[HN Gopher] Work Somewhere Dysfunctional
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Work Somewhere Dysfunctional
        
       Author : mbellotti
       Score  : 94 points
       Date   : 2022-01-17 15:41 UTC (7 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (bellmar.medium.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (bellmar.medium.com)
        
       | 6gvONxR4sf7o wrote:
       | You can't conflate unsolved problems with unsolved organizational
       | problems like that. If you are really into the politicking and
       | people stuff, sure. But that's why I love being an IC. I want to
       | build stuff to solve our user's problems. Sure, I have to
       | navigate the org stuff to have big impact, but that's the part
       | where I want to spend the least focus. Which is a part of how I'd
       | measure organizational dysfunction.
       | 
       | That said, I'm grateful for people who are really into the org
       | stuff. I've worked for a savant at that stuff and it really did
       | improve things. Thank you all who suffer the politics on behalf
       | of the rest of us.
        
         | throwawaygh wrote:
         | Agreed. Org stuff is important, but even the most well-managed
         | org in the world won't make good progress without the right
         | technical people.
         | 
         | I have a _really_ hard time believing that Defense has a strong
         | bench of IC engineers and scientists working on ML Safety. I
         | 've received job offers from these types of firms and they're
         | always paying at least 300K less than the competition when they
         | probably need to be paying 200K-300K more (requires a
         | clearance, WFH is impossible, my executive is not technical,
         | etc.)
        
       | pphysch wrote:
       | The article is a bit long but the core lesson that "there are
       | opportunities to be found in crises" is important. And spending a
       | lot of time in a dysfunctional/crisis-plagued environment is a
       | great way to hone that skill.
       | 
       | As a side note, the Chinese words for "crisis" (Wei Ji ) and
       | "opportunity" (Ji Hui ) share a common character (Ji ). A useful
       | mnemonic (crisis can end in an opportunity, opportunity can begin
       | in a crisis).
        
         | jjtheblunt wrote:
         | Is there a meaning for that single character, in isolation?
        
       | bserge wrote:
       | Yeah, you could also work somewhere not as developed. It's
       | dysfunctional alright, and the pay can be shit. But if the
       | company seriously considers your ideas, you'll be seen as some
       | sort of prophet. Many ideas and systems that you take for granted
       | simply don't exist in developing countries. And they really need
       | them.
        
         | notpachet wrote:
         | Unfortunately, the prophet is often also the first person the
         | others come after with pitchforks when the crops fail to grow.
        
           | bserge wrote:
        
       | the_gipsy wrote:
       | Cannot read medium without an account. Can we ban it already ?
        
         | lazyant wrote:
         | https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fbellmar.medium.com%2Fw...
        
         | znpy wrote:
         | there you go: https://archive.fo/MwT63 :)
        
           | WHA8m wrote:
           | I haven't had any problem. Did you?
        
             | sshine wrote:
             | Yes, after about ten seconds, the page that otherwise
             | appeared to load fine suddenly becomes a 500 that
             | encourages me to read other Medium articles.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | Etheryte wrote:
         | Blocking cookies lets you read away without any problems. If
         | you're using Chrome, go to the website, click the small padlock
         | in the URL bar, select cookies, and then block all the ones for
         | Medium.
        
           | the_gipsy wrote:
           | That's ridiculous for reading some blog post.
        
       | TaylorAlexander wrote:
       | I have a lot of personal emotional trauma from working at a
       | dysfunctional start up where the 29 year old CEO idolized Steve
       | Jobs and thought that yelling at people and manipulating people
       | was cool.
       | 
       | Don't work somewhere dysfunctional.
        
