I think it's worse to be stuck with responsibility for a codebase that you have no real authority over. You can't live in fear of that kind of stuff. Who's th

I think it's worse to be stuck with responsibility for a codebase that you have no real authority over. You can't live in fear of that kind of stuff. Who's the fricking expert on software development? Not the managers. If you focus on meeting everyone's needs lower down on the food chain-- and invest in tools in techniques that multiply your ability to maintain and extend the code-- then your development will be so tight and your response to issues will be so comprehensive that the "play it safe" types will have nothing they can say to you. (Except maybe that they'd rather have more buttons or something.) If you're a responisible developer, you'll be addressing the "slightly wrong" stuff well before the middle managers even hear about it. You'll have a relationship with the real value-adders such that they talk to you instead of your bosses. You, after all, are the one that gets stuff done quietly and thoroughly. Sheesh. They're "play it safe" types. Think about it. Once the code is up and running, they're not going to be to be suggesting any changes. Suddenly you're the status quo and they'll defend your work by saying "if it ain't broke don't fix it" just like they said about the previous solution.