12 ms·

It's really hard to work with people who don't put effort into their work after being in the military around people who put so much effort into getting things r

by ok_dad 5y ago

It's really hard to work with people who don't put effort into their work after being in the military around people who put so much effort into getting things right. I'm not saying time equal effort, either, I'm a clock watcher at work, but at least when I'm working I focus on the goal at hand and I actually try to think about the problems I'll face after I finish some task, so that I'll do it more robustly. The military doesn't have a monopoly on this, I've met several great people who have never served, and there are many ways in which the military sucks (don't get me started). However, it's pretty unrivaled when it comes to people who try hard and perfect their craft, imo.

gumby 5y ago
My experience in hiring ex enlisted folks is 100% great. With officers…less than that. They are used to more infrastructure than a startup can or wants to provide.
- ok_dad 5y ago
  I was an officer (personally, I think I was decent, but who knows), I can agree on that to a point: former enlisted folks who are technical experts are by far above most former officers, and I have to say one of the reasons I left was because the officer corp is basically rotten these days with the same crappy, entitled managers that you see in the civilian world. However, the good officers were and are a cut above the rest. The problem is adverse selection by the shitty officers who thrive in that crap environment and wouldn't last a week as a civilian manager because they have no carrot, just sticks. Anyways, this is kind of off topic, so I'll take my leave.
  - mcguire 5y ago
    I had a friend who was involved in the early US Air Force cyberwarfare stuff. He had a story of a (much more) senior officer visiting, seeing the people, who were also officers and had CS MSs and PhDs, doing their work, and throwing a fit. Air Force officers, you see, don't do work; they manage people who do work. Doing things was a job for the enlisted.
    - petschge 5y ago
      Especially the Air Force should know better since the people doing the work for flying things are officers...
      - manquer 5y ago
        Flying is at pinnancle of jobs at an airforce. There are thousands of roles that is needed for a one plane to be ready to fly by a pilot. Perhaps the more accurate statement officers do the what they see as cool jobs all boring ones are delegated.
        QuarterReptile 5y ago
        Although the polar opposite can very often be true. The enlisted guy troubleshoots the obscure fault in the oxygen generator while his officer drafts messages detailing the problem, works to get parts ordered, and attends meetings about the whole fiasco.
      - throwawayboise 5y ago
        Aren't the people doing the flying mostly low level officers such as lieutenants and maybe captains?
        yutyut 5y ago
        No, tactical flying is highly technical and requires years to master. Most lieutenants and junior captains (winged aviators, mind you) that check into a squadron are tactically useless for the first 12-18 months as we train them up and they aeronautically adapt. Your three-to-four year Captains will do most of the flying but even the CO generally flies 1-2 times a week (Marine aviation).
        hef19898 5y ago
        The only employer I had in my life, among quite a few, where leadership had that devotion t the operational aspects of their jobs was Amazon. I like to work with those people. I guess that culture is what gives Amazon its continuous edge over the competition.
  - gumby 5y ago
    > Anyways, this is kind of off topic, so I'll take my leave. Thanks for replying. I don’t think it’s off topic. Startups should know that former enlisted personnel make great hires.
- roughly 5y ago
  > They are used to more infrastructure than a startup can or wants to provide. I've seen this with ex-Googlers on the software side, and ex-Apple folks from the hardware side who go independent tend to hit it too ("what do you mean our Chinese suppliers are refusing to retool their whole process for us?")
jcims 5y ago
I didn't serve myself but I ran a small consultancy for a few years and one of the primary predictive factors whether or not a new hire would do well was former military experience. I don't attribute it to core personality issues or intelligence or anything like that, I think it's just training and experience that was consistent with the expectations for the type of work we did (small infosec firm).
- tonyedgecombe 5y ago
  I remember the sales director at a company I worked for telling me he liked to hire ex-military people because they were compliant. If he told them to cold call 100 people then they would do exactly that.
petra 5y ago
I served in the Israeli military, like every 18 year old male. In ours, there are many places where people don't care. A lot depends on the role one plays. some are very meaningful. In some you carry a direct and deep responsibility(for your team mates lives, for the people you protect). In some places, you'll get punished severely if you make a mistake, So you really try not to. So you try to do a good job. In others ? Not so much. So you do the bare minimum and skate by. Many people are like that. It's a general "recommendation" for the new soldier. Now compare that to civilian life - in most jobs you're just a cog, you get paid the minimum your employer can manage, and most of the benefit of doing a better job is making the boss richer. So why give a fuck ?
- manquer 5y ago
  You are always a cog in the wheel, in a miltary the boss in addition making money can also kill you for a useless goal, the $2 trillion and thousands killed and injured over 20 years in afganistan is a recent example . Being motivated about a job whether miltary /civilian should be about what you can do not if its corrupt /inefficient /incompetent almost any large institutuion usually is
