3 ms·

I have had similar experiences. I've taken very tedious tasks that involved a lot of monotonous paperwork and automated them and that turns everyone's problems

I have had similar experiences. I've taken very tedious tasks that involved a lot of monotonous paperwork and automated them and that turns everyone's problems into my problem when they don't work the way the user thinks they should. I've also had people use the fact that my tool, which just automates a process that everyone had to do manually in the past anyways, use me and my tool not functioning correctly for them as an excuse to not having the work done on time.

lifeisstillgood 7y ago
> that turns everyone's problems into my problem I see software as a new form of literacy, and this argument is, for me, a clincher. Imagine a world where, you were the reader/writer in the company. And if there was a problem with the letters sent from head office, then because you are the reader/writer guy who does all the writing the problems are all yours Yes, that is correct, as the only reader writer they are your problems. but the wider problem is why are you the only one?
- sean2 7y ago
  True, but software is only one such department that this reasoning works for. Legal, Public Relations, Accounting, HR, facilities, etc, are examples of other departments that need specialists for fields that everyone really ought to get some literacy in. If you're head of human resources at your company, any human resource problem the company has, is your problem, because you're the human resources guy. To be fair, most of those departments demand certification to participate in, but if everyone was able to make spot fixes to the companies software, then I'd start demanding that only certified software people be allowed to touch our git repo.
hhas01 7y ago
“use me and my tool not functioning correctly for them as an excuse to not having the work done on time” Sorry, bud, that one’s on you. If you don’t understand your users—really get in their shoes and walk around in them—how can you hope to build automation that works for them? Change is Risk, and here you are trying to sell them on the mother of all Changes. Burn them, they won’t give you another chance. -- [And yeah, I know some users will always be obtuse reactionary assholes who blindly reject any sort of change as a direct threat to their status quo. Work to accommodate them—if you can make your solution work for them then it’ll work for anyone—and if they’re just being a petty sabotaging asshole after you’ve done all that then bump the issue with the full papertrail up the management stack. Let their superiors handle their crap; they don’t pay you to deal with it. Take solace in knowing that once all their rivals at smashing it with terrific automation, those backwards losers will be first out their jobs.]

lifeisstillgood 7y ago

> that turns everyone's problems into my problem I see software as a new form of literacy, and this argument is, for me, a clincher. Imagine a world where, you were the reader/writer in the company. And if there was a problem with the letters sent from head office, then because you are the reader/writer guy who does all the writing the problems are all yours Yes, that is correct, as the only reader writer they are your problems. but the wider problem is why are you the only one?

sean2 7y ago
True, but software is only one such department that this reasoning works for. Legal, Public Relations, Accounting, HR, facilities, etc, are examples of other departments that need specialists for fields that everyone really ought to get some literacy in. If you're head of human resources at your company, any human resource problem the company has, is your problem, because you're the human resources guy. To be fair, most of those departments demand certification to participate in, but if everyone was able to make spot fixes to the companies software, then I'd start demanding that only certified software people be allowed to touch our git repo.

hhas01 7y ago

“use me and my tool not functioning correctly for them as an excuse to not having the work done on time” Sorry, bud, that one’s on you. If you don’t understand your users—really get in their shoes and walk around in them—how can you hope to build automation that works for them? Change is Risk, and here you are trying to sell them on the mother of all Changes. Burn them, they won’t give you another chance. -- [And yeah, I know some users will always be obtuse reactionary assholes who blindly reject any sort of change as a direct threat to their status quo. Work to accommodate them—if you can make your solution work for them then it’ll work for anyone—and if they’re just being a petty sabotaging asshole after you’ve done all that then bump the issue with the full papertrail up the management stack. Let their superiors handle their crap; they don’t pay you to deal with it. Take solace in knowing that once all their rivals at smashing it with terrific automation, those backwards losers will be first out their jobs.]