How do I professionally phrase "shut up and do what I'm hiring you to do"?

[Nava]

@Roland_Orzabal

As others have pointed out (and I agree), this is a nonstandard role for a software developer to be asked to take on, whereas it might be less so for, say, a machinist or construction contractor.

Not IME, really: it’s the difference between a Programmer and an Analyst-Programmer. The Analyst-Programmer analyzes a problem and comes up with solutions, the basic-Programmer translates what other people have thought up. Maybe that’s how you can say it:

Please note: I am not seeking an Analyst; the Analysis has already been performed and takes into account information which, for legal reasons, can not be made available to you. We are seeking a Programmer to follow the Analyzed algorithm. Thank you!

[PatriotGrrrl]

Yeah, what you want is a codemonkey, maybe you can work that word into the headline of you job description. :D:p:D

[Princhester]

@GuanoLad

It seems to me that this thread is a textbook example of what Roland is talking about. Instead of providing the answer to his carefully worded OP, most people are suggesting alternatives.

“Oh, he doesn’t really want what he thinks he wants, he actually wants something else entirely, which I shall helpfully offer to him.”

Indeed. Read the first line of the first response. The very first thing anyone responding to this thread does is mimic the behaviour of what he is complaining about! I thought it was a whoosh till I realised it was serious.

@The_Second_Stone

An independent contractor is allowed, by law, to come up with the correct result in any legal way.

Sorry but this is completely irrelevant in this context. You are confusing the process by which an independent contractor arrives at a result, with a contract specified result that includes, as part of the result, following a process. It is freedom in the former and not the latter which is an indicator that one is an independent contractor.

[Vorpal_Blade]

@Little_Nemo

He posted what the job was and people voluntarily stepped forward and said they could do it and quoted a fee.

And has done it 28 times.

[Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus]

@Roland_Orzabal

You’re not wrong, Spectre, but in my case, the factory engineer has already drafted a detailed set of plans for the machine that takes those factors into account, and the owner is hiring someone with the mechanical skills and tools to put it together exactly as designed. The role of the contractor, then, is not designer but builder.

As others have pointed out (and I agree), this is a nonstandard role for a software developer to be asked to take on, whereas it might be less so for, say, a machinist or construction contractor. Where I disagree, though, is that I don’t believe that automatically renders the request invalid, nor do I believe that making it is any sort of insult to the coder’s intelligence or skill.

I may have misunderstood your intent from the beginning; it sounds like you do mean functional requirements are not being met, and not something petty like what color pencil he uses.

[Cesario]

As a professional software developer, I can tell you that the way you are phrasing this does seem to be insulting to the intelligence of the people you’re contracting.

You have two choices if you really want to screen out the people who aren’t going to do what you’re asking.

First, you can give better explaination. You took the time to write up the minutae of the process, after all, and if you’d used that time to instead write up a description of what the process is designed to actually accomplish (in terms of other processes interacting with it) you’re more likely to see compliance with your instructions and you’re more likely to have a usable end product.

Alternately, you can explicitly state in the description that you know the process you described is ineficient and will give you suboptimal results, and that you want suboptimal results. Acknowledging that you know they could do the job better if you let them takes the edge off the percieved insult to their intelligence that is implied by you giving the process instead of just the requirements, and makes it clear you aren’t giving them the process description because you don’t think they know how to write a simple character deletion routine.

I believe the second option is closer to what you are asking for.