3 ms·

"The example I gave involved information persistence, lawyers and and government national security apparatus i.e. way above my pay grade." My reply still stand

"The example I gave involved information persistence, lawyers and and government national security apparatus i.e. way above my pay grade." My reply still stands. "Hey soandso, we need to change our persistence strategy for this information due to regulatory compliance" "Uh, okay. What are the specifics?" "I'm not entirely sure; I've already reached out to soandso in legal/whatever to let them know we're working on this, reach out to them" "Got it" You haven't been blindsided, nor have you been told what to do by fiat; you've been informed about a new stakeholder and been empowered to collect requirements from them.

jollybean 5y ago
So you wouldn't be in a position to know this - but that would be a dramatic oversimplification of the situation, though my anecdote is specific, I think it highlights how scope is often broader than we think in general. 'The situation' involved legal overview of ambiguous legal statutes, to the point wherein we had to engage specialized, outside law firms. Even just making that determination, and the wherewithal to know hat we needed outside help, the type of help, the firm to use ... way beyond me. We're dealing with a government agency using those 'backdoor' channels within the bureaucracy, very sensitive, political, relationship based. In that context, the 'product part' (my job) was frankly the easiest, most obvious thing. It was all of the 'other things' that made it very difficult to navigate. In the other anecdote, where I was 'blindsided' by an executive requiring a specific thing for a product without much discussion, there were broader issues at play, I think your assessment of 'context' might have helped, but even then, it still would have required coordination. So these things all touch each other, and where they do, there's an VP involved, having to make decisions, every day. I'm really wary of some of the commentary here that is dismissive of the kind of work executives do, I think those comments lack a kind of organizational maturity. Director and VP level jobs are the most brutal kinds of work, they're very stressful and operationally oriented, they are not these 'big office grand strategy' type jobs that I think maybe some people think they are. Though obviously 'it depends'.
- lostcolony 5y ago
  That's all fair, but I think you're mixing my intent a bit. I would not call "telling me what/how to do something in an area I am completely lost in" as "by fiat". By fiat implies they're telling you what/how to do something by the authority in their title. And when it comes to giving details, I am not trying to say there isn't coordination or similar involved. This, again, has to do with the level of delegation. There are 10 I've seen discussed in coaching literature, and they range from "I am literally telling you ever step to take", up to "I gave you a broad desire I have, and now I walk away". What is right in a given situation varies, but the way you figure out what amount is right is by having a respectful conversation. But I agree, operating at that level is not cushy. At the same time, I don't think it has to be as hard as it oftentimes is...but I think that to be true at every level. When a given position is really hard, it's because of bad management above them, I've generally found, but I've not observed many C-levels so can't comment there.

jollybean 5y ago

So you wouldn't be in a position to know this - but that would be a dramatic oversimplification of the situation, though my anecdote is specific, I think it highlights how scope is often broader than we think in general. 'The situation' involved legal overview of ambiguous legal statutes, to the point wherein we had to engage specialized, outside law firms. Even just making that determination, and the wherewithal to know hat we needed outside help, the type of help, the firm to use ... way beyond me. We're dealing with a government agency using those 'backdoor' channels within the bureaucracy, very sensitive, political, relationship based. In that context, the 'product part' (my job) was frankly the easiest, most obvious thing. It was all of the 'other things' that made it very difficult to navigate. In the other anecdote, where I was 'blindsided' by an executive requiring a specific thing for a product without much discussion, there were broader issues at play, I think your assessment of 'context' might have helped, but even then, it still would have required coordination. So these things all touch each other, and where they do, there's an VP involved, having to make decisions, every day. I'm really wary of some of the commentary here that is dismissive of the kind of work executives do, I think those comments lack a kind of organizational maturity. Director and VP level jobs are the most brutal kinds of work, they're very stressful and operationally oriented, they are not these 'big office grand strategy' type jobs that I think maybe some people think they are. Though obviously 'it depends'.

lostcolony 5y ago
That's all fair, but I think you're mixing my intent a bit. I would not call "telling me what/how to do something in an area I am completely lost in" as "by fiat". By fiat implies they're telling you what/how to do something by the authority in their title. And when it comes to giving details, I am not trying to say there isn't coordination or similar involved. This, again, has to do with the level of delegation. There are 10 I've seen discussed in coaching literature, and they range from "I am literally telling you ever step to take", up to "I gave you a broad desire I have, and now I walk away". What is right in a given situation varies, but the way you figure out what amount is right is by having a respectful conversation. But I agree, operating at that level is not cushy. At the same time, I don't think it has to be as hard as it oftentimes is...but I think that to be true at every level. When a given position is really hard, it's because of bad management above them, I've generally found, but I've not observed many C-levels so can't comment there.