How many of you know that the team is working on something that no-one wants?

Using software does not translate remotely well into /designing/ software. Too many people want to play small-time user interface designer while realistically having no design knowledge beyond "I've used software before, and I have IDEAS about how to do things better."

So much effort is wasted on implementing things people think they need, having recognized a problem and conceived one idea that might solve it if only someone could implement their vision.

I sometimes envision a world where (layperson) patients show up at a hospital with a medical condition, describe a novel surgical treatment to the physicians, and then the physicians follow their instructions exactly because, hey, why not? It might work! There definitely won't be consequences if it doesn't!

Those middle managers do not give a shit because they are middle management! Big companies have tons of people like who's only motivation is to simply not get fired (this is one point the movie Office Space nailed by the way.)

A fish rots from the head. If your executive leadership is not obsessed with its customers, nobody else will be. And you guys will continue to be rudderless which is demoralizing.

Big, fat, companies get lazy and that sucks for a guy who wants to make a difference. Go work somewhere that encourages logical (black/white) thinking and values engineers who want to turn customers into raging fans.

Or just work each day enough to not get fired, and build your own product on the side.

Around 1994/95 client/server was unassailable in board rooms (much like AI is now). And after initially speaking up against it, I ended up shutting up about my criticism of that architectural approach, since it would have just gotten me fired.

So I ended up sneaking some early Internet technologies into a big client/server project I managed. Doing that ended up benefiting those developers in future jobs, and the company, because they didn't have to re-write that part so quickly. :-)

I've seen places where engineers and other ICs, some team leads and managers, those with far more experience and clout at me, voice skepticism against questionable product decisions coming from upper management, only to receive nothing in response. Even when these decisions involve infeasible engineering forecasts, leadership stay the course. The worst they might get is some uncomfortable questions from the most bold, outspoken senior or staff engineers during all-hands. And the response is usually some stock party line about staying the course and everything will work out. Sometimes, this is coupled with toxic cultures that prevent people from truly speaking out.

Beyond fighting for better labor conditions, an intracompany tech worker organization should be able to push back against bad management decisions. Imagine if your engineering guild had power not just to determine the tech stack or coordinate between teams, but also to check the power of management on product and technical decisions, or even question strategic business decisions.

People imagine tech unions will just be a rehash of Industrial Era blue collar unions, but they have the potential to be something more- a way for the rank and file to finally have the clout to push back against bad engineering decisions from poor leadership.

Sure, you can say disgruntled engineers can just leave, or companies with bad management cultures should deserve to fail. But that just seems like defeatism. It seems like a form of capitalism that promotes throwaway, wasteful behavior. If employees have valid concerns, but management ignores them, doesn't it seem like a shame for an organization to decline and the product to die because of no one could oppose management's mistakes? What about the customers?