Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Zenefits Software Helped Brokers Cheat On Licensing Process

buzzfeed.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 167 posts

Re: Zenefits Software Helped Brokers Cheat On Licensing Process

#141

Post by radicalbyte »

tyre wrote: post #27
mixmastamyk wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> uncovering some frightening immaturity pervasive in Valley companies. This is one of the dark sides to having an entire engineering team in the 25-30 age range. They can sling http just fine, but sometimes don't fully grasp the consequences of their work.

I was 22 when I started and cared very deeply about the consequences of what I was doing. It's more about heavily interviewing for alignment with your mission. If people care deeply about the problem you're solving — not just the technical problem, the people problem — then you're far less likely to have these issues. I interviewed dozens if not hundreds of people at ZP and there were two red flags for engineers: 1)…

At 12 I was a hacker. At 22 I was very serious + responsible. At 35 I've learnt when I should act like a 12 year old.

So hacking is reserved for research project and the odd on-off script which gets nowhere further than my PC ;)

I've had hackers in my team, they've always been strong technically (they take risks so learn fast) but they have always been a net negative in the long run if left uncontrolled. But put them into the right environment and they can be very effective (as they tend to be very creative).

The question is will an ex-Facebook hacker accept being kept at arms-length production and treated like a junior developer? It works for me because there aren't any AAA employers here in The Netherlands.

Re: Zenefits Software Helped Brokers Cheat On Licensing Process

#142

Post by tyre »

hitekker wrote: post #140
tyre wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is great feedback: constructive and substantive. I like your idea framing the quotes as an alternate telling. They were listed first out of habit (ex-philosophy major), but you're right that this is primarily our story to tell. Empathy The difference between front-stabbing and giving good feedback is one of maturity. If you've had many conversations with young kids, they are incredible at giving blunt feedback,…

Thank you in return for thinking through my suggestion :-) Everything you said sounds fine, with the exception of what makes front-stabbing, front-stabbing. I agree that maturity is important for giving constructive feedback; just as important, in my opinion, is closeness. That closeness is certainly achievable in a small startup, but the company scales, I have strong doubts that it will match the level of honesty Em…

I understand more where you're coming from and I absolutely agree. Part of it is my vocabulary, specifically co-opting the word feedback.

In public situations, like giving a presentation or a meeting with multiple parties, a huge part of empathy is understanding people's sensitivity to being ganged up on or feeling embarrassed in front of other. Politeness, specifically around being less brutally honest in group settings, is meant to deter this.

Feedback, to me, is a 1-on-1 activity. Much closer to a heart-to-heart, which requires both the confidence to stand by your values and the vulnerability to be open to change.

Re: Zenefits Software Helped Brokers Cheat On Licensing Process

#143

Post by LukaAl »

hitekker wrote: post #140
tyre wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is great feedback: constructive and substantive. I like your idea framing the quotes as an alternate telling. They were listed first out of habit (ex-philosophy major), but you're right that this is primarily our story to tell. Empathy The difference between front-stabbing and giving good feedback is one of maturity. If you've had many conversations with young kids, they are incredible at giving blunt feedback,…

Thank you in return for thinking through my suggestion :-) Everything you said sounds fine, with the exception of what makes front-stabbing, front-stabbing. I agree that maturity is important for giving constructive feedback; just as important, in my opinion, is closeness. That closeness is certainly achievable in a small startup, but the company scales, I have strong doubts that it will match the level of honesty Em…

I love this conversation, and I'd like to give my feedback. First, no, you are coming across as a person who thought deeply about this concepts.

I like the idea of closeness but, as you noted, it is not always possible. I think that empathy is the right word, but should be better characterized. Empathy is trying to establish a connection, is to bring the two people close when giving the honest feedback so that it is perceived correctly. How to do it, that's another story.

One technique that I found very powerful is called feedforward. The idea is, instead of saying what someone has done wrong, suggest a way he could make it right the next time. Example, you sent an email without the attachment. I could tell you: "you should be more careful!" or I could give you a constructive idea, maybe creating a connection: "I understand that sometimes it happens to forget an attachment. I developed the habit of putting the attachments in the email before writing it, so I don't forget them". It is not a perfect example. But even if we aren't close, it gives you a sense of closeness, a feeling that I understand you, and I care about you.

The problem with this approach is that the receiving party should be receptive. I used this method and I received answers like "But I believe I was right because...". And this is the end. You could ignore the answer, knowing that your feedback was useless, or you could try to explain, but you have lost. Nevertheless, if the feedforward is ingrained in the company culture, it is something known and actively practiced (that means the example starts from the CEO), it helps to create a positive environment.

I'm not sure if that's what he means by empathy, or maybe his company uses a different technique. You are right: closeness, privacy, and maturity are essential for a positive culture were front-stabbing (or worse, backstabbing) is impossible. And empathy is the ability to bring someone close, especially when it is relevant to provide important feedbacks.

