Getting things “done” in large tech companies • Hacker News Board

Re: Getting things “done” in large tech companies

#51

Post by virgilp » Tue, May 06, 2025, 12:59 PM UTC

wpietri wrote: post #40

virgilp wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know. I'm 30 years into those 40 and, while I can list plenty of "achievements" ... that's not what got me promoted. There _is_ value in making bosses & grandbosses happy. I don't think it's good for you to be a cynic(because there's more to life than "promotion!"), but I think it's good to know/be well aware of the cynical viewpoint, because there's often a lot of truth in it.

We agree: There is value in making the compiler happy. There's value in getting tasks done. There's value in pleasing bosses. They are necessary means to an end. However, my point is that one's analysis of the purpose can't stop with any of those. That focusing only on any one of those is ultimately shallow. And in particular, my critique of this article is that he's just shifting focus from one proximate goal to ano…

Agreed - the better take is "getting promoted in large tech companies requires marketing" (and even that is only true for the senior roles, in the junior roles, being good at your trade is typically enough to get promoted to "less junior").

But people have different ways of expressing this same idea, because it gets tiring to see/read it in only one form.... so I guess one has to get a bit provocative in order to draw attention :)

(and to be fair, given how distasteful many programmers find the "marketing" part, it's somewhat useful to have many different ways to tell them that it's needed).

Re: Getting things “done” in large tech companies

#52

Post by dcminter » Tue, May 06, 2025, 12:59 PM UTC

underdeserver wrote: post #5

dcminter wrote: post #2

Absolutely true, and absolutely one of the reasons that working in large tech companies can be soul destroying.

I see it completely differently. If the execs don't see the value, customers don't see the value, and you can't prove money is being made (or saved), where is the value of your work, really? You're not paid to make art.

You're right, but this assumes that the execs have the insight to see that maintenance tasks save money. If preventing next year's incident isn't understood as being as valuable as doing the hero work to untangle this year's incident then it can be hellish unless you like hero work.

Re: Getting things “done” in large tech companies

#53

Post by lazide » Tue, May 06, 2025, 1:00 PM UTC

whstl wrote: post #38

theK wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, fire the Product Managers?

Or at least hold them accountable for failing to get things done and communicating badly with developers. Which is something that I'm yet to see. In previous companies, as an engineering manager, I had to burn a huge amount of political capital to steer my team in the right direction, several times. My people (engineers) want to achieve their goals and create value, and the higher-ups want working software making mon…

Because it’s easier to create chaos for some people than it is to actually do what they are supposed to do.

Re: Getting things “done” in large tech companies

#54

Post by dcminter » Tue, May 06, 2025, 1:03 PM UTC

underdeserver wrote: post #31

lazide wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, that is also why large segments of the big corp work environment check out and do the absolute minimum - or even create chaos to make it less obvious who is doing what for whom. Because the paycheck is indeed useful for them, eh?

These people are comfortable collecting a paycheck despite providing little value. I'm not.

Do you like working with those people? That's part of it.

Re: Getting things “done” in large tech companies

#55

Post by ta1243 » Tue, May 06, 2025, 1:03 PM UTC

lazide wrote: post #7

underdeserver wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see it completely differently. If the execs don't see the value, customers don't see the value, and you can't prove money is being made (or saved), where is the value of your work, really? You're not paid to make art.

Well, that is also why large segments of the big corp work environment check out and do the absolute minimum - or even create chaos to make it less obvious who is doing what for whom. Because the paycheck is indeed useful for them, eh?

This is why small companies can compete. What they lose out on economies of scale, they gain on avoiding this.

Re: Getting things “done” in large tech companies

#56

Post by icedchai » Tue, May 06, 2025, 1:04 PM UTC

theK wrote: post #21

whstl wrote: post #3

I don't disagree with the article, but after working in big tech, two HN startups, a couple unicorns and others, in two continents, I don't really find this too actionable. In the last ten years (and even in the 20-people HN startups), the day to day work of engineers has become so incredibly specialised and divorced from the needs of decision-makers and the customers that there is almost nothing I can do to influenc…

So, fire the Product Managers?

Good PMs are worth their weight in gold and actually make engineers' jobs easier. Bad PMs create a useless "translation" layer that doesn't help anyone (except, perhaps, themselves.)

Re: Getting things “done” in large tech companies

#57

Post by johngossman » Tue, May 06, 2025, 1:04 PM UTC

While I generally agree with this, I’d add one thing: to understand what your managers want, you really need to understand the business. At the highest level, how does your company make money, or at least think it’s going to make money? What other things does the company value? It’s surprising how often I find developers who don’t know, either because they aren’t curious, are too busy to learn, or (surprisingly common) think it’s somebody else’s job to make money…they’re just doing what they’re told. My advice is to actively try to meet upper managers, sales and support people, marketing people, and ideally customers. You almost always learn something you can apply. In big tech it is way too easy to be insulated from what the output of your job actually is. This applies even if you work on internal systems—-somewhere those systems either add value or protect the company, and understanding that helps get your job done. And if it turns out your group doesn’t add value, or you can’t figure out how it does, then start looking at what groups do add value and whether you can move there. I did a few jobs that were not clearly aligned with the company needs and those always turned out to be a mistake. The valued work not only pays better is (usually) more satisfying.

Re: Getting things “done” in large tech companies

#58

Post by abhisek » Tue, May 06, 2025, 1:08 PM UTC

icedchai wrote: post #56

theK wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, fire the Product Managers?

Good PMs are worth their weight in gold and actually make engineers' jobs easier. Bad PMs create a useless "translation" layer that doesn't help anyone (except, perhaps, themselves.)

How will you define a good PM? I have been looking for this definition for a while.

In my startup experience, it seems to me the best PMs are the CTO and the early engineers who has near infinite business and user context.

Re: Getting things “done” in large tech companies

#59

Post by whstl » Tue, May 06, 2025, 1:09 PM UTC

icedchai wrote: post #56

theK wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, fire the Product Managers?

Good PMs are worth their weight in gold and actually make engineers' jobs easier. Bad PMs create a useless "translation" layer that doesn't help anyone (except, perhaps, themselves.)

Bingo.

It's exactly the same for designers.

Good ones can shave days off complex tasks, and even help the code be more beautiful.

Bad ones can turn a 5-min feature into a week's worth of work. For absolutely no gain, and possibly creating a few bugs along the way.

Unfortunately the only way designers and PMs can learn this is by working together with engineers. Everyone needs to check the ego at the door. Which is borderline impossible with some personalities (from all sides).

Re: Getting things “done” in large tech companies

#60

Post by johngossman » Tue, May 06, 2025, 1:09 PM UTC

wpietri wrote: post #40

virgilp wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know. I'm 30 years into those 40 and, while I can list plenty of "achievements" ... that's not what got me promoted. There _is_ value in making bosses & grandbosses happy. I don't think it's good for you to be a cynic(because there's more to life than "promotion!"), but I think it's good to know/be well aware of the cynical viewpoint, because there's often a lot of truth in it.

We agree: There is value in making the compiler happy. There's value in getting tasks done. There's value in pleasing bosses. They are necessary means to an end. However, my point is that one's analysis of the purpose can't stop with any of those. That focusing only on any one of those is ultimately shallow. And in particular, my critique of this article is that he's just shifting focus from one proximate goal to ano…

Agreed, and as I tried to say in another comment, the real purpose is to help the company make money (and achieve its other goals). Ideally your management knows what those goals are and pleasing them is a proxy for that. Not always true, but in that case you have another problem, and its good to know that.