       | throwawaygh wrote:
       | Dear Author,
       | 
       | Software Safety and especially AI Safety are hard technical
       | problems. You're not going to figure out how to add a few 9s to
       | the reliability of a computer vision system by studying org
       | theory.
       | 
       | Making progress on The Hardest Problems requires hiring the
       | excellent ML engineers and scientists, and then having even half-
       | decent management. Management does matter, but the strong IC
       | talent is a precondition to progress.
       | 
       | If Defense had armies of competent ICs but was still failing, I
       | guess focusing on non-compensation-related organization issues
       | might be reasonable. That's not even remotely the case.
       | 
       | Just shy of 70% of CS PhDs from US institutions are foreign
       | nationals, which means Defense is already talent-constrained. The
       | 50% or so who are qualified to work on AI safety and qualify for
       | relevant clearances would probably want a close to a 0 added to
       | what Defense offers (and not even for moral reasons... security
       | clearances and "must work at the office" are real drags on
       | quality of life that require significant additional
       | compensation).
       | 
       | I've seen first-hand that defense systems are insecure and unsafe
       | because _defense chooses not to purchase excellent IC talent_.
       | The biggest organizational challenge in Defense is the lack of
       | adequate compensation for engineers and scientists.
       | 
       | The largest management problem in the Defense industry is
       | figuring out how to get the org to pay for excellent engineering
       | and scientific talent. Your competitors in the labor market are
       | paying high six or low seven figures, don't require security
       | clearances, don't require drug tests, and have much more
       | hybrid/WFH flexibility. For me to take a job in defense to work
       | on ML Safety, you'd probably have to pay north of $1M.
        
         | [deleted]
        
       | throwmeback wrote:
       | This article kinda feels like an elaborate excuse for not leaving
       | your current employer, partner etc.
       | 
       | I mean seriously - why take shit when there's a 90% chance you're
       | working on another elaborate CMS/CRUD-looking system? There's
       | millions of them out there, you don't need to subject yourself to
       | terrible experiences. Just go someplace else.
        
       | itsdrewmiller wrote:
       | Better an article than a job board at least.
        
       | pram wrote:
       | There's really no good reason to stick your neck out at a
       | dysfunctional place. It's like that for a reason. You might get
       | grit from the experience, but more likely you'll just become a
       | bitter cynical husk. I know, I worked at Oracle.
        
         | LinuxBender wrote:
         | I worked at a similar place and to call it dysfunctional would
         | be an understatement. It made me a stronger and more fearless
         | person but I was already a bit obstinate and had a tendency to
         | challenge authority so it was ultimately good for me. I can see
         | where different personality types would be affected positively
         | or negatively by such an environment. It's not for everyone.
        
         | tra3 wrote:
         | > There's really no good reason to stick your neck out at a
         | dysfunctional place
         | 
         | I'm reading "The Pentagon Wars" [0], about how US Military used
         | to develop weapon systems in the 70s and 80s; here's an
         | anecdote from the book:
         | 
         | > General Gavin recounted how he had to bury fifty young men
         | near the village of Gela, Sicily, in 1943.1 The men had pieces
         | of their own bazookas ground into their bodies by the German
         | tanks they had been trying to stop. Their new bazookas had
         | failed to stop the tanks. General Gavin condemned the Ordnance
         | Corps for not testing the bazookas against German tanks that
         | had been captured in North Africa. There had been considerable
         | controversy back in the States over the development of the
         | bazookas. At least one prominent scientist on the project had
         | resigned because of his conviction that the warhead was too
         | small to stop a tank. Sadly, he was proved correct. General
         | Gavin was angry that the Ordnance Corps bureaucracy had given
         | his troops an untested weapon.
         | 
         | The book is great for a number of reasons one of which is
         | describing how defense contractors were compensated on delivery
         | not the quality. The bulk of the book deals with Bradley
         | fighting vehicle development that was a death trap. James
         | Burton, the author, ends up being pushed out of the military
         | for raising a lot stink about the Bradley but not before making
         | a huge difference in the design of the vehicle, that ends up
         | saving a lot of lives.
         | 
         | [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pentagon_Wars
        
           | protomyth wrote:
           | Study the development of American torpedoes for WWII as
           | further reading. The Bureau of Ordnance has a lot of American
           | blood on its hands.
        
           | jcadam wrote:
           | I greatly enjoyed the movie. They actually played it for us
           | when I was in the military attending a course on space
           | operations and we got to the subject of acquisitions.
        
