The White House vows to let programmers dress informally

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/08/20/the-white-house-vows-to-let-programmers-dress-like-ones-do/

by Libertatea • 12 years ago

82 92 12 years ago

washingtonpost.com

AndrewKemendo• 12 years ago

This is a clear power play and is playing by the same rules as those that are wearing suits. What dressing like that is saying is, no I don't have to wear the uniform of this culture because I am in a position of informal power.

The New Yorker did a piece on that same issue last year: http://www.newyorker.com/business/currency/the-power-of-the-...

At the end of the day I am torn on this issue. The idea that competence counts makes sense and that is all that should be judged. However there is something to be said about shared cultural displays and how they fit into a larger team effort. The modern suit is a pretty benign display in the larger scheme of things. Especially if you look at the rumpled messes that check the "suit" block, roaming around government agencies.

All that said, I fucking despise having to wear a suit.

toby• 12 years ago

Agreed, you'd probably find that a lot of tech guys in a hoodie and jeans spent more on their clothes than DC staffers in "suits".

walshemj4• 12 years ago

Really my last suit was $750 and I was looking at a nice Vivien Westwood one the other day which was $1200.

nknighthb• 12 years ago

I wear t-shirts and shorts. Always. Mostly from King Size Direct. Add in underwear and socks and the total cost of whatever I'm wearing at any given moment is <$100. Add in shoes and it's probably about $160.

I'm always comfortable, which is difficult for me with any other off-the-shelf clothing.

So tell me, how much more am I spending than DC staffers in what would have to be custom-tailored suits to match the comfort level?

smacktoward5• 12 years ago

Yeah, I'm of two minds on it too. On the one hand, I'm all for letting people be comfortable at work. On the other hand, it's the fucking White House we're talking about here, not a paper company in Scranton. If there is a single office in the world where the people at least make an attempt to act like grown-ups, I'd want it to be that one, you know?

hugs• 12 years ago

How about when you're actually in the White House to meet the president you wear a suit, but when you're at your desk in some other building (aka: not the WH) you don't. That was our policy last year on the hc.gov turn-around: Bring a suit (just in case!), but don't plan on wearing it everyday.

jinushaun• 12 years ago

Jeans and t-shirt/hoodie are the official uniform/suit of programmers. You stand out if you wear anything else.

xmonkee• 12 years ago

Why does acting like a grown-up literally involve acting like an adult. Suits are basically playing dress-up for adults. And don't even get me started on ties.

PieSquared• 12 years ago

I think this is a good example of a place where different people can just have fundamentally different values. I don't see wearing more formal clothing as "acting like grown-ups". Similarly, I don't see the White House as being a place particularly deserving of special treatment when it comes to being there as a programmer. Clearly, you (and many others) might disagree (and not-so-subtly imply that others are immature children...), but neither one of us is right or wrong.

Guess this is what causes culture clash :)

dragonwriter4• 12 years ago

On the other hand, it's the fucking White House we're talking about here, not a paper company in Scranton. If there is a single office in the world where the people at least make an attempt to act like grown-ups, I'd want it to be that one, you know?

I kind of take exception to the idea that "act like grown-ups" means "prefer engaging in ritual displays of conformance to getting real work done". I mean, I associate the former more with acting like exceptionally image-conscious high-school students rather than acting like grownups.

That's not to say that dress rules can't have something to do with acting like grownups; even if it was miguided, the one place I worked that prohibited technical staff from wearing ties on the basis of published research showing that wearing ties reduced the output of technical workers had a grown-up reason.

cousin_it• 12 years ago

SCIENTIST: Why do we all have to wear these ridiculous ties?

FREEMAN: Oh, you wanna know why? I'll tell you why. It's symbolic. The management wants you to know that you're their dog, so you're wearing their leash. You don't see me wearing a tie, do you?

pseudonym• 12 years ago

It comes down, for me, to more a question of "how much external facetime do you have in your day-to-day job". Shared cultural displays are one thing, but forcing everyone into the "Least Comfortable Denominator" just because some subset of your culture does need to display that level of formality...

Even above the comfortable clothing aspect of it, inflexibility in a comparatively minor thing like "dress code in non-customer-facing positions" indicates potential inflexibility in far more important things (sick/maternity/bereavement time, butt-in-chair time, informal 1-on-1s with higher-ups, merit-based raises, etc) and would greatly negatively influence the likelihood of taking a job for me.

dang2• 12 years ago

The title is taken from the url (which is fine, and better than the HTML doc title in this case), but it's ungrammatical. What's a minimal fix? I can't think of one.