  - imajoredinecon 5y ago
    > useless goal Is bringing peace, civil rights, and good governance to a corrupt, poor, and violent country useless? (Obviously, we ended up failing in large part.)
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - aerosmile 5y ago
      Agree that "useless" was a bit harsh. Perhaps "unachievable"? It's a bit like dieting. You take someone who has been chubby their entire life, put them through a bootcamp, and then look at their weight 5 years later. The stats are not looking good in those cases, and I think they largely reflect our efforts in up-leveling the political landscape in historically corrupt countries. I am not saying that we shouldn't keep trying. But I think we should internalize that the chances of success are slim, and then make that a part of our upfront decisioning process on budget, casualties, political cost, etc.
renewiltord 5y ago
Does anyone have a neutral example? All the examples I have of military people who are in or adjacent to this part of Amazon have been disastrous. Full of themselves and not particularly high performance. In my experience, ex military people are just like any other ex government office people. Mostly afraid to be known as having made mistakes, a bit too cocksure, and leaning on their “when I was at X”. Maybe it’s different in different sub sections of the armed services. However, the local characteristics make sense considering the environment they were in (I only know two combat veterans). After all, similar mistakes lead to the Navy routinely bashing ships into each other. I think it’s likely that the rubber meets the road very little in the US armed forces. Perhaps the people experienced in that have different characteristics.
rootusrootus 5y ago
> after being in the military around people who put so much effort into getting things right I met some really bright, hard working people when I was in the military. But I met a huge number of slackers doing the absolute minimum required to skate by. I don't think the military has any particular monopoly on driven individuals.
- asdff 5y ago
  It's pretty common to join for tuition too.
aerosmile 5y ago
You have to give it to the military - they really succeed in indoctrinating their community in their success metrics. Everyone who leaves the military has a very high opinion of their peers' professionalism, dedication, and so forth. From an outside observer's perspective, the results are not as strong - the budgetary, humanitarian, environmental, collateral, and political costs of most of the military engagements of the past 50 years have been quite bad. You never hear the veterans talk about that - it's always about the success metrics that they define for themselves (eg: casualty ratio - "we lost only 2 lives on our end, and they lost XXXXX"). Compare that to the Googlers who constantly complain about their employer, and contrast that to Google's net impact on our society. First of all, it's not a cost center but a massive revenue center, and it paid for endless road constructions and similar projects across California, New York, and all other states that Google operates in. And while we can argue about the political bias in their search results, I believe Google has made information more accessible, and that's fundamentally a good thing. I imagine it has to do with how these two organizations approach their communities from the very beginning: - Google: don't be evil - Military: we have our own law where your jury can consist of as few as just 3 officers, and only 2 of them need to agree to send you to jail. Oh, and you don't get a lawyer until the investigation is finished, including your own deposition. So... still want to download all those incriminating documents and expose someone in the military? Not saying that we should operate like the military, but it's important to realize that anyone who joins the military is ok with this set of rules. So they are fundamentally not opposed to how the military works to begin with, and it's therefore not surprising that they are largely happy with their internal success metrics.
- lupire 5y ago
  People complaing about the military too. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_assault_in_the_United_States_military https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_assault_in_the_United... Everyone who works anywhere is not "fundamentally opposed to how it works".
- Jansen312 5y ago
  As long as their internal success metrics align with civilian interest, I am ok with that. But some can't integrate back especially when jobs require creativity, extensive domain knowledge and experience, and multi-tasking with multi-roles. It is that later that most veterans can't function well. In their previous life, things are predefined and roles are limited to just 1 or 2. Civilians have to juggle a lot and has no clear cut directions how things work out. Employers also won't tolerate your disabilities if that can be taken over by any other normal persons.
estaseuropano 5y ago
Its incredibly painful to read Americans perspective about work. I'm sorry if that comes across as rude, but this is incredible: > I'm a clock watcher at work, ... As is your right! As you should! What you're really saying is: I do value my lifetime. I do value the time with my partner, kids, friends. I do value my hobbies and spare time. I appreciate that I exist not just to serve some corporate (or government) goal. What a sad world to be so brainwashed by american corporate culture that you call this 'clock watching'. Sorry I really don't want to come across as rude or insulting as the term is ladden, but there's no other way to express this.