         | lmilcin wrote:
         | Every place is dysfunctional to some extent.
         | 
         | Working in truly dysfunctional and trying help the situation
         | has taught me very valuable lessons that are very useful in
         | less dysfunctional organisations.
         | 
         | In other words -- seeing very clearly bad things helps you
         | recognise it when it is less clear. Fixing very bad makes
         | fixing less bad almost effortless.
        
         | crispyambulance wrote:
         | YMMV, but if the immediate team that you're working with has
         | good leadership, sane people with rapport and trust amongst
         | each other that can go a long way towards a positive working
         | environment, even if the organization as a whole is an ocean of
         | shit-show. It just means you got to be ready to jump ship
         | quickly if something poisons your team (eg, an acquisition, or
         | org-change).
        
         | hikerrrr wrote:
         | Eh, was semi rewarded myself for sticking my neck out at
         | Oracle, rest of my team was let go, I was rewarded for my good
         | attitude and small expertise just for showing up where previous
         | coworkers couldn't. Reward was that I got to keep my job and
         | watch my other coworkers told to take a hike... The challenge
         | then became how to drop my cynicism more than how to work the
         | dysfunctional org.
        
           | renewiltord wrote:
           | Getting to keep your job at Oracle seems to have been the
           | real punishment here.
        
       | thenerdhead wrote:
       | > The value of working for a dysfunctional organization, the
       | place where people build the most skills, is in getting hands-on
       | experience fixing problems. Even if you don't in fact fix them...
       | and you won't have enough control to fix everything. Even in
       | situations where you have the authority to execute, you can't
       | control the ripple effects of your changes. Maybe you'll
       | accomplish something, maybe you won't.
       | 
       | I'd definitely agree that you'll build the most skills at a
       | dysfunctional place. The type of skills you learn are typically
       | the opposite of what makes an established organization work
       | though. There's a common saying of "work the people, then the
       | problem". The challenge here is that when majority of your work
       | is to improve the culture, the actual skills you were hired for
       | start to slowly take the back seat.
       | 
       | I don't agree that being selfish is going to help you at all. In
       | fact, being selfish is the exact reason why most organizations
       | are dysfunctional. Here's one that comes off the top of my head.
       | Say you're a line engineering manager and you're incentivized to
       | deliver a large feature that year by your manager who is largely
       | clueless of what your group is doing. But, the whole team
       | realizes that the feature you're incentivized to deliver is not
       | in the best interests of the team right now. What do you do with
       | your role power? Most people will selfishly get that feature
       | implemented to get their max bonus & rewards that year. That type
       | of behavior breeds more dysfunction.
       | 
       | Here's a whole list of dysfunction: output over outcomes,
       | obsession with internal metrics, lack of customer research,
       | optimizing everything for little gain, shipping features like an
       | assembly line, over-dependence on data/spreadsheets, fast paced
       | twist and turns of work, over-engineering, trying to keep
       | everyone happy, flip-flop decision making from people with role
       | power.
        
       | badrabbit wrote:
       | Survivors bias much? Maybe you come out stronger or maybe you end
       | up pessimistic and bitter for a long time or get burned out. As
       | much of a good advice as "stay in prison, it will make you
       | tougher".
        
       | arnvald wrote:
       | I worked at 2 dysfunctional companies and the most valuable thing
       | I learned from it is never to work at dysfunctional company ever
       | again.
       | 
       | I might have a different definition of a dysfunctional place
       | though - for me it's a place that works against me and my
       | productivity, a place where I have to go through a number of
       | hoops in order to do the job I was hired to do. And let me tell
       | you, by the time I made it through all these hoops I was so
       | drained of energy I lost all the passion and will to continue
        
         | larrymyers wrote:
         | I've worked at many dysfunctional companies, and the most
         | valuable things I learned is that all companies are
         | dysfunctional and you need to find the one where you can thrive
         | despite the dysfunction.
         | 
         | Now, that being said, find a company where your role is valued
         | because it is directly tied to revenue generating activities
         | for the company. Don't be in a support role. (This isn't novel
         | advice.)
        