Edit: Ok, we changed it from "The White House vows to let programmers dress like ones do".

gk1• 12 years ago

The White House vows to let programmers dress down

dang2• 12 years ago

If I know my Hacker News, that would spark an argument about the prejudice of saying dressing down. So maybe we'll use "informally", as more neutral. Thanks!

pzxc• 12 years ago

The White House vows to let programmers dress like programmers

kabdib• 12 years ago

The acid test for me: Will they hire software engineers who don't have degrees?

I've worked with quite a few people who didn't bother to finish college, or never went to begin with. There doesn't seem to be a correlation between "great engineer" and "got a BS in CS" -- let me re-state that; you can be a great engineer without the paper, or a lousy one with the degree.

So the question is: Is it a meritocracy, or is it a meritocracy?

[also: sandals? :-) ]

pmorici• 12 years ago

The question isn't whether they will hire them. They most definitely would. The question is will they pay them equally. Government pay standards are typically based on degree. At heavily tech oriented government organizations they have different pay scales for people with CS/Math/EE degrees than people w/o them.

Also having worked in government before, not the White House, they didn't expect the engineers to wear suits. Shorts and sandals were acceptable.

blutoot2• 12 years ago

Getting one degree in engineering increases the likelihood that the person will be higher than average in her software engineering skills. When you have 1000s of applicants and your approach to everything is fairly conservative compared to the private sector, you won't go out on a limb and hire a dropout unless that dropout has a stellar portfolio of some extraordinary work. And it's the dropout's responsibility to get that work noticed in the marketplace.

mahyarm• 12 years ago

Usually for software engineers, you are not getting 1000s of applicants unless you have 1000s of positions. It's folly to use cheap filters such as a degree at that point. Especially if your an unattractive employer such as the government.

kohanz5• 12 years ago

I know you re-stated it, but I disagree with the first statement. I believe there is a correlation. The strength of the correlation can be debated, but in my experience, a degree is a positive signal when hiring someone to be part of a software engineering team.

Note that I didn't just say software engineer. In my book, technical skills are only part of the equation, but the ability to communicate well, operate well within a team, etc. are also very important and in my experience, going to school helps prepare people for this kind of work.

In the end, a degree or lack thereof only becomes a significant signal if there isn't enough real-world experience on the resume.

k-mcgrady• 12 years ago

> going to school helps prepare people for this kind of work

Is there some specific teamwork that goes on in a CS degree? Can't teamwork skills be picked up in the previous 14 years of schooling?

hacknat• 12 years ago

I agree with you that he's overstating the case a bit. There is obviously a correlation between a degree in CS and good Engineers, but it's important to realize that there are great Engineers who don't have one as well. I think he's making the argument that the sign of a healthy organization is an openness to looking for talent in unlikely places. If that's his point, then I think we agree.

yason• 12 years ago

Many smart guys have a degree but they're not smart because of the degree, it's just that they were smart to begin with but decided to finish their degree for one reason while other smart people decided otherwise for another reason.

Having a degree doesn't make a good engineer or a programmer: it just doesn't prevent that either.

dubcanada• 12 years ago

I disagree with you. I also disagree that you learn social skills in college, you learn social skills in grade school. You don't learn social skills in college, by that stage you either have them or don't.

You learn technical skills in college, yes, but I disagree that hiring a software engineer team purely based on having a CS degree will result in the best hires.

I would hire entirely based on real world experience. If you have none, I don't care if you don't have a degree too me you are about as useful as someone applying with experience as an accountant.

If you sit in school and then go home and spend the rest of the night reading a text book and don't code any open source projects or make something for your portfolio, you really shouldn't be part of a software team. You should either be in a lab somewhere or a teacher, as you are only interested in learning about the topic, not applying it. Anyone who is actually interested in the topic will come out of school with experience in something (internship, hobby, etc).

vampirechicken2• 12 years ago

The degree is, in the face of people's stunning inability to judge others, a prima facie way to decide whether a person is capable of setting a long term goal and seeing it through to completion.

