Live data from Hacker News

Things I want to say to my boss

ithoughtaboutthatalot.com

201–210 of 238 posts

Re: Things I want to say to my boss

#201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As I've seen it younger engineers simply focus a lot more on money and their career growth versus the product or whatever their own sense of "the right thing is". That makes the stock go up and everyone is happy more or less. At the same time a lot of experienced engineers get very upset at the suggestion that they should do likewise.

I'm very much not an experienced engineer but I lean that way. I think the modern profit-above-all-else attitude of modern engineers comes from the whole "learn to code" movement and promises of a good paying job. These people aren't motivated by their passion for the craft but instead because it was seen as easy money

Hard not to be motivated by money when simply being alive requires so much of it. It's easy to be principled when your bills are paid.

Re: Things I want to say to my boss

#202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is a variation of the principal-agent problem, and recognizing had helped me climb up the ladder in my career.

Tell me more

When I was in the policymaking world and was considering grad school/academia, an underlying theme in my research was that the principal-agent problem is a reflection of misaligned incentives which leads a stag-hunt dynamic to become a Nash Equilibrium.

Long story short, incentives matter, and understanding how to align your initiatives with the incentives of veto players helps build coalitions that you need to get initiatives out the door. That said, these initiatives also need to be executed successfully, becuase organizational dynamics are inherently multi-agent games.

Essentially, I made sure to understand how to speak (ie. Understand the incentive structures) of multiple stakeholders (eg. How to convince Mgmt and IC Engineers, PMs, salespeople, customer success, and customers) and also how to execute successfully on initiatives (ie. How to successfully launch products, lead a round, land customers, or manage an M&A event).

This meant both building domain knowledge about each of the stakeholders fields as well as building domain knowledge in a handful of fields I knew I could specialize in.

Basically, understanding incentive structures and being able to show how your interests and goals align with those incentives is critical.

For example, back when I was an IC level engineer, if I wanted to get tech debt prioritized, I made sure to:

1. Show that it was tied to active issues to customers that matter - eg. fixing a bug for a customer who spends $20k a year at a company generating $100M a year in revenue is a misallocation of resources for EMs and PMs

2. Show that it is tied to speeding up feature delivery: it converts a conversation around "maintenance" into a conversation around adding new capabilities that are assumed to generate revenue, thus aligning Sales, PM, and Leadership

A lot of people on HN neurotically and reflexively don't care to understand how organizations work or how to make a case. A number of them assume that just because it's a technical problem it should actually matter to the top line of a business. In most cases, it does not if you cannot make a case for it. A number of them also don't care to leave a bad organization if they are in one (I have worked in 2 in my career, and made sure to leave).

I have no MBA, I just have an undergrad CS degree (and a secondary in Government). Even though my current day job doesn't demand it, I can still code, but I also taught myself how to do basic FP&A, marketing, user experience research, and other functions. If you want to survive and thrive in the tech industry, nowadays you will need to build industry specific domain experience, technology specific domain experience, and basic product management, sales, and user experience chops.

Re: Things I want to say to my boss

#203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I struggle to find things in the modern business world that cannot be blamed on the culture of the MBA. What you are talking about — boards not caring about the welfare of employees — is a fundamental result of the culture of the MBA, which has suffused through all business thought in a way that casually depersonalises and humiliates. I used to work for a small business and I decided I would have to quit one day when…

This one trips me up. Why are we sensitive about the word "resource"? Literally nothing about the word "resource" has negative connotations for me. Resources are finite and precious. They are protected and important. Sometimes they are exploited and undervalued, sure. What isn't? Certainly not humans or employees. Every project requires resources. Some of them are human. It's just a category. Would you be less bother…

> Would you be less bothered if he said "I've got a human for that"? Or "I've got a worker for that"? "The staff to handle that need is available"?

"I've got a worker" is still somewhat dehumanising. "I have the staff for that" is somewhat less dehumanising.

But, for example, "yes we have someone here that can work on this with you" is so obviously less dehumanising.

I find it surprising that people would ever be confused about this. Perhaps it is because I am British and that sort of language is impolite, rude and arrogant. Or perhaps it is rejection-sensitive dysphoria (a real problem for me) making me sensitive to descriptions of myself and people I care about that reduce us to interchangeable allocatable units.

But again, the basic thing here is: there were four of us. Only one of us was ever going to do that job because there were four of us and we had four different jobs. So why ever lurch towards the language of interchangeability, in earshot.

