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

Workers who love ‘synergizing paradigms’ might be bad at their jobs

news.cornell.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 354 posts

Re: Workers who love ‘synergizing paradigms’ might be bad at their jobs

#121

Post by aerodexis »

CGMthrowaway wrote: post #43
rdevilla wrote: post #16

I suspect this is why formal languages exist; as a sieve to keep the hordes of fools at bay, and a system for turning bullshit into parse errors. We are undoing much of this progress by now insisting everything be expressed in natural language for a machine to translate on our behalf, like a tour guide. The natives will continue to speak amongst themselves in their mother tongue.

>a sieve to keep the hordes of fools at bay Corporate speak as a signalling mechanism is only effective among the "clueless" in the Gervais model. If any CEO tried to talk 1:1 to a competent board member that way, they would lose all credibility. Once you've operated at a certain level you get it >a system for turning bullshit into parse errors. This is the (cynical version of) the framing I tend to hold about corpor…

The Gervais model is predicated on sociopathy as the driving force of social cohesion. This is the kind of model a sociopath would construct. There are other models available to us.

Social organizations require some sort of glue to bind them together. They need ways to maintain cohesion despite vagueness and to obscure (small) errors. There is a cap put upon max individual output, but aggregate output is much higher than whatever a collection of individuals could attain. This is a very basic dynamic that is lost amidst a cult of individualism that refuses to admit to any good greater than themselves.

Yes - the CEO talking to the board in this way would lose credibility. But a CEO failing to deploy this jargon correctly would also lose credibility with the board : it's obvious he doesn't know how to lead.

What I would like to see is a study of the ratio's between corporate speak and technical speak - and the inflection points at which too much of either causes organization ruin.

Re: Workers who love ‘synergizing paradigms’ might be bad at their jobs

#122

Post by dec0dedab0de »

CGMthrowaway wrote: post #43
rdevilla wrote: post #16

I suspect this is why formal languages exist; as a sieve to keep the hordes of fools at bay, and a system for turning bullshit into parse errors. We are undoing much of this progress by now insisting everything be expressed in natural language for a machine to translate on our behalf, like a tour guide. The natives will continue to speak amongst themselves in their mother tongue.

>a sieve to keep the hordes of fools at bay Corporate speak as a signalling mechanism is only effective among the "clueless" in the Gervais model. If any CEO tried to talk 1:1 to a competent board member that way, they would lose all credibility. Once you've operated at a certain level you get it >a system for turning bullshit into parse errors. This is the (cynical version of) the framing I tend to hold about corpor…

Corporate speak as a signalling mechanism is only effective among the "clueless" in the Gervais model. If any CEO tried to talk 1:1 to a competent board member that way, they would lose all credibility. Once you've operated at a certain level you get it

This also holds true for competent non-board members. I have interacted with C-level executives at fortune 100 companies, as well as smaller businesses. It is almost impressive how quickly they can switch in and out of corporate bullshit mode. I think it's what the kids call code-switching.

In general, once they trust you a bit, and they know someone isn't listening they talk like a normal person. Then you ask a difficult question about the business and the corporate-speak kicks in like a security sub routine trying to prevent them from saying the wrong thing.

I have also met some that seemingly calculate their tone and cadence to try to manipulate the person(s)/people(s) they're talking to. It's fascinating when you catch them doing it, and it's different than simply matching like a chameleon. For example, they may use an authoritative tone with younger people, a kind but subtly threatening tone with anxious people, and a buddybuddy tone with a plumber or someone they know isn't going to put up with any bullshit.

I'm really curious how much of it is formally taught in MBA programs and stuff, how much is them copying each other, and if any of it is just a natural defense mechanism to the pressures of being in power.

Re: Workers who love ‘synergizing paradigms’ might be bad at their jobs

#123

Post by teddyh »

delecti wrote: post #28
alcasa wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe controversial, but I believe a lot of OOP/Clean Code patterns are the software equivalent of corporate BS.

I worked with a junior dev who suddenly got really excited about Clean Code. Every example he brought up left me feeling that there was a kernel of good advice, but the book wanted you to take it to such an extreme that it would result in shitty code.

