> So many companies hire solely on technical aptitude, then design the role of the engineer as an implementer of others’ ideas. Stripe (and specifically the Atlas team) biases hiring much more strongly on aspirations, track record, taste, and potential. The team is filled with enthusiastic, energetic, fantastic communicators who are motivated to deliver ideal user experiences. In the right environment, people with these skills are able to produce a better product and build a better team culture than a dull, code-focused, command-and-control kind of environment.

I really really hate this idea that the most important skill about an engineer is being a good communicator. I know why people say that, but honestly, being a good communicator is the _last_ thing that makes a good engineer. The best software engineers are good at - I know this comes by a huge surprise - writing code. It's strange, but people who's job is to mainly write code also should be mainly good at writing code. In fact, people who are good at communicating tend to turn everything into discussions, debates, meetings and do very little actual work. Software developers don't need to be good communicators. They stare at a screen and need to be good at being content by solving problems by writing code. If they get happiness from that and they are fast learners then they will be good developers. Managers need to be good communicators. Team leaders who need to explain concepts to juniors or discuss architecture with others need to be good communicators, but not your regular junior/mid/senior developers. If a software engineer is a good communicator they will quickly be put into a role which will make them something that is not a software engineer anymore, so it's arguably a skill that is important for other roles and not coding.

EDIT:

Lots of people here trying to berate me on effectively what boils down to being a normal person and describing it as a "good communicator". Sure I agree with that, you have to have some basic humans skills, being able to read things, understand basic shit and being able to speak to other people like every other normal person who functions in society. I personally don't call that a "good" communicator. Just a person. Just like I don't automatically assume that if someone is not a good/great communicator that they automatically are poor communicators. By the same measure that everyone berates me here we are all good athletes if we can run 10 metres or kick a ball down the hill. Personally I set the bar slightly higher than just being normal when I describe as something to be good or great but perhaps that is just me.