bong jia yin | cuggiple cuggiple | Cheege Cheege | vashex vashex | though though | CrogPoot CrogPoot | LaparerE LaparerE | enlarne enlarne | outwax outwax | Storie Storie | Reibefen Reibefen | Uploade Uploade | Idiops Idiops | enrothe enrothe | VopsypE VopsypE | unionsew unionsew | doolous doolous | nelowila nelowila | fewbrorm fewbrorm | Butbaby Butbaby | Autoff Autoff | PoibJozy PoibJozy | Opimige Opimige | Atrophy Atrophy | Bersecip Bersecip | BoumbTor BoumbTor | accums accums | invask invask | unenrept unenrept | Heetstuh Heetstuh | erucky erucky | Smesetus Smesetus | daliale daliale | enrony enrony | Offews Offews | Adable Adable |

Company Users
t | m | b | job | Medsource | edirectsl | pranalinimesha91@gmail.com | Rasika | Rasika2512 | Anderio | testcom | prasadmaduraww@gmail.com | mic bong | Aasperon |

WellCome To CV eBook.


Good Developer, Bad Developer
Good developer is an artist, a craftsman who enjoys the process of creation. Bad developer considers himself as a programmer, responsible for generating lines of code.

Good developer understands the problems of the customers. Bad developer understands only the technical problem at hand. Good developer does not define the why, but constantly strives to understand why. He's responsible for the how, and still sees the big picture. Bad developer is focused on building classes and methods and configuration files, but does not get the big picture.

Good developer understands the complete architecture of the product. Bad developer knows only the components he's written. Good developer fully understands the technologies that are used within the product. He understands what they are used for, and how they work internally.

Good developer is not afraid of new technologies but embraces them by quickly getting a grip. Bad developer only sticks to what he knows. His immediate reaction to any technical change is negative.

Good developer is constantly learning and improving his skills. Good developer reads technical articles, and finishes several technical books a year. Bad developer does not have time to learn. He's always too busy with other stuff.

Good developer cares about the product quality. He is also very much concerned with the process quality. Good developer pushes himself to create bug-free code; bad developer leaves it to QA to find bugs to fix.

Good developer develops features which create value for customers. Bad developer completes tasks. Good developer will never claim the requirements are incomplete, and will make sure to fully understand the features he's working on. Bad developer will wait until the finest details are available. To emphasize: good developer is the CEO of the feature - he is going to make sure he always has the information needed to accomplish the feature, and in case information is missing he'll make sure he gets it.

Good developer is not afraid to go into anyone's code. Bad developer is afraid of others looking into his. Good developer understands that it shouldn't take more time to write self-explanatory and well-documented code. Bad developer always needs to allocate extra time to document and simplify.

Good developer will never feel his code is good enough, and will always continue to clean and fix. Good developer always strives to create elegant solutions but understands that his job is to deliver value to customers. Bad developer thinks only about the elegance of his code and leave the job of delivering value to others.

And finally its managers duty to train the right people to have the right mindset to be a good developer.
A company is a community, not a machine.
Average bosses consider their company to be a machine with employees as cogs. They create rigid structures with rigid rules and then try to maintain control by "pulling levers" and "steering the ship." Extraordinary bosses see their company as a collection of individual hopes and dreams, all connected to a higher purpose. They inspire employees to dedicate themselves to the success of their peers and therefore to the community and company at large.
Management is service, not control.
Average bosses want employees to do exactly what they're told. They're hyper-aware of anything that smacks of insubordination and create environments where individual initiative is squelched by the "wait and see what the boss says" mentality. Extraordinary bosses set a general direction and then commit themselves to obtaining the resources that their employees need to get the job done. They push decision making downward, allowing teams form their own rules and intervening only in emergencies.
My employees are my peers, not my children.
Average bosses see employees as inferior, immature beings who simply can't be trusted if not overseen by a patriarchal management. Employees take their cues from this attitude, expend energy on looking busy and covering their behinds. Extraordinary bosses treat every employee as if he or she were the most important person in the firm. Excellence is expected everywhere, from the loading dock to the boardroom. As a result, employees at all levels take charge of their own destinies.
Motivation comes from vision, not from fear.
Average bosses see fear--of getting fired, of ridicule, of loss of privilege--as a crucial way to motivate people. As a result, employees and managers alike become paralyzed and unable to make risky decisions. Extraordinary bosses inspire people to see a better future and how they'll be a part of it. As a result, employees work harder because they believe in the organization's goals, truly enjoy what they're doing and (of course) know they'll share in the rewards.
Technology offers empowerment, not automation.
Average bosses adhere to the old IT-centric view that technology is primarily a way to strengthen management control and increase predictability. They install centralized computer systems that dehumanize and antagonize employees. Extraordinary bosses see technology as a way to free human beings to be creative and to build better relationships. They adapt their back-office systems to the tools, like smartphones and tablets, that people actually want to use.
Work should be fun, not mere toil.
Average bosses buy into the notion that work is, at best, a necessary evil. They fully expect employees to resent having to work, and therefore tend to subconsciously define themselves as oppressors and their employees as victims. Everyone then behaves accordingly. Extraordinary bosses see work as something that should be inherently enjoyable and believe therefore that the most important job of manager is, as far as possible, to put people in jobs that can and will make them truly happy.
Change equals growth, not pain.
Average bosses see change as both complicated and threatening, something to be endured only when a firm is in desperate shape. They subconsciously torpedo change ... until it's too late. Extraordinary bosses see change as an inevitable part of life. While they don't value change for its own sake, they know that success is only possible if employees and organization embrace new ideas and new ways of doing business.
Business is an ecosystem, not a battlefield.
Average bosses see business as a conflict between companies, departments and groups. They build huge armies of "troops" to order about, demonize competitors as "enemies," and treat customers as "territory" to be conquered. Extraordinary bosses see business as a symbiosis where the most diverse firm is most likely to survive and thrive. They naturally create teams that adapt easily to new markets and can quickly form partnerships with other companies, customers ... and even competitors.