I also require interaction with and feedback from the customer. However, a customer can be many things. As long as I'm satisfying someone (end user, team leader, big boss, etc.) then that's enough for me. The interaction itself is the key factor.
As for the feeling of pride and ownership from having a large impact on the system, again it's a matter of focus. You are still creating something, even if it's a smaller piece of the whole.
I long ago realized that I'm a small fish in a big pond. Learning to feel happy about my place in that pond was the only solution.
I guess it all depends, there is a degree of camaraderie that comes with smaller teams and a lesser chance of ego's colliding. I have experienced both and they both have their upsides and downsides. To be honest, while working on a larger team I learned so much from other programmers, you think you know a lot, but someone always knows more.
另一方面，如果团队已经团结起来，那么技术是否过时或者业务问题是否无聊都无关紧要。当您感觉您的同事在同一场战斗中并为您提供支持时，使用 VI 和已有 10 年历史的 beta C++ 编译器开发后台会计系统仍然会令人振奋。当你向别人学习并倾听你的意见时，你就有了一些新的方法可以尝试。当开发人员控制构建/测试/部署过程时，使其保持理智并改善支持团队的生活（和睡眠模式）。当你的同事（和你）总是愿意帮助解决晦涩的语言问题或解决令人抓狂的错误时。不管其他什么，这都是让编程变得有趣和有趣的原因。
It all depends on the team and the egos of the individuals.
When working on a team with ego problems, it doesn't matter how cool the technology is or how much interaction you get with the customers. One bad apple can drain all of the fun out of working on an otherwise cool project.
On the other hand, if the team has gelled, it matters very little if the technology is out-of-date, or the business problem is boring. Working on an back-office accounting system using VI and 10-year-old beta C++ compilers can still be invigorating when you feel like your peers are in the same fight and have your back. When you learn from others and are listened to when you have some new approach to try. When the developers control the build/test/deploy process so that it's sane and improves the lives (and sleep patterns) of the support team. When your peers (and you them) are always willing to help with an obscure language issue or work through a maddening bug. That what makes programming fun and interesting regardless of everything else.
我确实有一个问题，你所说的大是什么意思？一个项目有 50 人的团队会很大吗？还是说1000个就比较大了？在一个层面上，我要求的是规模，因为如果你想了解在 Office 和 Windows 等 Microsoft 大型产品上工作的所有开发人员，就会有超出规模的团队，而在另一端则是从事此类工作的单人开发团队。这一切。
You may want to consider changing companies back to a smaller company where you had a broader set of responsiblities, for one idea. Also, what are changes in the process that would help with the points you don't like?
I do have the question of what you mean by large here? Would a team of 50 people in a project be large? Or is it more like 1,000 to be large? On one level I'm asking for scale as there are teams beyond large if one wants to look at all the developers that work on Microsoft's big products like Office and Windows while at the other end of the spectrum are the one person development teams that do it all.
I'd second Kelly's answer that it depends on the team and egos for another big factor in things. What do you consider fun? Is it finding more efficient ways to solve problems that have poor solutions? Is it conquering a Millenium puzzle? Or is seeing someone smile while using your software what makes it fun? Lots of different possible answers and while I can make suggestions, how good or bad they are is totally for you to interpret.
I don't think you're alone in disliking how as a company matures the process can change as new people in various roles are added with increased bureaucracy and losing agility as it may take more signatures to get a change to be allowed or developers lose that touch to the customer of their product. There is a spectrum of various ways to produce software and some places may have less process in place and be focusing on "just make it work" while other places may want the process to be much more formal and organized with 1,001 policies for every little thing. At which end do you want to be working?
To answer the question as it's asked in the title: No!
I feel very similar and talked to many others who think the same. From my experience small teams are much more fun to work with and by that (and some other reasons) they're much more effective.
发布评论
评论（6）
我还需要与客户互动并获得反馈。客户。然而，客户可以有多种含义。只要我能让某人（最终用户、团队领导、大老板等）满意，那么对我来说就足够了。交互本身是关键因素。
至于对系统产生巨大影响所带来的自豪感和主人翁感，这又是一个焦点问题。你仍然在创造一些东西，即使它只是整体的一小部分。
我很久以前就意识到我是大池塘里的一条小鱼。学会对我在那个池塘里的位置感到高兴是唯一的解决办法。
IOW，这都是相对的！
I also require interaction with and feedback from the customer. However, a customer can be many things. As long as I'm satisfying someone (end user, team leader, big boss, etc.) then that's enough for me. The interaction itself is the key factor.
As for the feeling of pride and ownership from having a large impact on the system, again it's a matter of focus. You are still creating something, even if it's a smaller piece of the whole.
I long ago realized that I'm a small fish in a big pond. Learning to feel happy about my place in that pond was the only solution.
IOW, it's all relative!
