Live data from Hacker News

When Smart People are Bad Employees

bhorowitz.com

31–40 of 43 posts

Re: When Smart People are Bad Employees

#31
post #30
post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference here was that the guy liked to try to be specifically obtuse and difficult. It wasn't a matter of thinking through a problem before hand - it was an exercise in proving/looking smart. Spending 5+ minutes consternating over the type of screws that came with the shelf is not "thinking ahead" :)

Sounds like he was a conscientious designer with an intuition for usability. I can relate to him, I also analyze screws and designs of trivial things. Is this really the optimal screw for this sort of task? If you didn't want this level of analysis, why the hell would you take a $150/hr engineer and have him screwing in shelves rather than call in the $12/hr maintenance man? I know the answer already. Your company th…

> If you didn't want this level of analysis, why the hell would you take a $150/hr engineer and have him screwing in shelves rather than call in the $12/hr maintenance man?

At the time of the incident with the screws, the guy was an intern...

Re: When Smart People are Bad Employees

#32

I once had an employer who seemed (to me) to prefer people who were (in my opinion) pretty inappropriate for their jobs because they had so little ability to do them. I found it very difficult to understand at the time, because I generally like to have people around who are better than me at most things, so I can concentrate on what I do best. It was interesting over the years, though, to see what happened. That part…

...also learned that loyalty and commitment are more valuable than brilliance

While this was true in your circumstances, and some degree of loyalty and commitment are important, I don't agree that they are "more valueable" in general. For example for technical jobs, not everyone can learn them (or at least be good at them). It seems important to have people in the right places, that have already some vision and experience in their area.

Re: When Smart People are Bad Employees

#33

From the article: "Being effective in a company also means working hard, being reliable, and being an excellent member of the team." Translation: keep your head down, don't rock the boat and don't have any passion for what you do. This is the recipe for 'success' (i.e. continued employment) at big companies. "As a result, a company needs lots of smart, super engaged employees who can identify its particular weaknesse…

It is really sad how relevant and spot on your analysis is. I have moved from a small typical 10-15 guys IT shop to a well established national player in private banking and it is unbelievable how crippling and exhausting work is there - but I am working much fewer hours for a much better pay. The attrition of daily 9-5 not-project work, all "serious business" and no "play" is horrible for even a mildly creative person in a typical "knowledge work" position...

And I love how even big corporations are usually presented as if they were making clear cut, sensible and rational decisions based on facts. This could not further from the truth.

Too bad you only find out about that once you actually start working a real job - nobody gives you that truth in university.

Re: When Smart People are Bad Employees

#34
post #33

From the article: "Being effective in a company also means working hard, being reliable, and being an excellent member of the team." Translation: keep your head down, don't rock the boat and don't have any passion for what you do. This is the recipe for 'success' (i.e. continued employment) at big companies. "As a result, a company needs lots of smart, super engaged employees who can identify its particular weaknesse…

It is really sad how relevant and spot on your analysis is. I have moved from a small typical 10-15 guys IT shop to a well established national player in private banking and it is unbelievable how crippling and exhausting work is there - but I am working much fewer hours for a much better pay. The attrition of daily 9-5 not-project work, all "serious business" and no "play" is horrible for even a mildly creative pers…

True... and consider your self lucky. Joining an operation like this at a later stage usually makes it easier to leave it behind when it is really due, compared to the situation where you accompany it from its beginning and wake up at some point in time entangled into "serious business" / "enterprise" setup ... unable to leave it behind due to some irrational connection to some people or some of your knowledge work done there... humans are so well suited to get exploited due to their irrational traits which the "enterprise" world still ignores still so profoundly.

Re: When Smart People are Bad Employees

#35
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean? You think it should not be mentioned ever again?

I wish there were a way to bring topics back and still retain the link to the previous discussion. Maybe years later, there would be new insight into this topic, but for a lot of stuff, the comments of 2 months ago are just as valid as anything you'd say today. searchyc is great, but no one really finds new comments buried on old posts now. For topics which have lasting value (vs "what will apple release tomorrow"),…

Would it make sense for HN to do something like the following?

Pull link out of submission and check database to see if that link has already been submitted. If it has, either automatically insert a comment containing links to the older discussion(s) OR append those links to the post itself?

It's going to be fairly brittle, because you're only comparing the addresses and not the values stored, but it seems like it wouldn't need too much work. Anyone have any thoughts?

Re: When Smart People are Bad Employees

#36

I once had an employer who seemed (to me) to prefer people who were (in my opinion) pretty inappropriate for their jobs because they had so little ability to do them. I found it very difficult to understand at the time, because I generally like to have people around who are better than me at most things, so I can concentrate on what I do best. It was interesting over the years, though, to see what happened. That part…

There's a phrase that goes something along the lines of, "The worst employees are the most loyal." While it's interesting to see how things worked out with that employer, I can't help but wonder whether it was really intentional, or whether she was as bad as hiring people as they were at doing their jobs.

Re: When Smart People are Bad Employees

#37
(c) is the 'problem'. Smart people aren't always good sales people. And it is fundamentally a sales problem, where they need to identify the right people to make the change, and then sell them on the idea (by convincing them they will save money, and that it was their idea in the first place). Now the geeks with low social skills is a common cliché, lets ignore that tired and played out meme...

