I'm iffy on the efficacy of immersion.
Some (and many top-star coders) just like coding- that's their thing, that's what they do best. They don't want to have to deal with bureaucracy and the doubt of working on the right solution.
I think there is value in understanding the problem and being immersed in it, but I've been to a few hackathons where the organizers try to play it up and create an "ideation" phase, which often just ends up frustrating many programmers who would prefer to focus on the technical problem.
And what's sad is that this "formal, correct, unambiguous term" pattern doesn't only apply in academic papers, but also in textbooks and learning and education (e.g. have you ever read a statistics textbook?) -- when we are trying to teach students concepts, we end up getting the opposite of what we wanted to achieve.
It's interesting how one can take any phenomena and demonize the actors playing in it.
The author focuses on the tangible benefits of working at a startup vs. working in finance (e.g. corporate card, company car, free food), but leaves out the journey which drive so many entrepreneurs to continue to do what they do and what ultimately makes many of them come alive.
It's a stark contrast to finance where many engage in soul-crushing work and anxiously await their bonuses, so they can find a more fulfilling job.
I think there is value in understanding the problem and being immersed in it, but I've been to a few hackathons where the organizers try to play it up and create an "ideation" phase, which often just ends up frustrating many programmers who would prefer to focus on the technical problem.