Live data from Hacker News

Lies Employers Use to Get You to Work with Them

linkedin.com

81–83 of 83 posts

Re: Lies Employers Use to Get You to Work with Them

#81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

High-trust and low-trust understate the severity of the phase change, which is more accurately described as a shift from trust-density to trust-sparsity. You go from a state where people spawn with the "bozo bit" off to one where they spawn with it on. You get a completely different political dynamic when that happens. Obviously, trust has varying degrees and context. In Japan, you can leave your laptop at a cafe; in…

> CS graduates from MIT and Stanford could be expected to justify hours of their time in "Scrum ceremonies" (which means that they aren't trusted, which means that their credentialing institutions and work experiences aren't trusted). Even average programmers in the bowels of Fortune 500's IT organizations had more autonomy than the typical "Agile" programmer today. If that's been your experience with Agile, you've h…

First of all, some kind of periodic status meeting is a necessary evil. Everyone hates giving status reports and justifying time. It's humiliating and time-consuming. It probably has to happen. If you don't have a scheduled, formal status reporting, you end up with impromptu status pings that are astronomically more annoying and lead people to give up on getting anything done (because there's nothing more anxiety-inducing and flow-breaking than an unreliable environment in which you can be expected to give status at any time).

The upper limit for senior people before they start to get pissed off is probably: the lowest of 10 minutes per week person, or 60 minutes for a weekly meeting, or 20 minutes for a daily meeting. So with a team of 8, you can either have a 60-minute meeting or daily 16-minute meetings. With a team of 4, you're limited to 40 minutes for a weekly meeting or 8 minutes of status reporting for a daily meeting.

Standups are good insofar as they allay toxic suspicion that isn't contributing. They're like prisons: not innately good, but the aspect of human nature that they exist to control or mitigate is worse.

Of course, most seasoned people realize that the game of status reporting is like playing Scrabble. It's not about dropping the 100-point words. It's about not opening up the board (and getting nagged with follow-on questions).

Now, I believe you that most of these Agile methodologies were designed with better intentions. I absolutely agree. But they devolve. We've seen that, over and over and over. They don't fix things. They make tolerably broken things more intolerably broken. If you're in an environment where business runs the show and engineers just implement (i.e. business-driven engineering) then the right thing to do, often, is to become politically inert, silently learn new skills, and save your energy (slack) while opportunities are few so you can step up when the business-driven engineering regime goes away (or when you change companies). Scrotum gets in the way of that, and by putting such an emphasis on micro-estimates (numbers that will always turn into political tools) it generates politics.

Re: Lies Employers Use to Get You to Work with Them

#82
post #25
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> What do you see in contrast to "the west"? The West of a previous time, presumably.

OP will correct me if I am mistaken but I read it that way: The "surprise/shock" that results from dealing with a cheating/dishonest entity is an instance of the confrontation between past and new Western standards for social trust. People are adapting to the fact that you cannot trust social entities as much as you did in the past. I would like to add that this is almost certainly a consequence of having governments…

Media plays a part as well. It's hard to trust your neighbors when you're constantly seeing and hearing about people doing horrific things to each other on the nightly news.

Re: Lies Employers Use to Get You to Work with Them

#83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. No that's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying that unless you're honest during the interview about what you need out of a job, you'll end up joining companies that will make you miserable because they are fundamentally a bad fit for you.

Ah yes, the old "bad fit" chestnut. What employers never mention, however, is that when candidates are foolish enough to open up about what they want, they're often pushed away as "not a good fit for the company/team".

Yes, that does happen - especially when it is true.
Post reply on HN