I was perusing some older conversations here and one in particular caught my eye. It evolved into discussion about finding a technical lead or functional equivalent who would, to the best of my understanding, bridge and help orchestrate the different developer teams in Status.
What was interesting (from a candidate’s perspective), was the fact that someone internally could volunteer for the role before seeking outside talent.
This was nice to read, because I hadn’t run across much discussion in the Status-sphere about mobility within the organization.
Are the roles delineated somewhat fluidly or is the delineation normally pretty rigid? (I would intuitively expect the more technical the role the less fluid it would be.)
I suppose I’m asking, in part, because a few of the currently open positions seem somewhat complementary and I was curious about overlap and/or who handles the work of the unfilled roles before they are filled.
Are the roles delineated somewhat fluidly or is the delineation normally pretty rigid?
This is a startup dude, there’s not many things you could call “rigid” here. Everyone does everything they can be bothered to do and know how to. This is especially true in the technical positions. I’m the sysadmin, but I do a hundred other things not directly related to infrastructure, because I either wanted them done or though they were interesting.
For example, I made this library for converting Status chat keys to chat names:
It wasn’t my responsibility, but I though it would be nice to have. There are many other things like that that I - and others - do in the company too. Of course we have clear organizational goals, but what we build requires a lot of different things to work in consort. Not all of them have to be delegated to a specific person to get done =].