It can, for less savory reasons, be used to pre-screen people who fit in demographics that do not have high graduation rates.

aridiculous• 12 years ago

All I can say is that I didn't 'set a long term goal' going into college. I just did what I was told and eventually picked a major, riding it out as the path of least resistance to graduation. Let me put it this way: given my cultural upbringing and inset fears at the time, it would have been harder to drop out of school than to stay in school. Pretty sure that holds for many college graduates.

I'm not against screening for college grads as a policy, though I think that it could limit you from finding amazing underrated candidates. I just think that popular argument about 'seeing out a long term goal' is simply not true a lot of the time, though I benefit a lot from it.

Iftheshoefits2• 12 years ago

It may be prima facie, but it's also completely subjective. There are a plethora of reasons a person might not complete a degree that have nothing to do with his ability to commit, complete long term goals, or anything else. Using a degree in such a manner is an indicator to me that the person doing it is either incapable of engaging in critical thinking, or else is too lazy or indifferent to do so on this matter. In that regard, a person using such a filter is itself a (negative) filter, for me, with regard to whether I want to work with them.

worklogin• 12 years ago

Who needs someone who can "see a long term goal to completion"?

What's the turnover rate in Silicon valley, or for that of high-skilled IT design and ops? I'd rather have a savant of a coder/engineer for 18 months than a mediocrity for 36.

andersonvom• 12 years ago

I would say there is a correlation, which is not to say it is causation.

I'd venture to say that going to school and getting a degree in CS would increase the likelihood of one becoming a better engineer. That is not to say everybody that has a degree is a great engineer or the other way around.

So, in a sense, it makes sense to take that into consideration when hiring someone, but much like everything else in an interview process, it should be taken with a grain of salt.

haberman• 12 years ago

There doesn't seem to be a correlation between "great engineer" and "got a BS in CS" -- let me re-state that; you can be a great engineer without the paper, or a lousy one with the degree.

What you said after "let me re-state that" is not a restatement. The first statement (there doesn't seem to be a correlation) is much stronger.

walshemj4• 12 years ago

They said "great" not average ones who do 8 hours a day cut and pasting into the latest a greatest trendy framework or language with out understanding the real problem

Iftheshoefits2• 12 years ago

I agree with the weaker proposition that the correlation between "having a degree" and quality of engineering is not always clear, and may not be the best (or even most important) factor in determining whether to hire.

However, in my experience generally people who obtain a college degree are more well-rounded than people who don't. A consequence of this is that such people, again in general, tend to be able to think about problems in a more mature, broader, and deeper sense than those who don't "finish" (or complete most of) a degree.

This has nothing to do with whether the software industry is a meritocracy or not, or whether a dress code has anything to do with whether it's a meritocracy or not. My opinion: almost no job in this industry--or any other--is completely, or even mostly, meritocratic.

ianstallings2• 12 years ago

A lot of government IT positions will allow you to substitute experience for a degree (according to USAjobs.gov).

I do agree though, although I'd say it's very positive thing going to a place like MIT, it really doesn't impact my decisions for hiring. I'd rather hear about your real story. When did you find out you wanted to code? How did you truly learn? What hurdles did you overcome? What kind of things have you actually done? Even college grads are expected to have some kind of experiences that relate to the job.

ap222132• 12 years ago

I've met many self-taught programmers, and they were great to work with. Some were extremely productive and knew the inside and outside of certain languages and libraries. However, they still wrote code that nested 5 loops, or put data in arrays when they needed a linked list, or invented complex algorithms to solve something that a simple graph would do, or didn't understand the basics of linear algebra, number theory, and statistics. Degrees in CS can be extremely valuable.

matthewowen2• 12 years ago

But you could say exactly the same thing about many programmers who do have CS degrees too, right?

dsg42• 12 years ago

All this statement proves is that you don't know what a "great engineer" looks like. Do you think any of the kernel developers at Microsoft, Apple, or Google don't have hardcore degrees? They all do, and there's a reason for it.

In addition, it's hilarious that you point this out specifically for a job at the White House. There are so many non-engineering factors that go into succeeding at such a job, most of which are learned in college.

In summary, while I would never make such a degree an absolute requirement, I would be shocked to find someone who could work at the US Digital Service who doesn't have a college degree.

koverstreet• 12 years ago

Hah, no. Hardcore kernel engineer here, formerly of Google, you're flat out incorrect.

pcora• 12 years ago

I'm the only one that noticed that the guy get's a Blackberry for the job?