There is now a second edition of that book which has supposedly been rewritten to fix that.

Re: Workers who love ‘synergizing paradigms’ might be bad at their jobs

#124

Post by mv4 »

headcanon wrote: post #118

If anyone wants a chuckle, I vibe-coded an endless supply of "synergizing paradigm" terms as a slideshow for a fake corporation. It's fun to put on in the background on a tv somewhere to see if anyone notices. https://brightpath-global-solutions.com/ Edit: repo link: https://github.com/chronick/global-business-solutions

as someone frequently exhibiting at various industry trade shows, I can confidently say nobody would notice.

Re: Workers who love ‘synergizing paradigms’ might be bad at their jobs

#125

Post by darreninthenet »

kevinsync wrote: post #54

Last time I worked corporate, we were acquired and I was asked what my job was by somebody on the other side. I said “My job is to make you feel good about whatever it is that I may or may not be doing around this place.” Despite it being a joke, I think there’s a lot of truth in there that explains corp-tongue -- from being visible in endless meetings to in-group parlance to cutthroat promotion tracks, a lot of corp…

As a highly experienced consultant once said to me, forget all the objectives, priorities and corporate culture bullshit, whatever anyone tells you, your job is to make your boss look good.

Re: Workers who love ‘synergizing paradigms’ might be bad at their jobs

#126

Post by persedes »

Esophagus4 wrote: post #98

There does exist some purpose for corp-speak: it is a shared language for people in disparate parts of a large organization to communicate with. It is a tool, mostly for managers. Managers use it with peers because their job is coordination and communication. Managers shouldn’t talk to their reports in corp-speak, but think of it like a shared protocol for all messages in the corporate message bus.

Agreed, I think it also acts as a hiring filter to scan for candidates that have been exposed to this kind of language and can speak it fluently. The bigger the cooperation, the more widespread that is though, don't see it as often in mid sized companies. Was looking into a director role at a large org and there were lots of very new words thrown at me very quickly.

Re: Workers who love ‘synergizing paradigms’ might be bad at their jobs

#127

Post by jimnotgym »

I find it interesting how different companies have a different BS, that marks people as insiders. The insiders like to make the implication that it is the newcomer who is at fault, because they only know the real words for things. Slimey salesey newcomers pick up on it instantly.

Often it is misuse of terms that actually have real meanings that annoy me most

Re: Workers who love ‘synergizing paradigms’ might be bad at their jobs

#128

Post by utopiah »

rdevilla wrote: post #16

I suspect this is why formal languages exist; as a sieve to keep the hordes of fools at bay, and a system for turning bullshit into parse errors. We are undoing much of this progress by now insisting everything be expressed in natural language for a machine to translate on our behalf, like a tour guide. The natives will continue to speak amongst themselves in their mother tongue.

Which is precisely why proper scammers, not to say "top" management, is excellent at spotting keywords, or even better shibboleh, and using them. If they must they'll even learn and adopt new keywords from HBR or whatever trendy management publication can help them look the par.

Re: Workers who love ‘synergizing paradigms’ might be bad at their jobs

#129

Post by gherkinnn »

johnsillings wrote: post #44

SOCIOPATHS │ SOCIOPATHS WITH MBAs │ SOCIOPATHS WHO LIKE POWERPOINT │ OVERWORKED DOERS │ CONFUSED PEOPLE │ LOSERS

I am growing comfortable with bouncing between the confused and the losers. In this model, anybody between the losers and sociopaths are the true suckers. I am no sociopath so I better make myself comfortable at the bottom of the barrel. More time for my own problems.

Re: Workers who love ‘synergizing paradigms’ might be bad at their jobs

#130

Post by utopiah »

headcanon wrote: post #118

If anyone wants a chuckle, I vibe-coded an endless supply of "synergizing paradigm" terms as a slideshow for a fake corporation. It's fun to put on in the background on a tv somewhere to see if anyone notices. https://brightpath-global-solutions.com/ Edit: repo link: https://github.com/chronick/global-business-solutions

Where can I transfer millions in investments already? This is revolutionary. It'll change everything! /s
Post reply on HN