       | protomyth wrote:
       | That's a hard No!
       | 
       | One of my jobs had the dysfunction cranked to 11 with politics
       | (government and inter-office). I can honestly say that screwed me
       | up for a good long while. It took two job switches to be normal
       | again. You don't realize how far down you are until an outside
       | observer points out you haven't smiled in months.
        
       | MattGaiser wrote:
       | > People who want to study earthquakes need to go where there are
       | fault lines. People who want to solve hard problems need to go
       | where those problems live.
       | 
       | There is no need for those places to be dysfunctional though. You
       | can go study earthquakes in California or Afghanistan. You aren't
       | any better for it dodging the Taliban though.
        
       | subpixel wrote:
       | I read this as long-winded but ultimately good career advice.
       | 
       | In a truly dysfunctional company, you'll burn out and/or become a
       | pariah if you try to tackle foundational, intractable problems.
       | I've worked places with 'emporor's new clothes' level
       | disconnections with reality. You seeing the problems others don't
       | see is irrelevant.
       | 
       | Focus on things you can improve and small changes you can effect,
       | and build up a library of answers to behavioral interview
       | questions. Accept that your efforts will be undone and be focused
       | on your long term goals, which do not include dying on this hill.
       | 
       | > On the other hand, people who have pragmatic and slightly
       | selfish goals in addition to wanting the do good are more
       | resilient. If the system change they envision doesn't work out,
       | they still have something to show for all their efforts. That
       | keeps them grounded and calm for much longer in the same
       | environment.
        
       | paulcole wrote:
       | My favorite test of a workplace is to see how closely coworkers
       | map to characters in the film Jurassic Park.
       | 
       | The more obvious each casting choice is, the more dysfunctional
       | the workplace.
        
         | sdoering wrote:
         | I never heard this analogy. Mind to explain it further? What to
         | look for, why these characters in this movie?
         | 
         | I would love to dive deeper into the analogy.
        
           | paulcole wrote:
           | It won't make any sense if you haven't watched the film.
           | 
           | Basically you're looking for charismatic/deeply delusional
           | founder, money-grubbing lawyer, smartest-person-in-the-room
           | theoretical person, old-fashioned person who complains about
           | the new way of doing things (but who might be right),
           | scientist who cares only about results and who has no ethics,
           | annoying kids.
           | 
           | It's more a joke that I've seen play out in real life than a
           | truely common method for analyzing dysfunction.
        
             | etblg wrote:
             | And they were so preoccupied with whether or not they
             | could, they didn't stop to think if they should?
        
         | notpachet wrote:
         | Are we talking about the dinosaurs themselves?
        
           | paulcole wrote:
           | If those match up with the clients, RUN!
        
       | WesolyKubeczek wrote:
       | I imagine I could do it for shits and giggles if, say, I won in a
       | lottery and my livelihood didn't actually depend on me having a
       | job.
        
       | mannykannot wrote:
       | I have worked in some dysfunctional places, and had the good
       | fortune to work in places that were not. While I learned useful
       | things from both, I got way more out of the latter. In many
       | cases, it was on a level that the dysfunctional places simply
       | could not reach.
        
       | dexen wrote:
       | _> work somewhere dysfunctional_
       | 
       |  _> bellmar.medium.com_
       | 
       | I did a double-take to ensure it wasn't _" ballmer.medium.com"_
       | :D
        
       | rizkeyz wrote:
       | I can attest that exposure to quite dysfunctional environments
       | have hardened my technical skills to a level which currently
       | opens one opportunity after another. What other people shy away
       | from, I eat for breakfast and be done with it.
       | 
       | Many years ago, I found the character of the "The Wolf" in pulp
       | fiction fascinating: a person who basically does normal, regular
       | things in dysfunctional environments and charges a premium for
       | that. I love when people call me, when the project is overdue,
       | when nothing seems to work, when they ran out of options.
       | Strangely, I seem to thrive in these settings.
        
