The main motivation for this post is to save a pointer to this discussion on why star programmers are usually not paid in proportion to their output before it slides off the bottom of my 'Info' page.

But my /. journal seems like a good place to discuss the issue as well. Basically it boils down to this: Studies have shown that two out of ten programmers are each more effective than the other eight put together (often cited are productivity differences of more than ten or twenty times). Yet most programming shops pay all their programmers the same, with some differential based on senority.

Some of this has to do with an invalid concept of career paths for programmers, as instantianted in the pay scales of an organization by HR departments with little understanding of what makes one programmer better than another. Often the star programmers are Peter Principled into management, despite the fact they are not well suited for such a position, in order to give them more pay because that is the only advancement path provided. Other times a boss will attempt to provide perks in leu of pay. But more commonly the star programmer will eventually get disgusted and move on to more interesting work.

So, two questions. First, what makes someone a 'star' programmer? My theory is that it has to do with two things: An underlying talent, related to other creative talents, and a hobbyist's interest in the craft. A star programmer would program in their spare time if they did something else for a living. (Read the discussion linked above for more on this, including a description of what I call the "Toilet Tank Test".)

Secondly, how should we recognize and reward star programmers? What criteria should apply? How do we pay the star more while not creating envy in the less gifted? Is money the only important consideraion?

Update -- some appropo links:

Joel Spolsky has written extensively on this subject, including programmer compensation (also here) and what he calls the "Joel Test".

Some papers on Programmer Productivity here and here.

The article 'It's Not About Lines of Code'.

An article claiming that ". . . a company should therefore not hesitate to pay a salary that is 10-20 times that of the average programmer . . ." for a star programmer.

A google for "Star Programmers".