Although the thrust of many industry experts and strategists is on ensuring that there are sufficient coders to meet the anticipated demand, and to ensure continued innovation, these two concepts do not necessarily go hand in hand. To some extent they can be mutually exclusive.<\/p>\n

Computer programming is its own discipline, with clear methodologies of how it should be approached.\u00a0 Hence it is true: virtually anyone can learn to code. However, the actual mechanics of programming requires high-level concepts and ideas to be broken down into executable code that devices can interpret. In other words, and in the context of the proverb regarding forest and trees, programmers are required to focus on the leaves, rather than the trees or the forest.<\/p>\n

In a similar vein, when most of us think of innovation, we are looking for far-reaching transformations that have a noticeable impact on the average individual. Hence still using the forest and trees saying, for innovation to occur persons need to focus on the trees, even the forest itself. In order to be innovative it is critical to understand the bigger picture, the interrelationship of all its components, along with which rules must be adhered to, and which rules can be bent or even broken.<\/p>\n

To be clear: computer programmers can and do deliver \u201creal world\u201d innovation transformative products. A few quick examples: Bill Gates (Microsoft), Mark Zuckerberg (Facebook) and Jack Dorsey (Twitter, and Square).\u00a0 However, relative to the global community of coders, they and others who have done the same, tend to be the exception rather than the norm. The majority of coders are expected to be worker bees \u2013 helping to bring someone else\u2019s ideas to life \u2013 which although is not seemingly sexy, is vital to the overall development process.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n