That's interesting.

josephschmoe2• 12 years ago

That's common in government work. It's usually for the purpose of emailing/texting at work and nothing else.

I know half a dozen people who have a separate work phone they turn off when they get home.

ryanburk• 12 years ago

maybe it can be used as a cautionary tale. inspiration to build for the future, not the past.

(edit: wow, this is what becomes my first down voted comment on hn?! apologies to the blackberry crowd I offended)

smacktoward5• 12 years ago

Government procurement moves slooooowly, and BlackBerry has already been through the exhaustive process of security vetting that's required for gear that's going to be used in sensitive locations like the White House. I'm sure there's Apple and Android gear making its way through that process now, but it wouldn't surprise me if it wasn't all the way through yet.

dodders• 12 years ago

Security, innit.

blutoot2• 12 years ago

In my opinion, techies make as much of a big deal of outfits as do the finance/business guys. They just do it by shouting about how much they are against dress codes.

quaffapint• 12 years ago

In my last gig we had to wear the whole tie getup even though we're crawling under desks or setting up servers. The funny thing is when they had investors and such come through the building they didn't let us downstairs - we had to stay hidden. What the heck was the tie for then.

I even got reprimanded by my manager's manager because my dress shoes did not match my dress pants.

a3n• 12 years ago

Why would you want to work for an employer whose board of directors, Congress, regularly uses employees as hostages when they threaten to shut the government down?

I'd wear a clown suit if the work was steady, interesting and well paid.

djb_hackernews• 12 years ago

This reminds me of the attitude of a former employer. It was a small tech company, the CEO/owner was an old school business type. Always well groomed, nice suits, the car, etc.

He often had visitors come in to the office to see him, and he'd give a short tour on the way to his office. He'd stop by the sales area and introduce whoever was around and then he'd bring the visitor to the entry of the open office style room that had 4 of us software developers and say something like "And this is the bigger room, with a couple programmers" in such a way that it was as if he was showing off exotic pets or automated machinery. As if we were literally sitting there punching in the correct sequence of buttons in order to program a VCR.

"Programmers" are low status, and now when we are at the White House it'll be easier to tell who we are.

yoblin• 12 years ago

I think in some ways programmers have brought this low status upon ourselves. If you want to be taken seriously in a business setting, like it or not how you dress affects your credibility. When a coder complains that the executives at the company are not taking their ideas seriously, maybe they should switch out of the t-shirt that says "talk nerdy to me" on the front. Dressing professionally isn't just about corporate conformity, it also signals that you take your job seriously.

halleym• 12 years ago

Seems like he wore a comically wrinkly shirt, just for the video. Kind of ruins the sentiment. Some how.

goshx• 12 years ago

I hate to have to dress up just because people won't take you seriously if you don't. To me this is just a very old preconception created by society long time ago (when perhaps it made sense) and people keep doing it apparently for no clear reason.

I love when I see CEO/CTO's dressing whatever they like (e.g. Mark Zuckerberg, Werner Vogels, etc.).

The only time I can accept this "dress up" thing with no contest is when you go to meet someone and you want to be respectful to this person, so you dress better to show respect/appreciation... like he did for the President. Now, the dress up for the sake of dressing up because this gives you status and then people will treat you better, I can't stand it.

collyw2• 12 years ago

The thing is, its all very well saying that people shouldn't judge based on what we wear, but like it or not some people do. Its just a bit dumb and teenager like to not accept that and put a shirt on if its going to give you better options in an interview or whatever.

sbmassey• 12 years ago

Why would they vow to do it, and not just do it? Ok, it's just the title, but still.

matthewowen2• 12 years ago

I find this obsession with avoiding suits to be so tiresome. It's as though programmers are small children who get treats (like dressing down) in exchange for not being treated like real professionals.

It's a suit. It's simple. It's not hard to wear. It's not uncomfortable. Being afraid of wearing suits makes programmers look petty, juvenile, and unprofessional.

Yes, it doesn't have direct practical value, but human behaviour and codes of conduct are full of things with minimal practical value that we still go along with. Culture is complex.

collyw2• 12 years ago

Agreed. I have worked in academia as well as the private sector (banking amongst others). PHD's really amuse me how they think they are getting some sort of freedom, by working long hours for crap wages, but not needing to wear a shirt and tie and not needing to be in by 9.

The White House vows to let programmers dress informally

Related Stories