The breakthrough of technical development bottleneck of technician itself

Http://jandan.net/2014/03/23/programming-languages.html to see a problem, quite representative significance, that is, the technical development of technology bottlenecks in the breakthrough problem.

Specific problems, usually, the technical staff in a certain area of work 3-5 years later, will become a team or the company's core technical backbone, this time they will face several problems:

the puzzle of technical learning:When reaching a bottleneck, you can learn less reference system, first of all because the high-end technical personnel present inverted pyramid form, around the lack of guidance for your life, and secondly, the industry's technical exchanges, most in doing science and brush the existence of sense, After reaching a certain stage, the role of personal promotion is becoming smaller (even with one day of participation in the technical conference is not as good as a day in the coffee shop to study); Thirdly, the domestic culture leads to technical experts gradually turn to management positions, technology lacks accumulation, especially prone to fault and inheritance.

technical depth and breadth of the choice of confusion:Technical depth of further upgrading, can gradually do the industry Daniel, the professional skills are increasingly strong, the breadth of extension is also more easily programmable full stack technical personnel, both have pros and cons, personal time and Energy Limited, how to choose?

Technical direction of confusion:Large-scale Internet company's technical framework is basically in the initial selection of the establishment, with the business planning at the time, the industry at the time of the technology trend, the accumulation of personal experience, mature large-scale business from the stability considerations, general technology selection backward technology 2, 3 years, for technical personnel, from the actual work to consider the need to use old technology, But trends in the industry are moving in the direction of new technologies.

================================================================

This confusion believes that a lot of technical personnel and technical managers are present, including myself, of course, this confusion itself is in line with the learning curve law, that is, any technology learning and practice, the more time to study in the back, the more slowly their ability to ascend. But often really can insist and focus, can withstand loneliness until the change to qualitative change of the moment, is a list of the new state of the mountain small.

For the three points of confusion mentioned above, consider the following briefly:

One , the perplexity of technical learning, any new technology or knowledge point of learning, in the current Internet and information so developed, as long as you are interested in finding the relevant learning materials to self-learning, interest is often the first driving point. But the crux of the problem is how to deepen the new technology after learning, how to practice the new technology? No real practice summary, no real large-scale project actual combat drive, you will find that theory is ultimately a theory, the theory to transform into your actual combat experience is quite difficult.

If there is no real opportunity to learn a new technology, then it is difficult for you to truly maintain a long-term interest, to be familiar or to know that it is good, and to be truly proficient or understanding. A lot of technology in-depth learning is often in practice in the real complex problems, in the problem-driven learning and in-depth, these complex problems often involve a large knowledge, and the mutual influence of the various points of knowledge. If we have the opportunity to continue to solve such problems, continuous optimization and continuous improvement, the technology of natural depth.

To give a simple example, for the massive data processing of high-concurrency Internet architecture, this kind of architecture knowledge has a lot of books are in the system, often also have a lot of technical experts to share the practice. We learn these theories tend to look simple, but also easy to understand, but even if you learn this knowledge, if you do not have the corresponding large-scale Internet architecture design scenario for you to practice, the theory is ultimately a theory, these theories themselves you also difficult to really deep learning. It is for this reason that the puzzle of technical learning is not simply a matter of interest, but rather whether there is a large project practice opportunity or exercise problem, but often the majority of companies are unable to truly provide the opportunity for such large projects, and you have to thoroughly master these techniques through your own learning and simulation experiments to become empty talk.

Secondly, the depth and breadth of technical learning, the simple answer to this question is that technical managers focus on a broader range of knowledge and comprehensive capabilities, i.e. breadth is more important than falling into a depth of detail. For professional and technical personnel, it is the depth of technology is more important, because the depth of technology is often really to create greater value for you.

Technical managers need to focus more on building the entire knowledge system, including important soft skills. This type of personnel focuses on master planning and design, and is able to break down the problem. The technical problems and details of the decomposition can be transferred to the Professional staff of the subdivision post. To do this we still need a lot of technical accumulation, because this is your communication with professional and technical staff of the Bridge and general vocabulary.

For professional and technical personnel, the depth of technology is often more important, the depth is the ultimate value creation. As already mentioned, the higher the depth of technology is, the more slowly it is, the greater the period and time cost of learning. It is for this reason that the less people who can develop this technology pyramid, the more natural your core value is. Personal energy is limited, to achieve the full stack of technical personnel is quite small, even the full stack of technical personnel more common situation is often in their best professional skills can hit more than 95 points, and around the core professional technology related technology can hit more than 80 points.

Understanding this, we will be more aware that technical personnel should pay more attention to the depth of technology accumulation, long-term focus on a professional technical direction, the target choice, you will find that the breadth of knowledge is not the choice is aimless and random, The choice of any breadth of knowledge is that these breadth of knowledge is to support you in the depth of the breakthrough. When our technology goes deep into the bottleneck period, if we reflect and retrace ourselves, we will find that there is a problem in the breadth of knowledge, and we need to pause to add breadth first. But the breadth of the supplement is not the ultimate goal, and eventually it has to go back to deep dive.

the last point, the choice of technology direction. One of the biggest feelings for this individual is that when you really develop into a certain area of technology, you're not going to be as enthusiastic about new technologies and hotspots as you or your new one. That is, experts have more to consider business and problem-driven technology, with the most appropriate architecture at present to solve the most important issues and maintain a certain degree of extensibility, and for most of the technical thinking personnel are often concerned about the technology-driven business, only interested in technology rather than business and problem domain.

Technology trends and iterations are fast, and any technology or framework you currently choose may be obsolete after 2-3 years, but if the current technology is good enough to support the business is the best technology. If there is no

The breakthrough of technical development bottleneck of technician itself