9 ms·

What to care about in a job

106 points by luu 9y ago

saul_pako 9y ago
Love the fact and the way that the topic presented. I find it hard to apply to other lines of work though, especially classic working class jobs and for example healthcare and teaching. How would you guys modify the list? I for one would rate the security much higher even tough I understand that it's not as important for everyone. For physically demanding jobs (practical nurses, nurses, construction workers etc.) I'd also rate long term health very high
- hycaria 9y ago
  Not hard to get a job in healthcare (at least where I love) so I wonder why you'd rate security so high.
  - saul_pako 9y ago
    It's not hard to get a job, by to get a job that you can be sure to still have tomorrow when you wake up is another cup of tea. Working on day to day contracts and filling in for ordinaries does not grant you and your family a stable income. The physically demanding aspect of nursing for example often lead to premature retirement due to injuries or worn out joints and backs. The security aspect for me reflects the ability to stay healthy and being able to continue working in the long run. It also reflects the need for a job that doesn't disappear over night or cease to exist - family matters you could say
waytogo 9y ago
Wrong question, wrong perspective. Even the very best jobs where everything seems to be perfect still have significant setbacks because of the nature of a job: - Employees suffer from one single dependency which can make their live miserable—their manager; just compare: Entrepreneurs should be independent and build as many options as possible (e.g. not just one client but many) - A job locks you in, means all side activities are forbidden or made complicated (because of IP, time, etc.) which again harms you because you are not able to build options outside the company - The urge to stay employable + get high compensations, means: seamless job transitions with no gaps, min 2 years at one job, steady growth re titles, headcount, responsibilities—all to show that you are a good hire and it doesn't matter if your current employer is a pile of s* and you just have 7 months and need stay some more months Getting jobs and being an employee has opportunities, it's easy for many in our industry to get 200K+ salaries but the price is high: reducing your options until you hit a depression.
- expertentipp 9y ago
  > seamless job transitions with no gaps, min 2 years at one job, steady growth re titles, headcount, responsibilities > Getting jobs and being an employee has opportunities, it's easy for many in our industry to get 200K+ salaries but the price is high: reducing your options until you hit a depression. This is not how it works in most of the EU, in particular DE/IT/AT/CH. There they value loyalty the most and they assume something is wrong with person changing an employer after couple of years. Frequent job hopping? Even worse. At some point one hits salary ceiling (70-80k EUR in some regions, 30-40k EUR in most of the EU) and that's it - changing job means the same salary or even lower with the risk the new place will be full of assholes and going through, humiliating at times for an experienced professional, vetting period as a new employee. Sometimes I wonder perhaps there is some non-competing agreement between companies? I have hard time understanding this deadlock situation.
  - yhavr 9y ago
    Lack of economical education in the culture? Capitalism: Buy as cheap as possible, sell as expensive as possible. In the battle of this two intents, 'fair' market price emerges. If business tells you otherwise, if it frowns upon chasing your market value (including job hopping), is it a big fraud?
  - foo101 9y ago
    You are responding to comments in this thread by saying, "This is not how it works", but the comments you are responding to are making multiple points. You never clarify what the "This" you are referring to is. I am having a hard time understanding what you are talking about.
  - geezerjay 9y ago
    > Sometimes I wonder perhaps there is some non-competing agreement between companies? I doubt there are formal or explicit agreements, but informally or implicitly... Yes. One of my last employers bent himself backwards to avoid even contacting anyone who ever worked for certain competitors just to avoid the idea he was going after their staff.
  - 9y ago
foo101 9y ago
I think one important factor to consider, that is not mentioned explicity in the post, is: Manager. Your immediate manager can have a lot of impact on job satisfaction. A good manager would follow a bottom-up approach where he asks the team members what they need (time, equipment, etc.) and would try to get those things so that the team can succeed. This creates an overall higher job satisfaction. An ineffective manager may enforce ridiculous deadlines coming from upper management on his team or hog all the credit of the good work done by the team or not be supportive which would lead to stressed, overworked, and unhappy work life.
- expertentipp 9y ago
  > A good manager would follow a bottom-up approach where he asks the team members what they need > An ineffective manager may enforce ridiculous deadlines coming from upper management This is not how it works in modern workplace. In large companies the pressure mechanism is delegated to a whole group of employees in the same place in the hierarchy - POs, PMs, Scrum masters, various process lunatics. In case of problems they feed the line manager with negative feedback thus creating an image of bad team player, the line manager itself is a divine being rising concerns at most during friendly one-to-one conversations. Once it's clear you are not a good team player, it's better for everyone if you'll be let go. Ideally this process should be catalyzed during the trial period.
  - foo101 9y ago
    Do you mean managers are not effective in a modern workplace, or do you mean managers are effective in a modern workplace? What is the "This" you are referring to when you say "This is not how it works". Also what kind of modern workplace are you talking about? I am working in a place that is developing software in the year 2018. I guess that is fairly modern. I see both effective and ineffective managers in this same workplace. What exactly is your point?
  - eikenberry 9y ago
    > In large companies... You could have stopped right there. In large companies the politics have firmly taken their place at the top of everything. And if you don't enjoy politics, they are terrible places to work and you should avoid them like the plague.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
Seol 9y ago
I particularly like the "anti-priorities" section. You can't optimise for everything, and it's refreshing to see someone be upfront about the things which they're prepared to let be sub-optimal. Of course, it's important to read that section as "what I don't prioritise", not "what you shouldn't prioritise".
- vodkhang2 9y ago
  Yeah, I think everybody need to always think about what to say NO
OscarTheGrinch 9y ago
Are the problems that this company is trying to solve actually worth solving?
Harrisonbans 9y ago
Do your perfect 100% just simple.
the_tardis 9y ago
Aren’t we all just maintaining legacy code at some level?