Four people in a small business cannot really ever be a "category". And you should never use a word for a person that can also be used for a photocopier or a dictionary. A person can be resourceful; they are never a resource.

Re: Things I want to say to my boss

#204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are cultural differences though. In France burnout is not seen by the company as commitment. It is seen as either a health accident (best case) or as a fuck up on your side (worst case). This comes from a fundamentally different approch to work (and work ethics) from the US.

Yeah but in general French approach to work and US ones are... not similar, dare I say the opposite of each other. Often 10 weeks of paid vacation vs 2 (4 is already a big perk). How sick leave is treated or general health issues. Number of public holidays. And so on. So this view difference makes complete sense.

I agree with your sentiment. Work in France sounds like hell -- not for the work-life balance, but for the compensation model. Sorry to all of the French readers here. (You may feel similar to the United States or other places.) In these countries were the labour laws are extremely in favour of the worker (France, Germany, Italy, etc.), the pay for technologists is generally awful and there is very little upside. If you work really hard, you barely get paid more. That would so demotivating to me.

About this part:

    > Number of public holidays.
I Googled USA vs France. Both have 11 national holidays per year. Did you mean to write something else?

Re: Things I want to say to my boss

#205
post #87
post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Profit at any cost Yes, but I think you're overlooking a hugely important factor in all this... You boss is just some average manager that very often could even be below average. Your boss is under their own pressure to perform and most of them will similarly struggle because they're not that good. Most workers at any roles are just average by definition. And the higher up you go, the more timing and luck plays a r…

> and as an employee you should also be focused on that as your goal. Insofar as my paycheck continually rises at a rate substantially greater than inflation. Otherwise, I couldn't honestly give two shits about how well the company is doing. An employee should run themselves as a business. A company who is not willing to pay premium with substantial raises gets Jiffy Lube service. LLMs have been amazing for this if y…

> Otherwise, I couldn't honestly give two shits about how well the company is doing. An employee should run themselves as a business.

They pay you to increase their profit. As you see yourself running a business, it's important to understand what your customers actually care to pay for.

If you want your pay to go up, they need to see the impact you can make or are making to their profit.

A lot of engineers think they are paid to work through tasks assigned to them and what not, or to increase code quality, or to add a feature to the app, or backend, etc. As they focus on that, they can find themselves really surprised when they're told they aren't performing or are going to be let go. "I did everything you asked me?" Yes, but none of that was what they were interested in. To them it felt like they had to step in and find things for you to do otherwise you'd be sitting idle while they pay for nothing, which is work they had to do that they'd had rather not have too.

What they actually want you to do, is immediately begin understanding what makes them money, immediately start engaging with ideas to maximize that, and immediately start focusing on how the tasks you pick up should be done in order to maximize the impact to their bottom line, by figuring out if it's the right thing or not, if it's worth doing it well or doing it quickly, etc.

> Under no circumstance should someone who is paid based on hours-in-seat ever "work their hardest".

I'm not fully going to disagree here, but most engineers are not paid for "hours-in-seat" at least in big tech. They're salaried, not hourly wage workers.

And what you say is true if you consider "working hard" to be the same as "pretending to work a lot of hours."

Putting in lots of hours is actually quite easy, if at the sacrifice of your personal time, but anybody can do it.

Actual hard work though is often quite engaging, fun, and rewarding. Many engineers look for opportunities to work on hard problems for example.

It is very difficult to create an environment that makes people work hard. Meaning, having them truly tackle innovation, truly raise efficiency, truly prioritized on what matters, truly in the loop of what they need to solve for, truly assigned to what they are best at, etc.

It is very easy to create an environment that makes people work longer hours or weekends, but on a bunch of easy irrelevant things and with procrastination throughout.

> without having some amount of dark triad traits intrinsic to your personality. The best leaders are, in fact, tyrants. You need only to look at the greatest companies in history and their leaders to realize this

That you must be willing to take risk, believe you are the best, willing to play dirty, willing to stomp on others, and so on, yes for sure to some extent.

But out of all those with some of that, most of them are average or below average leaders even with respect to being a tyrant and everything else required.

Sometimes applying a bit of pressure, dangling a carrot, a bit of a threat, it does motivate people to put on more effort and try harder and it does extract more value out of them (at no added cost).

And a good manager will do that, and you should expect it. But going back to your business analogy, customers do the same. They complain, they want more for less, they threaten to go to your competitor, etc.

