There is a latent belief in programming that the best programmer is N times more effective than the worst. Where N is usually between 10 and 100.

Here are some examples:

• http://www.devtopics.com/programmer-productivity-the-tenfinity-factor/
• http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/HighNotes.html
• http://haacked.com/archive/2007/06/25/understanding-productivity-differences-between-developers.aspx

There is some debate as to whether or not it's been proven: http://morendil.github.com/folklore.html

I'm confident in the accuracy of these statements:

• The best salesmen in the world are probably 10-100 times better than the worst
• The best drivers in the world are probably 10-100 times better than the worst
• The best soccer players in the world are probably 10-100 times better than the worst
• The best CEOs in the world are probably 10-100 times better than the worst

In some cases, I'm sure the difference is greater. In fact, you could probably say that

The best [insert any skilled profession here] in the world are probably 10-100 times better than the worst

We don't know what N is for the rest of these professions, so why concern ourselves with what the actual number is for programming?

Can we not just say that the number is large enough so that it's very important to hire the best people and move on already?