> Constantly saying that we are going to remove technology <x>, where <x> is what you are hired for. Company will still need <x> for the foreseeable future. I'

> Constantly saying that we are going to remove technology <x>, where <x> is what you are hired for. Company will still need <x> for the foreseeable future. I've had a VPE who did this but much more subtly. - VPE arrives & inherits a prototype written in <x> and a team heavily experienced and passionate about <x> - VPE says that passion for technology <x> is a hiring red flag. "We want people to join due to passion for domain <y> not technology <x>". VPE is frequently the sole thumbs-down resulting in a rejection of many capable <x> engineers. - <x> team is understaffed but has a near-term milestone defined (but not owned) by the VPE - Simultaneously, VPE is hiring new members in another office with no experience in or interest in learning technology <x> - Milestone is cut in scope multiple times because initial goal was never reasonable. However, the milestone is delivered and is ready to be iterated on with all the new engineers hired. - VPE suggests moving away from technology <x> entirely and standardizing on alternative <z> because the engineers he hired are more interested in <z> and we are lacking in experts in <x> - End result is a wholesale rewrite of the <x> project using <z>. A year of my time and years of others' gone to waste. Not to mention the project itself is in a high-profile and competitive space. Clearly a bad actor but also adept at maintaining plausible deniability thanks to everyone's deference to the VPE's authority. Not to mention a variety of other shitty leadership behaviors employed. Really goes to show that the Amazon leadership principle "Leaders are always right" can be perverted by way of authoritarian self-fulfilling prophecy. Per this post, once this VPE forced out my direct manager who I actually liked (making VPE my new manager)...I peaced out :)