我想这一切都取决于，较小的团队会带来一定程度的友情，而且自我冲突的可能性也较小。我经历过这两种情况，它们都有优点和缺点。说实话，在一个更大的团队工作时，我从其他程序员那里学到了很多东西，你认为你知道很多，但总有人知道更多。
I guess it all depends, there is a degree of camaraderie that comes with smaller teams and a lesser chance of ego's colliding. I have experienced both and they both have their upsides and downsides. To be honest, while working on a larger team I learned so much from other programmers, you think you know a lot, but someone always knows more.
这一切都取决于团队和个人的自我意识。
当在一个有自我问题的团队中工作时，技术有多酷或者与客户进行多少互动并不重要。一个坏苹果可能会让一个很酷的项目失去所有的乐趣。
另一方面，如果团队已经团结起来，那么技术是否过时或者业务问题是否无聊都无关紧要。当您感觉您的同事在同一场战斗中并为您提供支持时，使用 VI 和已有 10 年历史的 beta C++ 编译器开发后台会计系统仍然会令人振奋。当你向别人学习并倾听你的意见时，你就有了一些新的方法可以尝试。当开发人员控制构建/测试/部署过程时，使其保持理智并改善支持团队的生活（和睡眠模式）。当你的同事（和你）总是愿意帮助解决晦涩的语言问题或解决令人抓狂的错误时。不管其他什么，这都是让编程变得有趣和有趣的原因。
It all depends on the team and the egos of the individuals.
When working on a team with ego problems, it doesn't matter how cool the technology is or how much interaction you get with the customers. One bad apple can drain all of the fun out of working on an otherwise cool project.
On the other hand, if the team has gelled, it matters very little if the technology is out-of-date, or the business problem is boring. Working on an back-office accounting system using VI and 10-year-old beta C++ compilers can still be invigorating when you feel like your peers are in the same fight and have your back. When you learn from others and are listened to when you have some new approach to try. When the developers control the build/test/deploy process so that it's sane and improves the lives (and sleep patterns) of the support team. When your peers (and you them) are always willing to help with an obscure language issue or work through a maddening bug. That what makes programming fun and interesting regardless of everything else.
出于一个想法，您可能需要考虑将公司改回一家较小的公司，在那里您有更广泛的职责。另外，流程中的哪些变化有助于解决您不喜欢的问题？
我确实有一个问题，你所说的大是什么意思？一个项目有 50 人的团队会很大吗？还是说1000个就比较大了？在一个层面上，我要求的是规模，因为如果你想了解在 Office 和 Windows 等 Microsoft 大型产品上工作的所有开发人员，就会有超出规模的团队，而在另一端则是从事此类工作的单人开发团队。这一切。
我赞同凯利的回答，即这取决于团队和自我意识，这是事情的另一个重要因素。你认为什么有趣？是否正在寻找更有效的方法来解决解决方案不佳的问题？它是否正在征服千年难题？或者在使用您的软件时看到某人微笑是否会带来乐趣？有很多不同的可能答案，虽然我可以提出建议，但它们的好坏完全由你来解释。
我不认为只有你一个人不喜欢随着公司的成熟，随着不同角色的新人的加入，官僚主义的增加和灵活性的丧失，流程会发生变化，因为可能需要更多的签名才能允许更改，否则开发人员会失去触动其产品的客户。生产软件的方法有很多种，有些地方的流程可能较少，并专注于“让它发挥作用”，而其他地方可能希望流程更加正式，并为每件小事制定 1,001 条政策。 。你想在哪方面工作？
You may want to consider changing companies back to a smaller company where you had a broader set of responsiblities, for one idea. Also, what are changes in the process that would help with the points you don't like?
I do have the question of what you mean by large here? Would a team of 50 people in a project be large? Or is it more like 1,000 to be large? On one level I'm asking for scale as there are teams beyond large if one wants to look at all the developers that work on Microsoft's big products like Office and Windows while at the other end of the spectrum are the one person development teams that do it all.
I'd second Kelly's answer that it depends on the team and egos for another big factor in things. What do you consider fun? Is it finding more efficient ways to solve problems that have poor solutions? Is it conquering a Millenium puzzle? Or is seeing someone smile while using your software what makes it fun? Lots of different possible answers and while I can make suggestions, how good or bad they are is totally for you to interpret.
I don't think you're alone in disliking how as a company matures the process can change as new people in various roles are added with increased bureaucracy and losing agility as it may take more signatures to get a change to be allowed or developers lose that touch to the customer of their product. There is a spectrum of various ways to produce software and some places may have less process in place and be focusing on "just make it work" while other places may want the process to be much more formal and organized with 1,001 policies for every little thing. At which end do you want to be working?
回答标题中提出的问题：不！
我的感觉很相似，也和很多有同样想法的人交谈过。根据我的经验，小团队合作起来更有趣，因此（以及其他一些原因）他们的效率更高。
To answer the question as it's asked in the title: No!
I feel very similar and talked to many others who think the same. From my experience small teams are much more fun to work with and by that (and some other reasons) they're much more effective.
感谢大家提供有趣且有价值的答案（以及纠正语法和拼写:-)
你们给了我一些需要思考的要点：
Thank you all for your interesting and valuable answers (and for correcting grammar and spelling :-)
You gave me some big points to think about: