"Savant" is an iffy word choice I'd agree, but lots of programmers tend to take instructions very literally. Strict logical thinking is part of the job, and most low and mid level managers are (or recently were) also programmers.

When people are giving me instructions that seem overly detailed to me, I usually assume they have a reason for giving those details because otherwise they would have left it up to me. If I disagree with some design choice or don't understand I'll usually challenge it or ask for that reasoning, but I don't always have time or energy to challenge every last thing. Nothing is more frustrating to me than when I ask for the reasoning and they can't (or won't) explain any motivation behind it. That goes both for my superiors and for my peers during architectural discussions and things like that.

And of course, there's a very high rate of autism in software engineering. Autistic people tend to take things more literally than most.

I believe the savant in this case is the computer that takes instructions literally?

I don't think that was a typo, earlier in the article they classify planning as the domain of middle management, and judgement-based execution as belonging at the supervisory level. I think they are copying this from retail management, I have a hard time imagining a use for an engineer who didn't have the ability to plan or apply judgement.

I think what that commenter meant, and I agree, is that the "savant" in this case was referring to a literal computer; the programmer as an IC is "delegating" a task by writing a program and having the computer execute it.

Yep this is what I was getting at.

Sounds like a pretty typical junior engineer to me.

Imagine the chaos that would ensue if each IC had four to eight juniors to supervise... :)

They effectively wouldn't be ICs anymore if an important part of their job is to supervise

The chaos would be great for the bean counters. "Productivity" will be up for a month or two. Until it isn't.

That's literally what "senior engineer" is supposed to be doing according to what I hear are current industry norm, which makes as much sense as what your comment makes it sound. Basically a hidden management role, with all the responsibilities but none of the power.

I think there’s a long-standing stereotype that programmers are "literal" thinkers who operate only with exact instructions