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

Most “mandatory requirements” in corporations are imaginary

nibblestew.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 405 posts

Re: Most “mandatory requirements” in corporations are imaginary

#51

Post by trabant00 »

Aeolun wrote: post #41
trabant00 wrote: post #23

I find these types of articles to be truisms. We have some imperfect system. Everybody knows about the problems it has. Somebody writes an article about how stupid and wrong those problems are. How does that help anybody? The real question is how you fix those problems without introducing others. Passed a certain age and work experience you start to notice that the bureaucracy that stops you from doing quick smart fi…

If only people were willing to place all responsibility with me. I’d happily take it if we don’t have to deal with all the senseless policies/teams any more. The bureaucracy stops idiots from being idiots. The logical solution is to not hire (or retain) idiots, not to add more bureaucracy.

From your post I think you are quite young and inexperienced. There's not enough non-idiots to run companies. Having to deal with them is a fact of business, you can't simply isolate from the world. The fact that nobody is willing to place responsibility with you should tell the same thing.

To sum it up: try to talk about what you already did. So from experience, not what you would do in your ideal world.

Re: Most “mandatory requirements” in corporations are imaginary

#52

Post by serioussecurity »

Aeolun wrote: post #33
sfifs wrote: post #25

In BigCorps, if there's a stupid requirement, there's usually a reason for the stupid requirement to be there in the first place but getting to the reason might require un-peeling a few org layers to since the people enforcing the policy will not be the people who wrote the policy. A more productive use of time would be to understand the reason for the policy, document out why it doesn't apply to your case and then a…

I think the problem with this logic is it hinders a hundred people on a daily basis to prevent one person from doing something stupid once a year. That’s just not great ROI.

I've seen individual engineers make a mistake that caused 100 engineer's salary worth of damage.

Re: Most “mandatory requirements” in corporations are imaginary

#53

Post by zeepzeep »

HenryBemis wrote: post #40
sfifs wrote: post #25

In BigCorps, if there's a stupid requirement, there's usually a reason for the stupid requirement to be there in the first place but getting to the reason might require un-peeling a few org layers to since the people enforcing the policy will not be the people who wrote the policy. A more productive use of time would be to understand the reason for the policy, document out why it doesn't apply to your case and then a…

I believe it's all about Security (C-I-A). To mitigate this issue, on paper, an (usually) HR policy writes "do not do non-work related stuff with your work computer". And since many people ignore this rule, because "why have a second laptop?", the next best thing is to route all traffic from your laptop through the company, and weed out the GigHubs and GitLabs of this world (in the same manner that they block all sex…

> That said.. why would a person use the corporate computer for their (allow me the use of the word) 'hobby'?

Because my work computer is around 100 times faster than my personal one.

Re: Most “mandatory requirements” in corporations are imaginary

#54

Post by rendall »

nisse72 wrote: post #39

Related, after telling us for years how dangerous it would be if people flew with more than 100 ml of liquid, it's now allowed (i.e. no longer dangerous?) to carry a larger quantity of hand sanitizer because of coronavirus: https://www.tsa.gov/news/press/releases/2020/04/15/tsas-tips...

There was always a medical exception, e.g. for lens solution.

However, most TSA agents do not know this unless you tell them it's a medical exception, and then they will ask a supervisor.

Re: Most “mandatory requirements” in corporations are imaginary

#55

Post by corty »

DEADBEEFC0FFEE wrote: post #47
Aeolun wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the problem with this logic is it hinders a hundred people on a daily basis to prevent one person from doing something stupid once a year. That’s just not great ROI.

Anyone who has spent a bit of time trying to calculate the lost productivity caused just the meetings needed to discuss breaches (internal, accidental), knows it's great ROI.

Everyone greatly overestimates ROI in their own area of expertise and greatly underestimates costs in the rest.

You might be right in some special instance, but generally you are not. One example: Sending files via Email is a security problem. So you prohibit this via settings, virus scanners, appliances, etc. Now you've solved the emailed worm problem. However, you've just created a "how do we move files/data/screenshots/..." problem for the whole company. Now everyone will need their own special solution for everything, support will need a screenshot upload tool because you cannot just email them screenshots anymore, marketing won't be able to do images in mails anymore, external people won't have access to internal file shares, etc.

Re: Most “mandatory requirements” in corporations are imaginary

#56

Post by cryptica »

This particular requirement that contractors cannot work from home had a purpose; so that full time employees have at least one advantage over contractors so that employees don't start asking to become contractors. Of course contractors get paid more so it makes no sense to be an employee... That's why companies need these odd rules; to artificially sweeten the worse deal... Even though there is no productivity benefit at all. It's all about exploiting psychology to keep costs down.

Re: Most “mandatory requirements” in corporations are imaginary

#57

Post by anticensor »

zeepzeep wrote: post #53
HenryBemis wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe it's all about Security (C-I-A). To mitigate this issue, on paper, an (usually) HR policy writes "do not do non-work related stuff with your work computer". And since many people ignore this rule, because "why have a second laptop?", the next best thing is to route all traffic from your laptop through the company, and weed out the GigHubs and GitLabs of this world (in the same manner that they block all sex…

> That said.. why would a person use the corporate computer for their (allow me the use of the word) 'hobby'? Because my work computer is around 100 times faster than my personal one.

I have the opposite situation: My personal computer is faster .

Re: Most “mandatory requirements” in corporations are imaginary

#58

Post by munk-a »

roel_v wrote: post #50
nisse72 wrote: post #39

Related, after telling us for years how dangerous it would be if people flew with more than 100 ml of liquid, it's now allowed (i.e. no longer dangerous?) to carry a larger quantity of hand sanitizer because of coronavirus: https://www.tsa.gov/news/press/releases/2020/04/15/tsas-tips...

When circumstances change, risk profiles and trade offs change. News at 11. I mean you can rage about the unlikeliness of people concocting explosives from various liquids, but that is entirely besides the point here.

I, personally, would prefer to rage at the fact that the TSA has managed to export that liquid rule to everyone else in the world. I don't see why, when flying from Ontatio to Quebec, I need to follow the TSA's security theatre.

Though I agree that's also besides the point.

Re: Most “mandatory requirements” in corporations are imaginary

#59

Post by galoisgirl »

Our time on this Earth is limited and we can't do everything. We have to make decisions.

"X is required" is shorthand for "we do not want to deal with the consequences of the lack of X". It's a decision. Sure, they could, but they wouldn't have resources to deal with other things.

That's basically all there is to understand here.

All the rest are corollaries:

- Sometimes changed circumstances require revisiting some decisions. Like COVID-19. - You can try and convince people to change their decisions. Your time to do that is limited too. Chose your battles. - Decision fatigue exists. People may not want to make new decisions and will prefer sticking to old ones or push the burden onto other people.

Saying it's "imaginary" is childish. Sure, policies may be arbitrary, but the constraint of only having 24 hours in a day is not.

Re: Most “mandatory requirements” in corporations are imaginary

#60

Post by Yizahi »

simonbarker87 wrote: post #3

This is why managers need a high level of emotional intelligence, the ability to empathize and quickly place themselves in the position of others. Without those three qualities management is ill equipped to handle these kinds of things sensibly. Sadly the above traits are more deemed leadership qualities rather than management qualities and so often missing in management. Leadership skills are far harder to teach tha…

There is an opinion that the more manager resembles high functioning sociopath the more efficient he is. He may even look friendly and provide benefits for the employees but that would be not because of empathy but because of calculated decision. Personally I think there is some truth to this opinion and I don't believe in the "benevolent" corporations, especially big ones.
Post reply on HN