4 ms·

Yes, it can be deeply inefficient, but so is not getting approval to do necessary work. You have to start making progress somewhere, even if it's not as fast as

Yes, it can be deeply inefficient, but so is not getting approval to do necessary work. You have to start making progress somewhere, even if it's not as fast as you'd like it to be. If you're sucessful with this, you gain credibility and over time your recommendation will be sufficient to get approval for smaller tasks, and the business case will only need to be made for bigger tasks. If you're not sucessful with this approach, and can't get approval despite showing that it's in the business' best interests using the business' own criteria, then your business is too dysfunctional and toxic to fix. Time to move on.

sanderjd 9y ago
> If you're sucessful with this, you gain credibility and over time your recommendation will be sufficient to get approval for smaller tasks, and the business case will only need to be made for bigger tasks. Maybe! Alternatively: if you give a mouse a cookie, it will want a glass of milk. It might be worthwhile to establish early on that the technical leadership needs to be trusted to make their own decisions about trivial things.
crdoconnor 9y ago
>Yes, it can be deeply inefficient, but so is not getting approval to do necessary work. No, actually not needing approval to do necessary work is very efficient. >You have to start making progress somewhere, even if it's not as fast as you'd like it to be. If you're sucessful with this, you gain credibility and over time your recommendation will be sufficient to get approval for smaller tasks, and the business case will only need to be made for bigger tasks. There's no point in working to gain enough credibility to be able to do your own job effectively when you can simply leave and go and work somewhere else that doesn't expect you to prove to it that you can do your job after they've hired you. Even if you manage to prevent the company from shooting itself in the foot as far as you're concerned by "proving your worth", it'll probably only go and shoot itself in the foot somewhere else and that will also ultimately become your problem. In any case, this process tends to feed upon itself. Failures in delivery lead to a lack of distrust which leads to micromanagement which leads to failures in delivery. It's not that you can't escape that vicious cycle, it's that it typically has a terrible payoff matrix.
- DougWebb 9y ago
  I meant not getting approval for necessary work, and therefore not being able to do the necessary work, is inefficient. Not needing approval for necessary work is great; we agree on that. You're right about having to make a choice between fixing the place you're at or finding a new place to be. There are many factors to consider, and sometimes trying to fix the place you're at can be worth the effort.

sanderjd 9y ago

> If you're sucessful with this, you gain credibility and over time your recommendation will be sufficient to get approval for smaller tasks, and the business case will only need to be made for bigger tasks. Maybe! Alternatively: if you give a mouse a cookie, it will want a glass of milk. It might be worthwhile to establish early on that the technical leadership needs to be trusted to make their own decisions about trivial things.

crdoconnor 9y ago

>Yes, it can be deeply inefficient, but so is not getting approval to do necessary work. No, actually not needing approval to do necessary work is very efficient. >You have to start making progress somewhere, even if it's not as fast as you'd like it to be. If you're sucessful with this, you gain credibility and over time your recommendation will be sufficient to get approval for smaller tasks, and the business case will only need to be made for bigger tasks. There's no point in working to gain enough credibility to be able to do your own job effectively when you can simply leave and go and work somewhere else that doesn't expect you to prove to it that you can do your job after they've hired you. Even if you manage to prevent the company from shooting itself in the foot as far as you're concerned by "proving your worth", it'll probably only go and shoot itself in the foot somewhere else and that will also ultimately become your problem. In any case, this process tends to feed upon itself. Failures in delivery lead to a lack of distrust which leads to micromanagement which leads to failures in delivery. It's not that you can't escape that vicious cycle, it's that it typically has a terrible payoff matrix.

DougWebb 9y ago
I meant not getting approval for necessary work, and therefore not being able to do the necessary work, is inefficient. Not needing approval for necessary work is great; we agree on that. You're right about having to make a choice between fixing the place you're at or finding a new place to be. There are many factors to consider, and sometimes trying to fix the place you're at can be worth the effort.