I read an article by Peter Coffee back in September. And, as I tend to do with most interesting articles, I stowed it away in a seemingly endless stack of papers. Now that I’ve finally gotten to it, I wanted to share it.
Peter points out a strong maturity indicator for IT personnel: the difference between an aficionado and a professional. Everyone knows that, to keep up with IT, you have to do a lot of studying. And, wherever you get this education, it’s a must, if you want to survive in the industry. However, there are two different types of studying, which is what Peter discusses. You can study what’s “cool” or you can study what’s necessary to get your job done. Basically, the difference equates to: What new technologies will help you get your job done more efficiently and effectively? For instance, XML may be the coolest thing on Earth when you consider its flexibility; but, should you convert your relational database to XML? Probably not. So, why are you spending time learning more about it? But, if you’re integrating two or more systems, XML could answer a lot of problems that you have had in the past. It’s up to you to decide what to study up on, and how it fits into your job - now, or in the future. Of course, any education is a good education, but you’ll be more marketable if you’re known as a problem solver than merely an up-to-date techie. My suggestion is to know the basics, but dig down into the technologies that will benefit your current/future projects the most. Peter sums it all up in the last paragraph of the article:
Amateurs do what’s interesting; professionals do what’s crucial. Make your plans accordingly.