There's a lot to like in this article. I like how the author tries to remove manipulative motions (correspondingly paranoia) from the context in hopes people ca

There's a lot to like in this article. I like how the author tries to remove manipulative motions (correspondingly paranoia) from the context in hopes people can see truer. Nontheless (I am 25+ years in software dev), - some 20pct of people think the office is where politics and games are played. Thus they try to play it better. That's because openness at the office is usually quite low. Such people are unmoved by push back thinking themselves the smarter, grayer haired guy. Survivors of this kind of BS actually are smart, and do have experience with effective but distorting coping skills - software should be a formal science. It's not almost all the time - the chief issue unaddressed here but smartly lead up to is the management function: as the normal scenario is that resources are vastly drwafed by problems what do we say no to? The management question when examined is complex and when it unfolds to systemic issues that are chiefly human not technical viz any of the corporate histories on quality improvement in the 80s/90s esp with company turnarounds. Ex. Detroit, Xerox, IBM under gerstner. While technical issues remain on the table, sustained under performance is ultimately rooted in management and company culture.