       | rdiddly wrote:
       | OK fine, but "dysfunctional places" just automatically and glibly
       | equals "the government?" Dysfunctional places, _" i.e."_ the
       | government? Assuming the best, probably she just means "the one
       | dysfunctional government agency I worked in and have been
       | blogging about forever." I have to actively & intentionally reach
       | for that explanation because otherwise it just rubs me the wrong
       | way I guess, because of its resemblance to, among other things, a
       | sloppy extrapolation/generalization by a young person who should
       | endeavor to vacate my domesticated blade-leafed-plant-dominated
       | steppe-biome reserve; a boring old joke along the lines of "I
       | learned all my bullshit-detection skills from working with
       | dishonest people, i.e. lawyers." ("Oh thanks a lot!" says every
       | honest lawyer); or a tired talking-point of the hypocritical and
       | unhinged faux-libertarian radical "government bad! always!"
       | right.
       | 
       | The secret to maintaining a vital mental landscape is to resist
       | the temptation to think the whole world conforms to what you've
       | seen so far in your short-ass life. Be content to "know" a lot
       | less, and probably say less as a result. Ice Cube once rapped
       | something about "shut my M.F. mouth if I don't know" and that
       | seems like a pretty good policy, though if everyone did it, there
       | would be a lot fewer blog posts in the world, unfortunately (or
       | fortunately?)
        
       | marcosdumay wrote:
       | > The rewards are great if you can survive...
       | 
       | Part of what makes a place dysfunctional is that the rewards have
       | no correlation with performance or impact.
       | 
       | Then there is stuff like this:
       | 
       | > People who want to study earthquakes need to go where there are
       | fault lines. People who want to solve hard problems need to go
       | where those problems live.
       | 
       | Sure, if you want to learn about dysfunctional places, go into
       | them. Learning about them isn't a priority for most people, and
       | if you have a technical profession (not administrative), it would
       | be a hobby at most. So, do you enjoy it there?
        
         | melony wrote:
         | People who study earthquakes also get paid peanuts.
        
           | marcosdumay wrote:
           | Yeah, but learning about earthquakes is a high priority to
           | them.
           | 
           | Learning about dysfunctional organization can be high
           | priority to administrators, not to technical careers. It's
           | basically useless knowledge for technical careers.
        
           | tonyedgecombe wrote:
           | Sometimes they even get sent to jail:
           | 
           | https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/oct/23/jailing-
           | italia...
        
         | tonyedgecombe wrote:
         | >Sure, if you want to learn about dysfunctional places, go into
         | them.
         | 
         | I'm not sure how much you can learn, the number of ways
         | organisations can be dysfunctional has no bounds. It's like
         | that quote from Tolstoy about families:
         | 
         |  _" Happy families are all alike; every unhappy family is
         | unhappy in its own way."_
        
       | depereo wrote:
       | Dysfunctional organizations waste your time and teach you to
       | spend all your effort on things that are irrelevant to your
       | stated or desired goals.
       | 
       | Don't waste your life on shitty organizations. They're not worth
       | participating in. You're not growing useful skills.
       | 
       | source: currently wasting my time in a shitty organization.
        
       | smartidiot wrote:
       | If the people who need your help don't want it, it's time to
       | leave.
       | 
       | That
        
       | dade_ wrote:
       | I think a better title is, "What to do if you find yourself
       | working at a dysfunctional company."
       | 
       | You may have started at a wonderful company that is acquired or
       | for some other reason becomes dysfunctional. The place isn't
       | dangerous, and the pay covers the bills, but you are losing
       | market value (skills are dated, less relevant). Changing jobs is
       | a pain, it could be bad timing for some reason, and perhaps you
       | lack the experience or training (certs) you want at the next
       | place. You may be jumping out of one pot into another, or worse,
       | into the fire itself. In this case, this approach makes sense to
       | me.
       | 
       | However, I have to agree with the majority of the comments, avoid
       | getting into one in the first place. Don't seek them out, and if
       | you arrive and it's bad, get out quick.
        
