> Who says I should deliver product that has value?

Whoever hired you?

"Not my responsibility/problem" is a terrible attitude, nobody wants employ those people. They can be useful as contractors. But if you are hired as an FTE, it's strange to complain about not being treated as a contractor, don't you think?

> Between (performance, scalability, fancy tech, etc) and (growth, UX, features), which one is Software Engineering and which one isn not?

It's a false dichotomy, all of those are Software Engineering. Some of those are not Computer Science, but could still be strongly tied to it (e.g. UX is often a synonym for HCI).

> You clearly see which metric matters to a software engineers (performance, scalability...)

No, I see this is a metric that matters for bad software engineers.

> And the value of a product is combination/unification of all these things (performance, scalability, ux, ui...) and who should think/plan about that?

Few people should be responsible, but everyone should think, plan and provide feedback.

What you need to recognize is that engineers are in unique position: they can understand 80% of business domain, while business folks can understand 5% of engineering domain. You'd be an idiot not to involve engineers in delivering value.

> Whoever hired you?

That's fair enough if it is clearly stated in the contract. If it is a silent assumption, that's not gonna work with me. It might be a bad attitude in the eye of the client, that's fine with me. I avoid those type of work anyway.

> No, I see this is a metric that matters for bad software engineers.

Well, this is a matter of opinion I guess. Not gonna argue with opinions, everybody is entitled to one. To give you my perspective, I think that is the sign of a good software engineer. He knows his role and what he studied for and focus on that. I don't want a half assed software engineer who doesn't know anything about business decision to make value judgment on a product. At least, I would not do it as a software engineer, is unfair and dishonest for both.

> Few people should be responsible, but everyone should think, plan and provide feedback.

Yes, everybody should participate in what they have competence of. As I'm never gonna argue with a UX/UI disegner about stylistic choices (accesibility, trends..? I don't know anything about that), I'm not gonna provide feedback on the value of a product. Hey, at the end everybody is free to do whatever they wish to and reap/face the consequences of it. It is just, I feel it is unfair to expect things from people for which they didn't spent year and money to study and blame them if something goes wrong.

> You'd be an idiot not to involve engineers in delivering value.

Yeah this is the mindset of the shareholder, who invest and try to extract as much as he can from a few individuals. I understand.

> I feel it is unfair to expect things from people for which they didn't spent year and money to study

Studies are always falling behind real world needs.

Also, your words could be rephrased as "I don't expect to learn at work".

> this is the mindset of the shareholder, who invest and try to extract as much as he can from a few individuals

Or a mindset of an engineer that wants a higher salary. You seem to recognize that shareholders have a demand for those types of engineers. And trust me, the supply is extremely scarce.

> Studies are always falling behind real world needs.

That's very very true. Not gonna deny that.

> Also, your words could be rephrased as "I don't expect to learn at work".

I like to learn technical things. Studing whether Mary like red button or green, I don't find it appealing. Likewise, I don't like to see where or who is gonna use my product. I know, a lot of people "hate" this attitude. But, I know where I'm good and where I'm less stressed yet still provide engineering service for my salary :).

> Or a mindset of an engineer that wants a higher salary. You seem to recognize that shareholders have a demand for those types of engineers. And trust me, the supply is extremely scarce.

I know, but this is my experience. I value more free time. Money should be just enough to sustain my lifestyle. And doing all thing not related to software engineering takes more time and leave unhappy. That's just me. And I just hope people don't silenty expect more from me and then be unsatisfied.

We've gone from "IT IS NOT THE RESPONSIBILITY NOR THE JOB OF THE SOFTWARE ENGINEER TO DELIVER OR PRODUCE VALUE" to "As a software engineer I like/prefer/value other things". I'm not going to challenge your preferences as long as you don't enforce them on the whole industry.

I knew that phrase in caps would bite me at the end. I studied comp sci because I liked the field and expected that in my job I would learn and expand my knowledge about it. But the reality was completely opposite of all my expectation. The whole industry wanted me to provide service for things I was not prepared nor have an innate attitude/willingness/mindset to grasp and formulate a valuable opinion that other people can use without disappointment. It is hard for me to see disappointment from clients when they expected something I don't have the competency to provide. As software engineer I like to build things independently from their value in the market.

The thing is, you can't blame the industry. Industry simply adjusts to market needs.

It's not the industry that has wrong expectations from you, it's you who had wrong expectations about the industry.