I believe this to be reasonable, though I believe there's an even stronger force at play: engineering retention. In other words, let engineers build whatever they want to build, within reason of course, because if they don't they may just go to another company that will let them. Solving for boredom. Complex systems are interesting.
I'm going to flip the narrative a little bit: whether its "tech is the end-game" or "engineers are bored and just want to have fun", I'm not sure I see the problem. I've grown out of the "maximally efficient business is the endgame" propaganda. My endgame at work is to have fun and produce enough value so I can come back tomorrow and continue having fun. Business as the endgame is a great motive for the CEOs who make millions a year. I'm not that.
Put another way, many people say that coding is as much art as science or engineering. Artists may do commissions, but ultimately their work comes from within; its not by-and-large prescriptive. The endgame is the art; the endgame is the tech; and, hopefully, that endgame is marketable. Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't; that's not especially relevant to the process.
Or, you can take the stance that the endgame is the business, and spend your life unfulfilled, making your rich boss richer. I'd rather seek fulfillment from the tech; not the money.
Technology, viewed in the traditional sense, is a means to an end. In the context of farming, for example, the plough and its later improvements weren't the endgame--the increased yields were.
I often equate a business to a ship. It's dynamic, navigates obstacles, and is captained by leadership.
Perhaps the two examples are extremes on a spectrum. And inside is the option to learn more about the ship, so that the right problems can be resolved and solutions found, to help it reach its destination. And perhaps fulfillment can be found there.
In fact, in doing so, sometimes, new courses become realized. Personally, I find getting one charted very fulfilling.
I'm going to flip the narrative a little bit: whether its "tech is the end-game" or "engineers are bored and just want to have fun", I'm not sure I see the problem. I've grown out of the "maximally efficient business is the endgame" propaganda. My endgame at work is to have fun and produce enough value so I can come back tomorrow and continue having fun. Business as the endgame is a great motive for the CEOs who make millions a year. I'm not that.
Put another way, many people say that coding is as much art as science or engineering. Artists may do commissions, but ultimately their work comes from within; its not by-and-large prescriptive. The endgame is the art; the endgame is the tech; and, hopefully, that endgame is marketable. Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't; that's not especially relevant to the process.
Or, you can take the stance that the endgame is the business, and spend your life unfulfilled, making your rich boss richer. I'd rather seek fulfillment from the tech; not the money.