       | jancsika wrote:
       | > People who want to study earthquakes need to go where there are
       | fault lines. People who want to solve hard problems need to go
       | where those problems live.
       | 
       | People who want to study earthquakes don't get paid by the
       | earthquakes.
       | 
       | Author works for a defense contractor.
       | 
       | I'd need a ton of evidence that _this particular_ defense
       | contractor has the goal of doing something inherently safe with
       | AI before I 'd read the author's analogy as anything other than
       | the written equivalent of getting drunk at the local bar to cope
       | with a dysfunctional marriage.
        
         | TheOtherHobbes wrote:
         | People who want to study earthquakes will keep a distance and
         | model and measure remotely.
         | 
         | The idea that seismologists actually want to experience massive
         | destruction personally is bizarre, and _completely_ wrong.
        
           | EdwardDiego wrote:
           | Seismologists don't just sit there making models. They also
           | like to do things like drill big holes into faultlines.
           | 
           | If you're studying faultlines, you want to have reasonable
           | access to the subject of your study. Otherwise you may as
           | well be a marine biologist living in Kansas.
           | 
           | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9ZPq5FRmnE
           | https://www.gns.cri.nz/Home/News-and-Events/Media-
           | Releases-a...
           | 
           | Physical measurement is used to make better models, you need
           | both. This: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lH_PAGimWJM
           | informs this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HipS-7kGe9c
           | 
           | Likewise, if you want to study volcanoes, you'd want to have
           | access to volcanoes.
           | 
           | https://youtu.be/eJGmkOFBDvg
        
           | jancsika wrote:
           | > People who want to study earthquakes will keep a distance
           | and model and measure remotely.
           | 
           | Hee hee, I completely missed that implication of the analogy.
           | 
           | There really should be an "earthquake chasers" reality show
           | if there isn't already. Like, they get a signal from that
           | early warning system in the U.S., the countdown starts and
           | then reaches zero by the time they jump in their van.
           | 
           | The rest of the episode would be counting the seconds as they
           | hurry toward their destination, only to arrive upset that yet
           | again they missed it by only a few tens of thousands of
           | seconds.
        
           | phillipcarter wrote:
           | Yeah, the post definitely has some serious "tell me you
           | aren't a geologist without telling me you aren't a geologist"
           | energy.
        
         | masterj wrote:
         | The author also has a long history of working at many places
         | that aren't defense contractors, and a great book on working
         | with large legacy systems (read: Cobol, mainframes, et al but
         | relevant to all developers) https://www.amazon.ca/Kill-Fire-
         | Manage-Computer-Systems/dp/1...
        
           | kilobaud wrote:
           | Seismically active regions (e.g. California) absolutely have
           | more earthquake experts than other places... I am not sure
           | why that metaphor is singled out when the rest of the article
           | is pretty clear its about finding the difference between a
           | burning building and a building-set-on-fire.
           | 
           | Firefighters don't just read about fires, they practice with
           | actual flames, too.
        
       | angarg12 wrote:
       | > Unfortunately, places with hard problems that haven't been
       | solved are also -- inevitably -- kind of dysfunctional.
       | 
       | I disagree wholeheartedly. Many companies (from big tech to fast
       | growing startups) have hard problems that need solving, and they
       | needn't be dysfunctional. In fact some high performing
       | organisations have plenty of hard problems, as solving hard
       | problems usually yield even harder problems to solve.
       | 
       | Sadly disagreeing with the premise makes the entire article a
       | weak claim.
        
         | redisman wrote:
         | Most dysfunctional places are also not producing much of value
         | . I've been at many shitty companies and there was nothing to
         | learn other than the leadership had some personality disorders
        
         | travisjungroth wrote:
         | There are at least two types of having problems.
         | 
         | There's having a problem like having a jigsaw puzzle. It sits
         | in front of you and is there to solve. Your organization's
         | problem could be making a faster database or improving
         | education outcomes in a neighborhood. An organization can
         | remain functional in the face of these problems.
         | 
         | There's another type of having a problem which is like having a
         | cold. It's in you and affects you. You organization's problem
         | could be the front line employees don't trust leadership or you
         | don't have enough resources. It's much harder to remain
         | functional in the face of these types of problems. I think the
         | author is referring more to this second type.
        
