3 ms·

Awww, that's some broken logic :-P In practice, company A and company B are not in direct competition, at least not in the position Employee E is in: one of th

by mahmud 16y ago

Awww, that's some broken logic :-P In practice, company A and company B are not in direct competition, at least not in the position Employee E is in: one of them consumes the technologies developed by the other. The underlying currency in this love triangle is not the employee himself, but KNOWLEDGE. Knowledge of a certain technology. Company A makes technology which it sells for $. Company B uses that technology to develop products and services to sell for $. Employee E learns to apply the technology and hires his time and expertise for $. Since both A and B make money from the technology, it's in their best interest to make sure the workforce is well qualified, so who better to certify and bestow titles of MVP at E than A?

rbanffy 16y ago
> Awww, that's some broken logic :-P Not really. After being exposed to days of propaganda, those employees may recommend products based on what no longer can be described as their best judgment. Unless A is a reseller of B, I see no circumstance where E being MVP of B is not an explicit conflict of interest. More likely, A uses products from B and E's judgment, being an MVP of B, will tend towards B's products even if company C's products are a better fit. Sending E to B-sponsored events further distorts E's judgment.
- mahmud 16y ago
  I see your point, but keep in mind that it's the B-type companies that go out of their way recruiting "MVP" type labor because they have already invested heavily in the technology, and/or because they believe it will give them a competitive edge. By the time the MVP is hired the company has already sold into the technology; his employment does not jeopardize anything, and there is no conflict of interest. If anything, his title and role merely reinforce their chosen technical ideology. It's the higher ranking officials and the C-suite that wine and dine with the vendor that you should worry about. Not the two-cent knowledge worker with the glorified MCSE certification.
  - rbanffy 16y ago
    > It's the higher ranking officials and the C-suite that wine and dine with the vendor that you should worry about. About a year ago, a company I know of, but ought to remain nameless, outed a CTO who did too much wining and dining (and traveling) with one hardware vendor. It was a violation of the very strict code of conduct every employee has to sign when hired. Their current CTO is a tech guy no vendor will be able to bullshit into a bad idea.

by mahmud 16y ago

rbanffy 16y ago

> Awww, that's some broken logic :-P Not really. After being exposed to days of propaganda, those employees may recommend products based on what no longer can be described as their best judgment. Unless A is a reseller of B, I see no circumstance where E being MVP of B is not an explicit conflict of interest. More likely, A uses products from B and E's judgment, being an MVP of B, will tend towards B's products even if company C's products are a better fit. Sending E to B-sponsored events further distorts E's judgment.

mahmud 16y ago
I see your point, but keep in mind that it's the B-type companies that go out of their way recruiting "MVP" type labor because they have already invested heavily in the technology, and/or because they believe it will give them a competitive edge. By the time the MVP is hired the company has already sold into the technology; his employment does not jeopardize anything, and there is no conflict of interest. If anything, his title and role merely reinforce their chosen technical ideology. It's the higher ranking officials and the C-suite that wine and dine with the vendor that you should worry about. Not the two-cent knowledge worker with the glorified MCSE certification.
- rbanffy 16y ago
  > It's the higher ranking officials and the C-suite that wine and dine with the vendor that you should worry about. About a year ago, a company I know of, but ought to remain nameless, outed a CTO who did too much wining and dining (and traveling) with one hardware vendor. It was a violation of the very strict code of conduct every employee has to sign when hired. Their current CTO is a tech guy no vendor will be able to bullshit into a bad idea.