But this part is the easiest one to do. And because it's so easy, you'll find it's what most managers do to try and be a "good manager". That makes it average at best.

Beyond that, a really good manager will do everything else I mentioned.

And so, my point remains, if all your manager is doing is just telling you why you're not better and things aren't done and to try harder, they're a bad manager, as that's just going to be what the average or below average manager will do, since it's literally the easiest thing to do as a manager.

Re: Things I want to say to my boss

#206
post #6

You know, watching Mad Men, it seems to be that work culture hasn't changed since the 50s. The same fake smiles, the same small talk, the same boss's favorite getting the credit. What's really changed since then? Let's not assume bygone days ever were what we think they were.

Mad Men isn’t a documentary. Contemporary work culture influenced its creators, so you’re likely seeing a reflection of that when you watch the show.

> Contemporary work culture influenced its creators, so you’re likely seeing a reflection of that when you watch the show.

Many of the writers on the show have only ever worked in show businesses, which is its own mutation of work culture. Not many have actual worked in stereotypical corporate work situations.

Mike Judge (Office Space, Silicon Valley, etc) probably comes closest having started in corporate life and made a transition.

Re: Things I want to say to my boss

#207
post #138

Peter Drucker wrote that the most important thing a manager could have was 'character'. I've asked myself "What is character?", and the best answer I've come up with is: "The willingness to do the right thing regardless of negative consequences to oneself." When I look at myself, I don't believe I have character. I want to be liked too much, and in my emotional core, I'm frightened. I don't think I'm alone in this. I…

I think your definition of character is useful, and I tend to agree with Drucker that it's the most important thing, because otherwise a manager will subject to whatever political winds are blowing higher up without any grounding or point of view on what should be pushed back on. On the other hand though, "do[ing] the right thing regardless of negative consequences to oneself" is easily stated, but in practice is not…

I agree that "the right thing" depends on point of view and narrative at hand (the context). And when I quote Drucker and point to character, I see it as the bedrock on which a good manager will stand. But people of good character still need a whole array of other tools to turn them into good managers: Being skillful politicians to navigate the organizational polity, being people who can see the big picture. Having _lots_ of people skills. Having a good grasp of the field of endeavor. An ability to laugh at themselves ...

Re: Things I want to say to my boss

#208
"In the end, good leadership is never proven by what you say about yourself. It’s proven by what people say when you’re not in the room."

The Whatsapp corollary is if your team has a separate chat group without you in it, you should look at your leadership style.

Re: Things I want to say to my boss

#209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not "OP", but I will say that empathy can certainly help you build better things (tools, processes, policies, etc) for the people they affect. It can also help you understand where coworkers or peers are coming from, and work with them better. The problem comes when it's a one way road where the empathetic person is doing all the work.

That's exactly what happened. I tried improving processes and worked so hard that I neglected my wife. I was removed because the team lead thought I'm going over his head... while I coordinated every move with him. But the moment I disagreed with him -- once, and for the first time -- I was removed. Zero discussion. I'm quite empathetic. My original message above comes from bitterness because neither extreme is good.…

Go somewhere you’re valued? Why compromise your own values to make your manager happy.

Empathy is a super power because it helps you understand people and connect with them, and connecting and collaborating is how we succeed. You’re deciding to cut that off in response to what sounds like a shit situation, like cutting off your own fingers.

Re: Things I want to say to my boss

#210
post #99
post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's because many of us older developers got into the profession when it didn't pay well, and had negative status associated with it, because we loved doing it. So yes, there is very little tolerance from us toward those who are in it for money/status/prestige, and not for the love of it.

Why does having different values imply intolerance?

For me it isn't much intolerance, it's more of a lack of patience for the careerists.

Working with people that love what they're doing can be very chill. Working with people angling for a promotion, taking shortcuts, one-upping the co-workers and still not pulling their weight is exhausting.

This is not a new phenomenon, in the past this kind of dev also existed. Lots of people studied CompSci but didn't want to be a "lowly developer" for long and were just making time to "become a manager". Of course they never put the work for that as well. Today it's half of the people I interview: they never got good enough to become a manager, and never become good enough to pass most interviews in the market of today.

On the other hand, I got a couple manager friends who love coding and are trying to become individual contributors, but keep getting pulled into leading projects because of their expertise.

Don't get me wrong, though, everyone wants to make money and have a good career, I just prefer working with a different kind of person.

Post reply on HN