>>I used to be in sales . I have made millions for companies. Sales was easy since I was helping people with pain they already knew and were looking to remove it. I also wanted them to feel good about the company so they would tell all their friends. Referral are sweet!

It always frustrated me that I could not sell management many of my ideas. Part of the problem was they saw no problem. Lying to customers. No problem. Screwing up services. No problem. Etc.

I got tired of it. That is why I now program.

Re: When Smart People are Bad Employees

#38
post #33

From the article: "Being effective in a company also means working hard, being reliable, and being an excellent member of the team." Translation: keep your head down, don't rock the boat and don't have any passion for what you do. This is the recipe for 'success' (i.e. continued employment) at big companies. "As a result, a company needs lots of smart, super engaged employees who can identify its particular weaknesse…

It is really sad how relevant and spot on your analysis is. I have moved from a small typical 10-15 guys IT shop to a well established national player in private banking and it is unbelievable how crippling and exhausting work is there - but I am working much fewer hours for a much better pay. The attrition of daily 9-5 not-project work, all "serious business" and no "play" is horrible for even a mildly creative pers…

(part 1 of my 2000 word essay) (sorry, my bad)

I know several people who have worked for 20 or more years at the same large organisation (government or corporate) and it blows my mind.

I have a friend who works at a local retail business whose boss is universally despised. Every time I think I have some sob story about the stupid architects and their dazzlingly defunct Ant file - I just need to swap stories with him to be quickly humbled and realise that perhaps things are not so bad for me after all. This boss of his is a guy who can throw a party, invite everyone and have an open bar (literally free as in beer)... and yet not have anyone turn up. This guy is such a colossal spoon that he can't even give away free alcohol. The mind boggles.

I really don't know how my friend and these 20 year veterans of corporate bungling manage to stick it out. I think that it is, in a way, a triumph of grit and determination and character under severe and prolonged stress. I think perhaps there is something in them that instead of getting more and more frustrated with each new offense to common sense, they are able to let last weeks insanity go. They've found some way to continually 'build a bridge and get over it', or perhaps they've seen so much insanity that they have built up an immunity to it, I don't know.

The sprinter may go faster, but the marathon runner goes further.

At the other end of the 'lifer' spectrum, are the people who stick it out because of fear. They take enormous abuse because they fear something worse than their current job. So they get bullied mercilessly. I knew one chap who was so scared of job interviews that he wouldn't even consider looking for work elsewhere. The people who live in constant fear are the one I pity the most. I genuinely feel bad for them.

----

But I suppose if I were to turn it around and look at us from their point of view I would see other things. Perhaps they would see the incredible psychological pressure of financial uncertainty. Being the first ones to get shot in a revolution, I mean recession. Not knowing where your next contract or next big customer is going to come from.

------

Specifically for the situation you mention, large financial institutions there are a number of things to master:

The first of these is regime change. Every couple of years (or perhaps more frequently) you will get new boss, or a new layer of bosses. They might for instance hire an ex-consultant at high level who 'mysteriously' somehow ends up bringing in his old firm to replace everyone or brings in a bunch of his old cronies to work under him, who bring in their buddies (etc). This can be quite a sudden thing, and you have to be genuinely nimble to survive (somehow running along on top of the avalanche).

The second thing is that many projects are going to fail, and even if you did the majority of the work and almost got it across the line all by yourself and the rest of the team of 20 did less combined than you, you can still end up getting blamed for failure. The blame game is very important and there are some strategies you can use to avoid being 'it', such as documenting the instructions you've been given, and not burning bridges, and cultivating friendships outside of your group (so that when (or preferably before) the project burns down, you teleport to safety in another project). Personally I don't do so well at this. I get far too attached to the imaginary win condition of the project succeeding, and so I force it across the line even if it means pissing off a lot of other people. If I could somehow find it within me to let projects fail I would probably have done better in banking.

(HN spat the dummy at my patented wall of text (tm), so I have to break this up into multiple posts, apologies in advance, hope you find it useful)

Re: When Smart People are Bad Employees

#39
post #33

From the article: "Being effective in a company also means working hard, being reliable, and being an excellent member of the team." Translation: keep your head down, don't rock the boat and don't have any passion for what you do. This is the recipe for 'success' (i.e. continued employment) at big companies. "As a result, a company needs lots of smart, super engaged employees who can identify its particular weaknesse…

It is really sad how relevant and spot on your analysis is. I have moved from a small typical 10-15 guys IT shop to a well established national player in private banking and it is unbelievable how crippling and exhausting work is there - but I am working much fewer hours for a much better pay. The attrition of daily 9-5 not-project work, all "serious business" and no "play" is horrible for even a mildly creative pers…

(this is part 2, should have posted it first, D'oh!)

