4 ms·

You are funny maybe without intending to be. They all share the same "pointless" features: - lawyers: reason for hiring: the company doesn't get sued for brea

by 1996 6y ago

You are funny maybe without intending to be. They all share the same "pointless" features: - lawyers: reason for hiring: the company doesn't get sued for breaking laws (boils down to reducing costs even if you only consider the statutory damages) - accountants: reason for hiring: the company doesn't hide deficits / key employees can't divert money (boils down to reducing costs) - MBAs: reason for hiring: so that existing processed are optimized, and employees don't slack off too much (boils down to reducing costs) To which I'd add HR: - HR: reason for hiring: so that the company doesn't get sued for discrimination or gets bad PR that will reduce sales/good hires (boils down to reducing costs) -- connected to lawyers, except HR may also care about stuff that doesn't directly break laws. So I think all of them are important! Then again, I'm now a capitalist pig, so feel free to dismiss my concerns. But even if you only care about the visible features of a product, understand you can't innovate or even excel on a budget - which means reducing costs and trimming expenses whenever possible.

devmunchies 6y ago
I forgot about HR!!! :) > reducing costs yeah, or risk mitigation. Haven't decided which is truer. > Then again, I'm now a capitalist pig, so feel free to dismiss my concerns Yeah I own a company with ~50-60 employees (call me Mr. Pig). Business owners need to take input from these risk-mitigation roles into consideration but, ultimately, they shouldn't be decision makers. Taking risk is important. Decision makers should be creators (eng, design) and the sellers (sales, marketing). Businesses aren't built on reducing costs, they are built on making money. But, then again, you can use money you save by reducing costs and feed it into the creation->sales machine. It's a balance.
- 1996 6y ago
  > call me Mr. Pig Hello Mr Pig, nice to meet a fellow pig :) > yeah, or risk mitigation. Haven't decided which is truer. Same thing to me. What do you "risk", except not making money? It all boils down to money. > ultimately, they shouldn't be decision makers. Taking risk is important Agreed - as long as you can take said risk, because again it all boils down to money. These people help you do that by not spending as much while achieving the same (or better) outcomes. > It's a balance. Totally! As for MBAs and the likes, I see them as XOs: I decide on the direction and give the orders. They implement them. Their perspective is different from mine - which is surprisingly closer to the first line workers, who hold a lot of valuable insights (about optimization, client needs, etc) that may be lost due to the middle layer (of MBAs etc) But the middle layer has its own role to play, to save money and keep operations smooth and reduce costs (risks) whenever possible.

by 1996 6y ago

devmunchies 6y ago

I forgot about HR!!! :) > reducing costs yeah, or risk mitigation. Haven't decided which is truer. > Then again, I'm now a capitalist pig, so feel free to dismiss my concerns Yeah I own a company with ~50-60 employees (call me Mr. Pig). Business owners need to take input from these risk-mitigation roles into consideration but, ultimately, they shouldn't be decision makers. Taking risk is important. Decision makers should be creators (eng, design) and the sellers (sales, marketing). Businesses aren't built on reducing costs, they are built on making money. But, then again, you can use money you save by reducing costs and feed it into the creation->sales machine. It's a balance.

1996 6y ago
> call me Mr. Pig Hello Mr Pig, nice to meet a fellow pig :) > yeah, or risk mitigation. Haven't decided which is truer. Same thing to me. What do you "risk", except not making money? It all boils down to money. > ultimately, they shouldn't be decision makers. Taking risk is important Agreed - as long as you can take said risk, because again it all boils down to money. These people help you do that by not spending as much while achieving the same (or better) outcomes. > It's a balance. Totally! As for MBAs and the likes, I see them as XOs: I decide on the direction and give the orders. They implement them. Their perspective is different from mine - which is surprisingly closer to the first line workers, who hold a lot of valuable insights (about optimization, client needs, etc) that may be lost due to the middle layer (of MBAs etc) But the middle layer has its own role to play, to save money and keep operations smooth and reduce costs (risks) whenever possible.