I can't handle such organisations. I simply cannot. I don't care if they pay 3x, they break me within a few months.
Compensation is inversely proportional to how much work you actually need to do.
The Enterprise Experience
61–70 of 158 posts
Re: The Enterprise Experience
#62Always worth keeping in mind Remy's Law of Enterprise Software ( https://thedailywtf.com/articles/graceful-depredations ): if a piece of software is in any way described as being “enterprise”, it’s a piece of garbage. Joking aside, I was intrigued by the list of good things at the end of the post. Some I could understand, but some seemed to fall into that strange category of things that people say are good but really…
I don’t think enterprise software is by definition bad. You can absolutely make good enterprise software, but doing that while adhering to the morass of requirements is a skill unto itself. And something that most people in an enterprise are just not all that interested in, since they’re never judged on how pleasant the software they deliver is to use. Hell, they not ever see any of the users interacting with the sof…
In my experience enterprises do not want to pay for excellent software, simply because it is expensive. I would love to work on software that was:
- in more than two AWS regions
- required screen reader / disability support
- required multi-language support
- required multi-cloud
- actually needed a big Hadoop cluster - most enterprise data processing can be done on a MacBook Pro M4.
Re: The Enterprise Experience
#63I'm in a similar environment and found this article painfully accurate. I keep thinking my job is to solve problems and ship software...but those are clearly not the revealed preferences* of my org.
The author went from small companies to a big one. Has anyone gone the other way? I'm looking to make that shift and I'm curious how others framed their Enterprise™ experience in a way that resonates with smaller teams.
Re: The Enterprise Experience
#64Missing - new leadership will push out the old guard and replace them with friends - groups get renamed for the Nth time in N years. People continue to do the same job, but now the department has an additional "Innovation", "Discovery", or "Leadership" inserted into the title
>- new leadership will push out the old guard and replace them with friends
My mortal nemesis brings his whole helpdesk and development team across slowly whenever he starts at a new business. Which is crazy, because as far as I can see the benefit to him is simply loyalty. They dont complain or go over his head when he fails to deliver. I have receipts from staff who worked with him at other businesses where he just follows the same pattern.
1. Identify problems (The problem is the lack of a new CRM from a big microsoft partner.)
2. Spend lots of money to fix the problem (Free trips to vegas 3 times per year thanks to the CRM partner and microsoft)
3. Fail to deliver the CRM (The problem was not a big enough scope)
4. Rescope the project. (more bennies)
5. Would have failed to deliver it again however I just got a new job transforming another business enjoy your crapheap.
Re: The Enterprise Experience
#65It hurt to read this. I have seen all of this and more. - Teams that produce negative output for years with no consequence - Six figure monthly AWS bills on unused resources - Technical people who can't use a computer - Constant re-orgs and turn over Wait until this guy experiences the wrath of big consultants... It is hell, but it pays. I get my fulfillment building my own things outside of work and dream of the day…
I don’t have the energy to build anything outside of work. I spend all of my free time trying to mentally recover. I’m left drained after work. If I’m going to do extra “work”, I always think I should do more work stuff, to attempt to get ahead on some project and reduce the stress of things than have been hanging over my head. The only time this shifts is when I have a couple weeks off. During that period I will ine…
[deleted]
Re: The Enterprise Experience
#66Always worth keeping in mind Remy's Law of Enterprise Software ( https://thedailywtf.com/articles/graceful-depredations ): if a piece of software is in any way described as being “enterprise”, it’s a piece of garbage. Joking aside, I was intrigued by the list of good things at the end of the post. Some I could understand, but some seemed to fall into that strange category of things that people say are good but really…
> Does "career development" just mean "more money"? If so, why not just say "there are opportunities to make more money"? If not, what is "career development" that is not just becoming more deeply buried in an organization with the various dysfunctions described in the rest of the post? In life, everyone that thinks a lot is eventually confronted with the reality that we're all just minor players within much bigger s…
Thanks for your thoughtful reply. I see what you're saying, although with the way the world is going, I'm increasingly doubtful of the potential of that approach, because it seems that companies are becoming more brazen about explicitly selecting for their narrow and immediate self-interest. In other words, the more you use your responsibility and influence to enact change, the more likely you'll just lose that responsibility and influence (i.e., get fired, demoted, or just shunted away to places where you can make less of a difference). However, that's not entirely the case everywhere yet, and it sounds like maybe you've found a place that's big but still not entirely evil, which sounds promising. :-)
In any case, I didn't mean to imply that what you're doing is any more objectionable than anything I or a zillion other people do when we make the same tradeoffs you allude to. What I was mostly reacting to was that you mentioned those things in the section on things you viewed positively, whereas they seem to me like they still incorporate a tradeoff involving a significant amount of badness. Perhaps though you simply meant they were tipped at least slightly toward the positive side on balance, which makes sense.
Re: The Enterprise Experience
#67I'm in a similar environment and found this article painfully accurate. I keep thinking my job is to solve problems and ship software...but those are clearly not the revealed preferences * of my org. The author went from small companies to a big one. Has anyone gone the other way? I'm looking to make that shift and I'm curious how others framed their Enterprise™ experience in a way that resonates with smaller teams.…
It's a tale of two cities, in my experience. Much like you, I'm sick of wasting away the best years of my life doing nothing of consequence at $ENTERPRISE and I'm willing to take a 20% pay cut at this point for a chance to actually ship things at a small company.
Unfortunately, I've found that describing what I've learned over the past three years (without any negativity) gives founders the ick. The survival skills you need in the jungle are very different from the ones you need in a zoo, and they feel I've spent too much time in a zoo.
Similarly, large companies want to hire people who understand the value of processes and hierarchies, and interviewing at these places is a challenge for those who have spent most of their career in startups.
Re: The Enterprise Experience
#68Earlier quoted context omitted.
> ... Remy's Law of Enterprise Software ... the list of good things at the end of the post. Like the poster of the blog article, I too have worked in very large enterprise. Think 200K staff, 10K distinct servers, etc... I had the lucky opportunity to assist the CTO in hundred-million-dollar enterprise software purchasing decisions. I got to interview vendor after vendor, grilling them to see if they're compatible wit…
> For example, I didn't understand why Active Directory uses search dialog boxes for every "picker" GUI control instead of a simpler drop-down or something similar... until I worked in an environment with 2 million objects in the directory. And that’s when you realize that searching in AD is actually dog slow, and you are better off just syncing the whole thing to a proper database, then checking if the object still…
It's a very simple database engine, effectively the same as Microsoft Access but 64-bit and server hosted. The internal data representation is also sub-optimal because it uses a triplestore (key-column-value) to support LDAP schema changes without having to apply matching SQL schema changes. I don't believe it has any sort of full-text indexing capability either, it just uses ordinary sorted indexes. Hence, some search types are effectively table scans.
Re: The Enterprise Experience
#69“The menu is not the meal” - what a great spin on “the map is not the territory”.
Re: The Enterprise Experience
#70Always worth keeping in mind Remy's Law of Enterprise Software ( https://thedailywtf.com/articles/graceful-depredations ): if a piece of software is in any way described as being “enterprise”, it’s a piece of garbage. Joking aside, I was intrigued by the list of good things at the end of the post. Some I could understand, but some seemed to fall into that strange category of things that people say are good but really…
> Is it still satisfying if that software is bad, or harms many of those people?
sadly many engineers might detach or feel powerless or simply not their part of the job, and only be attracted to the huge scale. sadly you can only ever work at that scale if you work for a few of the giants, of which mostly all do the same algorithmic dark patterns extraction methods shareholder benefit maximalism capitalism pushes them into