Large organizations can breed certain kinds of psychotic behaviour, such as out and out lying. Your boss (or someone else with power) may order you to do one thing, and then next week demand to know why you haven't done some other thing. You say "because you told me to do X" and they tell you they never said such a thing. Never ever ever trust that person again. Never leave yourself vulnerable. Never take anything they say at face value. But... here's the rub, they are in a position of power, so don't piss them off. I think there's an old saying - something about being wise as serpents yet gentle as doves, and that definitely applies here. As a non-pyschotic behaviour, this might arise because there are multiple people giving contradictory orders, I believe there are other old saying about the difficulty of pleasing all the people all of the time.

One of the reasons that banking projects frequently fail, and this boggles the mind, is that, no matter how important your project is to the organization, within the company there are people who are actively trying to kill your project. They will oppose you at every turn, they will fight you tooth and nail, they will (seemingly arbitrarily) deny you of perfectly reasonable requests for resources.

As an aside: working at large banks is the reason I bought my own white board marker, it lives in my bag, and I take it home with me every night.

So I considered this behaviour. Now I choose to believe that for most people they don't get up every morning, look themselves in the mirror and ask themselves how they can do the most damage to the company they work for, how they can be the most evil, how they can maximise suffering in the world. Most people aren't like that. So why then, are all these people trying to kill my projects? After a long period of contemplation I came to the understanding that the reason they act that way is usually because the company incentivises them to do so. Their role, for instance, may be to minimise costs. Projects are a cost. Therefore your project is directly in their gun-sights. This is just one example, large corporations are really good at creating and incentivising infighting. They might decide to engage in a silo based re-org. And then afterwards, none of the silos want to pay for essential projects, because they hope that someone else will be forced to stump up the bill. Now the organization didn't set out to create that outcome, but it is just basic game theory (prisoner's dilemma) that defecting is the best (short term) outcome for individuals (whereas co-operation is the best outcome for groups).

Make friends with the people who have good people skills, they will protect you in times of trouble. It doesn't matter how crap the business analysts are (and most are worse than useless) if you can be bothered to put in a minimal amount of effort to be nice to them, and they like you, you can often get enough warning to dodge a bullet or to get passed a teleport token at the last minute.

You'll run across some people who are genuinely bad at their jobs. (see also business analysts (caveat: a good business analyst is worth their weight in gold, treat them with the same care and respect you would a national treasure)) Try not to make them look bad. At one large bank I ran into a DBA and she was complaining that the queries were running too slowly. So I (tongue firmly in cheek) suggested that if all the data was bought into one really huge table the query would run really fast because there wouldn't be any joins... and she thought this was great advice. I freaked out. I ended up begging her not to do this. It turns out she'd never even heard of normalisation because it was her first job as a DBA and she'd never been given any training. //twitch// Don't make the little people look bad if you can avoid it. Don't stomp on the ants.

Things move at a certain pace, try not to get impatient. Try to find something to do that looks like work, that you can justify as work but that you enjoy doing. I always like doing design and testing, I give my code an absolute beating before I let anyone else near it, no abuse they throw at it will come close to the torture I put it through. Unfortunately, in the long run this means I end up finishing much faster than most of my co-workers (whoops). So I often end up helping out other programmers. That might be debugging or if they're stuck on some task that they hate (examples: UI or persistence) then I ask them what they like doing, and if I have something like that on my task list I can swap with them.

For the keeping yourself busy: develop an appreciation for doing the impossible, whether by sneaky solutions, your astounding application of some obscure API or comp-sci algorithm, or just outright cheating. Volunteer for stuff. Banks have lots of old code that needs the occassional fix. Put your hand up even if the code that needs fixing is in some obsolete dead language that nobody speaks anymore (exception: Cobol, just don't go there. Besides, the old timers need the work anyway). Document your achievements and then squirrel away the document. At your annual performance review print them all out and walk into your bosses office with a dead tree's worth of work you did over and above the call of duty.

If you're good at fixing bugs, keep track of how many you fixed compared to everyone else. Same goes for anything else you are really good at that can be tracked. If you think you're really good at something, and it turns out there is someone out there who is better than you, make friends with them and (subtly) get mentoring from them. Yes, they may be hyper-intelligent, but often it will turn out that they just know more tricks than you.

Programming is fundamentally both a social phenomenon and simultaneously a solo activity. Your non-programmer boss is never really going to appreciate your amazing algorithms, because he has no baseline to compare it to. Talking to other programmers and swapping war stories is really important to their and your motivation. Most programmers who don't get this are starved of attention and feel unloved. You need to realise that the attention you crave comes not from above, but from your peers, and the best praise is from programmers that are better than you.

Most importantly about making friends with programmers that are better than you, is that maybe at some point you'll get the opportunity to work on a startup as a low digit employee, because they know you, they know they can trust you, and they know you get things done.

Re: When Smart People are Bad Employees

#40
post #27

You know, I bet the cocaine fiend guy wasn't even on cocaine. How would the company know this? If they had insurance coverage and he went into rehab it would be seriously violation of medical privacy for this to be revealed to the company. If he did go into rehab, the article author would have mentioned it given that he claims to know all about the guy's cocaine habit as well as his mental health history, which he is…

Sounds like you established the baseline of "3 days what took other employees six months". Work is not a sprint, it's a marathon and you have to know how to pace yourself.
Post reply on HN