Re: Zenefits Software Helped Brokers Cheat On Licensing Process

#144

Post by hluska »

spacehome wrote: post #97
jacquesm wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds to me like the real problem was in the test. If someone can get by without actually absorbing the material then they should be given the pass, if they can't then it's a different story. Of course as soon as the program starts answering test questions or something like that it is a different matter but to spend less time than required and still pass means that either the test is inadequate or the course is need…

Or there's a wide spectrum in people's ability to learn. The real issue is that there is a designated time at all rather than just a test.

Then why not lobby to have the rule changed instead of outright breaking it?

Re: Zenefits Software Helped Brokers Cheat On Licensing Process

#146

Post by lmm »

maxerickson wrote: post #9
fennecfoxen wrote: post #2

The mandatory 52 hours spent logged into the course requirement hearkens back to this recent discussion on occupational licensing: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11054527

However arbitrary or dumb it might be, it's still a rather low bar. edit: which I think might not sound how I intend it. I meant to get at it not requiring a great deal of investment of time or other resources to become an insurance broker.

It shows a real lack of faith in the exam, I think. If the exam is testing the requirements of being an insurance broker correctly, why have an "x hours of training" requirement as well?

Re: Zenefits Software Helped Brokers Cheat On Licensing Process

#147

Post by lmm »

phonon wrote: post #81
trevmckendrick wrote: post #68

This is being way overblown IMO. If you've worked at a big, regulated company, you know there are tons of trainings that you have to do. Often said training provide little to no value, other than covering the ass (CYA'ing) of the employer. But what's worse: these programs will sometimes log you out if you're not paying 100% attention. Everyone I knew working at our Big 4 accounting firm would do our real work while t…

LIC-EN-SING This isn't some perfunctory blah-blah training. Unlike professions where you are expected to get a post-college degree and pass a multi-day difficult test given once or twice a year, all you need to become a health insurance broker is take some classes (in person or online) for a few hours, pass a test (which you can retake as often as you like) and pay ~$100. That's it! Zenefits is large enough they coul…

What on earth does spending x hours on something prove? If someone spent their 52 hours zoned out while the video played, just aware enough to click the "I'm still watching" button that shows up every 5 minutes or whatever, how would that make them any more qualified than the macro?

It sounds like the real problem is that the test is grossly inadequate. The regulations should specify a test that's stringent enough. Specifying x hours of training isn't helping anyone.

Re: Zenefits Software Helped Brokers Cheat On Licensing Process

#148

Post by lmm »

run4yourlives2 wrote: post #50

Let's just forget about the entire ethical argument around breaking an existing policy/legal condition of doing business, as important as that is wrt health insurance. Who in their right mind thinks taking the time to design, then publish, a way to defeat a relatively straightforward education requirement is in any way a worthwhile thing to do? There is a level of ego there that goes beyond rational decision making:…

It could easily have been a bottom-up effort - someone got tired of watching the videos, wrote the macro (doesn't require a lot of programming expertise), passed it around to their friends who also used it, passed it up to their manager and eventually it became widespread.

Have you ever had to watch 52 hours of mandatory training videos? I think that could easily be more unpleasant than 104 hours of hard labour.

Re: Zenefits Software Helped Brokers Cheat On Licensing Process

#149

Post by tptacek »

robbiemitchell wrote: post #114
dang wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course we don't: https://news.ycombinator.com/from?site=buzzfeed.com . Two of the biggest HN stories from the past two days alone were from Buzzfeed: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11075336 , https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11061992 . Usually the complaint I hear is "why is Buzzfeed on HN". Buzzfeed is one of a class of sites that produce a lot of dreck as well as the occasional high-quality article. Th…

Buzzfeed has proven itself by now to be a legitimate news source, even if the money is coming from the other division (clickbait). And not just tech stories: when big-name publications cut their education coverage entirely, Buzzfeed hired a reporter dedicated to it. I would expect similar penalizing treatment of other "mixed-quality" sources like Quora, Forbes, Techcrunch, Business Insider, etc.

The problem isn't the legitimacy of Buzzfeed; it's that the low-quality content comes from the same domain as the high-quality stuff, and so if you do nothing to penalize that domain, you get cat pictures on the front page. It's not a moral judgement, but rather a practical measure.

Re: Zenefits Software Helped Brokers Cheat On Licensing Process

#150

Post by AznHisoka »

AznHisoka wrote: post #104
fancy_pantser wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I bailed mentally at an interview with a YC startup in SF because, as part of the technical portion, they had me write a scraper to pull information from searches on other sites. This was against each site's legal/usage terms (and so was defeating the basic obstacles the companies put in the way of being scraped in bulk). When I asked about their business model they revealed that they were making money by doing exact…

Priceonomics?

No answer means yes.
Post reply on HN