           | franklampard wrote:
           | As an engineer, one would want to solve the first kind but
           | leave the second kind to MBAs
        
             | lanstin wrote:
             | Not if you have ever worked in a formerly successful org
             | that got fixed by MBAs. People need to understand the
             | nature of software before fixing organizations that make
             | and maintain software. After being burned a few times, many
             | engineers find it useful to at least wave off disasters
             | waiting to be implemented and to reinforce the odd truly
             | helpful suggestion from above. Best of all is creating
             | technical solutions that enable the organization to
             | function better, to increase lower level autonomy and
             | decrease organizational coupling, to increase useful
             | transparency so we can all see the ship and its vectors.
        
             | marcosdumay wrote:
             | That's their nominal task, and nominally why they make big
             | bucks.
             | 
             | But have you ever witnessed the MBAs solving it? I haven't.
             | So I'd recommend to avoid the organizations with the second
             | kinds of problems, so that you can focus on the first, and
             | not even think about the MBAs.
             | 
             | Or, alternatively, if you manage to find a way to do it,
             | get the task for yourself and make the big bucks.
        
       | ozzythecat wrote:
       | I wonder how much of this article is survivorship bias.
       | 
       | The risk of a dysfunctional workplace is the negative feelings
       | that start consuming you, crawling into your personal life,
       | impacting you emotionally, and causing burn out.
        
       | wnolens wrote:
       | I had the same opinion and tried to do this.
       | 
       | Spent a decade in big tech surrounded by dysfunction, pushing
       | truly innovative tech through the muck to release and expending
       | significant effort to clean the muck as I went for myself and
       | others. Now I'm just burnt out, jaded, and trying to exit tech
       | altogether.
       | 
       | At the end of the day if a direct line cannot be drawn between a
       | problem (or its solution) and revenue, then management doesn't
       | care and are not capable of filling in that line in their minds.
       | And if you fill it in for them, you'll get at most a pat on the
       | back.
        
       | omginternets wrote:
       | > Unfortunately, places with hard problems that haven't been
       | solved are also -- inevitably -- kind of dysfunctional.
       | 
       | This seems to conflate dysfunctional markets with dysfunctional
       | workplaces. It seems like the author's thesis rests exactly on
       | this logical error.
        
       | steve_taylor wrote:
       | Dysfunctional usually means I have to fight for permission to do
       | the job I was hired to do. Been there, done that. No thanks.
        
         | lloydatkinson wrote:
         | This is what I was thinking too. That and "That's the way we've
         | always done things" organisations where the default answer to
         | anything is "no" even after hard _proof_ of a better way of
         | achieving something. It 's exhausting when you can just work
         | somewhere with more autonomy and less bureaucracy.
        
           | dvtrn wrote:
           | _It 's exhausting when you can just work somewhere with more
           | autonomy and less bureaucracy._
           | 
           | And trust. Bi-directional even, but in my mind that's
           | implied.
        
       | popilewiz wrote:
        
       | idworks1 wrote:
       | I like broken systems. Especially those that still manage to
       | generate money. We all want to see clean code, written by sane
       | people. But the reality is that it is rare. And when you meet
       | clean code, there is a rigorous process that makes it nearly
       | impossible to add new code/features.
       | 
       | I worked at such place that boasted security on the outside. From
       | within, it was spit and duct tape. I couldn't believe it was a
       | fortune 10. After couple of weeks working on one of the smaller
       | projects, I created a new branch and called it rewrite.
       | 
       | When I had free time, I would rewrite the entire project from
       | scratch. I really hated all the in line mysql connections in
       | side_bar_bottom_new_v2.php. It took me a month to realize that I
       | couldn't rewrite an application that was built over the course of
       | 10 years, in my spare time. Only when I embraced it and took the
       | time to understand how it was built, was I able to turn it into a
       | secure app (messy, but still secure).
       | 
       | Now when I meet dysfunctional systems, I don't get mad. I
       | challenge myself to figuring out what the heck it is doing.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-01-17 23:01 UTC)