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

Re: Getting things “done” in large tech companies

#151

Post by whstl » Tue, May 06, 2025, 4:08 PM UTC

malthaus wrote: post #143

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…

communication is probably the most important skillset in any organisation and 9 months of interim work is not sufficient enough for you to realize it. so this reads like any other salty engineer who thinks he's smarter than everyone in the org, business people are useless and if only he would yield decision power, all issues would be solved immediately. but guess what, it's usually not true and that mindset is usuall…

I guess actually delivering work according to specifications and making both stakeholders and customer's lives easier is never gonna be good enough for the peanut gallery.

And it's not about having "decision power", whatever that means. I was there to collaborate, listen, document, communicate down and deliver. And I did. I got my raise, my team got raises, projects were completed, management was happy, customers are using it to this day.

I wanted to be in control of my career and my output like the article describes. For nine months, I was.

Everything else is bullshit rationalization.

Re: Getting things “done” in large tech companies

#152

Post by pphysch » Tue, May 06, 2025, 4:10 PM UTC

spicyusername wrote: post #19

Palomides wrote: post #15

"once software is done, you might be tempted to maintain it, but don't fall into that trap!" seems like a bleak thesis to me

They are implying that it is up to the decision makers to decide whether maintaining it is valuable. Never maintain it for "free".

most generally useful software is maintained for free

Re: Getting things “done” in large tech companies

#153

Post by kylereeve » Tue, May 06, 2025, 4:11 PM UTC

malfist wrote: post #77

icedchai wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.)

My previous PM was ultra valuable. Put devs in contact with the customers, got out of the way of deciding what to build, and then sheltered the devs from the chaos of customers. He was also smart about what could be done and in what timeline, always working from the estimates engineers gave, working backwards and deciding what scope could be cut and where, who if another team could loan us people. He was the right ba…

That's my experience with PMs (of all flavors of P; Product, Project, Program). A good one is invaluable and can really accelerate and unblock a project, especially one with a broad scope and many teams that depend on each other. A bad one is an active impediment and prevents actual work from getting done. I'd rather have no PM than a bad one, but a good PM is worth their weight in gold.

Re: Getting things “done” in large tech companies

#154

Post by whstl » Tue, May 06, 2025, 4:16 PM UTC

kylereeve wrote: post #153

malfist wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My previous PM was ultra valuable. Put devs in contact with the customers, got out of the way of deciding what to build, and then sheltered the devs from the chaos of customers. He was also smart about what could be done and in what timeline, always working from the estimates engineers gave, working backwards and deciding what scope could be cut and where, who if another team could loan us people. He was the right ba…

That's my experience with PMs (of all flavors of P; Product, Project, Program). A good one is invaluable and can really accelerate and unblock a project, especially one with a broad scope and many teams that depend on each other. A bad one is an active impediment and prevents actual work from getting done. I'd rather have no PM than a bad one, but a good PM is worth their weight in gold.

> I'd rather have no PM than a bad one, but a good PM is worth their weight in gold.

Yep that sums it up.

A mediocre one is already a huge problem, a bad one is able to tank projects.

A mediocre boss or mediocre engineer can at least get out of the way.

Re: Getting things “done” in large tech companies

#155

Post by csours » Tue, May 06, 2025, 4:16 PM UTC

I've noticed that people who are good at getting promoted are good at claiming success.

Claiming success is not wrong per se, and getting promoted is not wrong per se, but sometimes the claimed success does not accurately represent value delivery.

"Definition of Done" is a social exercise, not a technical one.

Re: Getting things “done” in large tech companies

#156

Post by munksbeer » Tue, May 06, 2025, 4:16 PM UTC

whstl wrote: post #149

conrs wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've had a very hard time with the Product Manager discipline. From the books and podcasts like Lenny's, it all makes perfect sense, but it seems like in practice it is as you described - they've inserted themselves in between and often don't represent either side well. It's lead me to develop product management skills myself, which are honestly incredibly useful in avoiding wasted effort. But it does make me wonder…

That makes me think. I never really worked with a PM that was good at preventing wasted effort. Or even mediocre at it. Most assumptions I saw them making were incorrect, unless it was a VERY SIMPLE product. To me this is something that engineering should be doing, just like splitting tasks and double-checking designs. Of course not every engineer can do it, but some of us have been doing it, negotiating deadlines an…

Frankly, for me, the best value product managers can provide is being the buffer and/or unblocker. I want other team C to do task X, because it unblocks my team and others, but somehow I can't convince team C to do it. Well, that becomes the product managers job. They _should_ know the path to delivery and understand why this is important and negotiate with team C to drop other stuff to deliver X. And they can tell anyone above team C why this is happening. And I have worked with some product managers like that, but unfortunately they are rare, and most just get bullied by stronger willed (obstinate) tech teams. It isn't an easy job.

I'm quite fortunate that at the moment I have a great relationship with all of our peer teams and we generally sort it out amongst ourselves. We don't have a product manager involved at all for the last few years.

Re: Getting things “done” in large tech companies

#157

Post by whstl » Tue, May 06, 2025, 4:28 PM UTC

aprdm wrote: post #142

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…

This really depends on the company. There are many companies where eng has way more weight than PM. And that eng aren't so divorced from customers. Even big tech.

I kinda keep hoping to get into one of those but so far only tiny startups are like this. Maybe I should go back to big tech.

Re: Getting things “done” in large tech companies

#158

Post by nine_k » Tue, May 06, 2025, 4:36 PM UTC

> If you want to get things done you can’t be a gardener.

I'd say that you can be a gardener, but you have to periodically demonstrate the harvest.

Re: Getting things “done” in large tech companies

#159

Post by PaulHoule » Tue, May 06, 2025, 4:39 PM UTC

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…

Behind any web application that works there is a gardener.

Re: Getting things “done” in large tech companies

#160

Post by whstl » Tue, May 06, 2025, 4:40 PM UTC

devrandoom wrote: post #37

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…

Also bear in mind that you're slowly strolling on the road to burnout.

Definitely.

It took me years to realize it but I became kind of a magnet for dysfunctional organizations. Apart from the current one and the previous YC startup, it was just bloated places that barely shipped anything.