106 points by luu 9y ago

Love the fact and the way that the topic presented. I find it hard to apply to other lines of work though, especially classic working class jobs and for example healthcare and teaching. How would you guys modify the list? I for one would rate the security much higher even tough I understand that it's not as important for everyone. For physically demanding jobs (practical nurses, nurses, construction workers etc.) I'd also rate long term health very high

hycaria 9y ago
Not hard to get a job in healthcare (at least where I love) so I wonder why you'd rate security so high.
- saul_pako 9y ago
  It's not hard to get a job, by to get a job that you can be sure to still have tomorrow when you wake up is another cup of tea. Working on day to day contracts and filling in for ordinaries does not grant you and your family a stable income. The physically demanding aspect of nursing for example often lead to premature retirement due to injuries or worn out joints and backs. The security aspect for me reflects the ability to stay healthy and being able to continue working in the long run. It also reflects the need for a job that doesn't disappear over night or cease to exist - family matters you could say

waytogo 9y ago

Wrong question, wrong perspective. Even the very best jobs where everything seems to be perfect still have significant setbacks because of the nature of a job: - Employees suffer from one single dependency which can make their live miserable—their manager; just compare: Entrepreneurs should be independent and build as many options as possible (e.g. not just one client but many) - A job locks you in, means all side activities are forbidden or made complicated (because of IP, time, etc.) which again harms you because you are not able to build options outside the company - The urge to stay employable + get high compensations, means: seamless job transitions with no gaps, min 2 years at one job, steady growth re titles, headcount, responsibilities—all to show that you are a good hire and it doesn't matter if your current employer is a pile of s* and you just have 7 months and need stay some more months Getting jobs and being an employee has opportunities, it's easy for many in our industry to get 200K+ salaries but the price is high: reducing your options until you hit a depression.

expertentipp 9y ago
> seamless job transitions with no gaps, min 2 years at one job, steady growth re titles, headcount, responsibilities > Getting jobs and being an employee has opportunities, it's easy for many in our industry to get 200K+ salaries but the price is high: reducing your options until you hit a depression. This is not how it works in most of the EU, in particular DE/IT/AT/CH. There they value loyalty the most and they assume something is wrong with person changing an employer after couple of years. Frequent job hopping? Even worse. At some point one hits salary ceiling (70-80k EUR in some regions, 30-40k EUR in most of the EU) and that's it - changing job means the same salary or even lower with the risk the new place will be full of assholes and going through, humiliating at times for an experienced professional, vetting period as a new employee. Sometimes I wonder perhaps there is some non-competing agreement between companies? I have hard time understanding this deadlock situation.
- yhavr 9y ago
  Lack of economical education in the culture? Capitalism: Buy as cheap as possible, sell as expensive as possible. In the battle of this two intents, 'fair' market price emerges. If business tells you otherwise, if it frowns upon chasing your market value (including job hopping), is it a big fraud?
- foo101 9y ago
  You are responding to comments in this thread by saying, "This is not how it works", but the comments you are responding to are making multiple points. You never clarify what the "This" you are referring to is. I am having a hard time understanding what you are talking about.
- geezerjay 9y ago
  > Sometimes I wonder perhaps there is some non-competing agreement between companies? I doubt there are formal or explicit agreements, but informally or implicitly... Yes. One of my last employers bent himself backwards to avoid even contacting anyone who ever worked for certain competitors just to avoid the idea he was going after their staff.
- 9y ago

foo101 9y ago

I think one important factor to consider, that is not mentioned explicity in the post, is: Manager. Your immediate manager can have a lot of impact on job satisfaction. A good manager would follow a bottom-up approach where he asks the team members what they need (time, equipment, etc.) and would try to get those things so that the team can succeed. This creates an overall higher job satisfaction. An ineffective manager may enforce ridiculous deadlines coming from upper management on his team or hog all the credit of the good work done by the team or not be supportive which would lead to stressed, overworked, and unhappy work life.

expertentipp 9y ago
> A good manager would follow a bottom-up approach where he asks the team members what they need > An ineffective manager may enforce ridiculous deadlines coming from upper management This is not how it works in modern workplace. In large companies the pressure mechanism is delegated to a whole group of employees in the same place in the hierarchy - POs, PMs, Scrum masters, various process lunatics. In case of problems they feed the line manager with negative feedback thus creating an image of bad team player, the line manager itself is a divine being rising concerns at most during friendly one-to-one conversations. Once it's clear you are not a good team player, it's better for everyone if you'll be let go. Ideally this process should be catalyzed during the trial period.
- foo101 9y ago
  Do you mean managers are not effective in a modern workplace, or do you mean managers are effective in a modern workplace? What is the "This" you are referring to when you say "This is not how it works". Also what kind of modern workplace are you talking about? I am working in a place that is developing software in the year 2018. I guess that is fairly modern. I see both effective and ineffective managers in this same workplace. What exactly is your point?
- eikenberry 9y ago
  > In large companies... You could have stopped right there. In large companies the politics have firmly taken their place at the top of everything. And if you don't enjoy politics, they are terrible places to work and you should avoid them like the plague.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

Seol 9y ago

I particularly like the "anti-priorities" section. You can't optimise for everything, and it's refreshing to see someone be upfront about the things which they're prepared to let be sub-optimal. Of course, it's important to read that section as "what I don't prioritise", not "what you shouldn't prioritise".

vodkhang2 9y ago
Yeah, I think everybody need to always think about what to say NO

OscarTheGrinch 9y ago

Are the problems that this company is trying to solve actually worth solving?

Harrisonbans 9y ago

Do your perfect 100% just simple.

the_tardis 9y ago

Aren’t we all just maintaining legacy code at some level?