rosenthyme

Thank you for your thoughts. I think pico-iterations would be wonderful, and that is the big problem -- we meet twice a week (he has dedicated 4hrs a week and sometimes not even that.) Way too much time goes by before we test whether the build-out matches the vision. This makes it more disheartening because there is often so much wasted work.

However, I'm glad this worked out well for you -- I am going to try to split the 4hours more evenly, perhaps into at-least a daily review. Part of the problem is he seems to think we are all wrong in requiring all these reviews, rather we should simply implement the vision rather than just talking about it over and over.

thank you for your thoughts on this. -going crazy

@theandrewbailey -- regarding how much other team members devote to the project, the rest of us work 40 to 50 hours a week. This is to be expected since a 10 minute vision takes 100x the time to actually code out and make functional. But to be honest, we are all putting in less and less productive time, as the whole process seems so inefficient and wasteful.

I have read so many stories of tough personalities like this who chew out their people publicly, yet in the process achieve greatness for themselves, their teams, and their products. I supposed I would have accepted this if I were working for Steve Jobs or Elon Musk or Steve Ballmer, so I keep wondering if I should just suck it up and grind on.

But coding-to-vision rather than coding-to-design/spec seems so inefficient. Is this common?

@theandrewbailey yes, he does give feedback, about once every several days. However, three days of coding can be wiped out with one piece of feedback. This is frustrating since it could have been nipped earlier on during a design session. Is it common for people to code-to-vision rather than code-to-design?