3 ms·

Ever since reading http://strikemag.org/bullshit-jobs/ http://strikemag.org/bullshit-jobs/ I have been thinking about this. One problem with this is the definit

by zby 10y ago

Ever since reading http://strikemag.org/bullshit-jobs/ http://strikemag.org/bullshit-jobs/ I have been thinking about this. One problem with this is the definition of 'meaningful', it is not very concrete. But I think the phenomenon is true - more and more work feels like doing something unnecessary (bullshit). I don't agree with Graeber explanation why this happens - which is basically a grand conspiration by all business owners to give worthless work to people so that they don't revolt. I think it is the result of the growing complexity of our work - we encounter more and more rules that we suspect to be stupid. Many of the rules are stupid indeed - based on some random past events, but many are not - they are just covering some cases that we have never thought of. It is easier to assume that the rules are stupid than admit incompetence. But as the complexity grows less and less people understand the rules, the bad rules are not revised and it all goes in a vicious circle.

tonyedgecombe 10y ago
I've seen the scenario where every time something goes wrong a new rule is handed down from on high, eventually you get to the point where you aren't allowed to prepare food in the kitchen or use the shower to have a shower or more importantly you aren't allowed to do the work you are there for.
- dmichulke 10y ago
  This is "power corrupts" at play. People in power almost always try to increase their level of control, essentially centralizing the power structure of the entity. At some point of time the entity is completely inefficient and collapses under its own weight (rules, bureaucracy). You can see this everywhere where power can be centralized: companies, organizations, nation states. Ironically, successful leaders these days often do the opposite of leading, they decentralize, making the company much more efficient (assuming there are still sub-entities that can/want to be efficient).
  - zby 10y ago
    This might be a part of the story - but it is not the most important one. It makes a good story - a fight between the good and the evil bureaucracy. But what I have seen is rules created in perfectly good faith and often they are reasonable answers to some immediate threats. The problem is with revising them when the situation changes or understanding how they work in the presence of other rules etc. It is quite analogue to how code becomes bloated - this might be an effect of some programmers believing that this is their work security - but more often than that the programmers hate it. Bureaucratic rules are quite literally the code that the administration runs - and we need them, it is just very hard to understand them all.

by zby 10y ago

tonyedgecombe 10y ago

I've seen the scenario where every time something goes wrong a new rule is handed down from on high, eventually you get to the point where you aren't allowed to prepare food in the kitchen or use the shower to have a shower or more importantly you aren't allowed to do the work you are there for.

dmichulke 10y ago
This is "power corrupts" at play. People in power almost always try to increase their level of control, essentially centralizing the power structure of the entity. At some point of time the entity is completely inefficient and collapses under its own weight (rules, bureaucracy). You can see this everywhere where power can be centralized: companies, organizations, nation states. Ironically, successful leaders these days often do the opposite of leading, they decentralize, making the company much more efficient (assuming there are still sub-entities that can/want to be efficient).
- zby 10y ago
  This might be a part of the story - but it is not the most important one. It makes a good story - a fight between the good and the evil bureaucracy. But what I have seen is rules created in perfectly good faith and often they are reasonable answers to some immediate threats. The problem is with revising them when the situation changes or understanding how they work in the presence of other rules etc. It is quite analogue to how code becomes bloated - this might be an effect of some programmers believing that this is their work security - but more often than that the programmers hate it. Bureaucratic rules are quite literally the code that the administration runs - and we need them, it is just very hard to understand them all.