Job conditions conflicting with personal principles on software-development - how much is too much?
- by Baelnorn
Sorry for the incoming wall'o'text (and for my probably bad English) but I just need to get this off somehow. I also accept that this question will be probably closed as subjective and argumentative, but I need to know one thing: "how much BS are programmers supposed to put up with before breaking?"
My background
I'm 27 years old and have a B.Sc. in Computer engineering with a graduation grade of 1.8 from a university of applied science. I went looking for a job right after graduation. I got three offers right away, with two offers paying vastly more than the last one, but that last one seemed more interesting so I went for that.
My situation
I've been working for the company now for 17 months now, but it feels like a drag more and more each day. Primarily because the company (which has only 5 other developers but me, and of these I work with 4) turned out to be pretty much the anti-thesis of what I expected (and was taught in university) from a modern software company.
I agreed to accept less than half of the usual payment appropriate for my qualification for the first year because I was promised a trainee program. However, the trainee program turned out to be "here you got a computer, there's some links on the stuff we use, and now do what you colleagues tell you". Further, during my whole time there (trainee or not) I haven't been given the grace of even a single code-review - apparently nobody's interested in my work as long as it "just works".
I was told in the job interview that "Microsoft technology played a central role in the company" yet I've been slowly eroding my congnitive functions with Flex/Actionscript/Cairngorm ever since I started (despite having applied as a C#/.NET developer). Actually, the company's primary projects are based on Java/XSLT and Flex/Actionscript (with some SAP/ABAP stuff here and there but I'm not involved in that) and they've been working on these before I even applied.
Having had no experience either with that particular technology nor the framework nor the field (RIA) nor in developing business scale applications I obviously made several mistakes. However, my boss told me that he let me make those mistakes (which ate at least 2 months of development time on their own) on purpose to provide some "learning experience". Even when I was still a trainee I was already tasked with working on a business-critical application. On my own. Without supervision. Without code-reviews.
My boss thinks agile methods are a waste of time/money and deems putting more than one developer on any project not efficient. Documentation is not necessary and each developer should only document what he himself needs for his work. Recently he wanted us to do bug tracking with Excel and Email instead of using an already existing Bugzilla, overriding an unanimous decision made by all developers and testers involved in the process - only after another senior developer had another hour-long private discussion with him he agreed to let us use the bugtracker.
Project management is basically not present, there are only a few Excel sheets floating around where the senior developer lists some things (not all, mind you) with a time estimate ranging from days to months, trying to at least somehow organize the whole mess. A development process is also basically not present, each developer just works on his own however he wants. There are not even coding conventions in the company. Testing is done manually with a single tester (sometimes two testers) per project because automated testing wasn't given the least thought when the whole project was started. I guess it's not a big surprise when I say that each developer also has his own share of hundreds of overhours (which are, of course, unpaid).
Each developer is tasked with working on his own project(s) which in turn leads to a very extensive knowledge monopolization - if one developer was to have an accident or become ill there would be absolutely no one who could even hope to do his work. Considering that each developer has his own business-critical application to work on, I guess that's a pretty bad situation.
I've been trying to change things for the better. I tried to introduce a development process, but my first attempt was pretty much shot down by my boss with "I don't want to discuss agile methods". After that I put together a process that at least resembled how most of the developers were already working and then include stuff like automated (or at least organized) testing, coding conventions, etc. However, this was also shot down because it wasn't "simple" enought to be shown on a business slide (actually, I wasn't even given the 15 minutes I'd have needed to present the process in the meeting).
My problem
I can't stand working there any longer. Seriously, I consider to resign on monday, which still leaves me with 3 months to work there due to the cancelation period. My primary goal since I started studying computer science was being a good computer scientist, working with modern technologies and adhering to modern and proven principles and methods. However, the company I'm working for seems to make that impossible. Some days I feel as if was living in a perverted real-life version of the Dilbert comics.
My question
Am I overreacting? Is this the reality each graduate from university has to face? Should I betray my sound principles and just accept these working conditions? Or should I gtfo of there? What's the opinion of other developers on this matter. Would you put up with all that stuff?