by ok_dad 5y ago

gumby 5y ago

My experience in hiring ex enlisted folks is 100% great. With officers…less than that. They are used to more infrastructure than a startup can or wants to provide.

ok_dad 5y ago
I was an officer (personally, I think I was decent, but who knows), I can agree on that to a point: former enlisted folks who are technical experts are by far above most former officers, and I have to say one of the reasons I left was because the officer corp is basically rotten these days with the same crappy, entitled managers that you see in the civilian world. However, the good officers were and are a cut above the rest. The problem is adverse selection by the shitty officers who thrive in that crap environment and wouldn't last a week as a civilian manager because they have no carrot, just sticks. Anyways, this is kind of off topic, so I'll take my leave.
- mcguire 5y ago
  I had a friend who was involved in the early US Air Force cyberwarfare stuff. He had a story of a (much more) senior officer visiting, seeing the people, who were also officers and had CS MSs and PhDs, doing their work, and throwing a fit. Air Force officers, you see, don't do work; they manage people who do work. Doing things was a job for the enlisted.
  - petschge 5y ago
    Especially the Air Force should know better since the people doing the work for flying things are officers...
    - manquer 5y ago
      Flying is at pinnancle of jobs at an airforce. There are thousands of roles that is needed for a one plane to be ready to fly by a pilot. Perhaps the more accurate statement officers do the what they see as cool jobs all boring ones are delegated.
      - QuarterReptile 5y ago
        Although the polar opposite can very often be true. The enlisted guy troubleshoots the obscure fault in the oxygen generator while his officer drafts messages detailing the problem, works to get parts ordered, and attends meetings about the whole fiasco.
    - throwawayboise 5y ago
      Aren't the people doing the flying mostly low level officers such as lieutenants and maybe captains?
      - yutyut 5y ago
        No, tactical flying is highly technical and requires years to master. Most lieutenants and junior captains (winged aviators, mind you) that check into a squadron are tactically useless for the first 12-18 months as we train them up and they aeronautically adapt. Your three-to-four year Captains will do most of the flying but even the CO generally flies 1-2 times a week (Marine aviation).
        hef19898 5y ago
        The only employer I had in my life, among quite a few, where leadership had that devotion t the operational aspects of their jobs was Amazon. I like to work with those people. I guess that culture is what gives Amazon its continuous edge over the competition.
- gumby 5y ago
  > Anyways, this is kind of off topic, so I'll take my leave. Thanks for replying. I don’t think it’s off topic. Startups should know that former enlisted personnel make great hires.
roughly 5y ago
> They are used to more infrastructure than a startup can or wants to provide. I've seen this with ex-Googlers on the software side, and ex-Apple folks from the hardware side who go independent tend to hit it too ("what do you mean our Chinese suppliers are refusing to retool their whole process for us?")

jcims 5y ago

I didn't serve myself but I ran a small consultancy for a few years and one of the primary predictive factors whether or not a new hire would do well was former military experience. I don't attribute it to core personality issues or intelligence or anything like that, I think it's just training and experience that was consistent with the expectations for the type of work we did (small infosec firm).

tonyedgecombe 5y ago
I remember the sales director at a company I worked for telling me he liked to hire ex-military people because they were compliant. If he told them to cold call 100 people then they would do exactly that.

petra 5y ago

I served in the Israeli military, like every 18 year old male. In ours, there are many places where people don't care. A lot depends on the role one plays. some are very meaningful. In some you carry a direct and deep responsibility(for your team mates lives, for the people you protect). In some places, you'll get punished severely if you make a mistake, So you really try not to. So you try to do a good job. In others ? Not so much. So you do the bare minimum and skate by. Many people are like that. It's a general "recommendation" for the new soldier. Now compare that to civilian life - in most jobs you're just a cog, you get paid the minimum your employer can manage, and most of the benefit of doing a better job is making the boss richer. So why give a fuck ?

manquer 5y ago
You are always a cog in the wheel, in a miltary the boss in addition making money can also kill you for a useless goal, the $2 trillion and thousands killed and injured over 20 years in afganistan is a recent example . Being motivated about a job whether miltary /civilian should be about what you can do not if its corrupt /inefficient /incompetent almost any large institutuion usually is
- imajoredinecon 5y ago
  > useless goal Is bringing peace, civil rights, and good governance to a corrupt, poor, and violent country useless? (Obviously, we ended up failing in large part.)
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - aerosmile 5y ago
    Agree that "useless" was a bit harsh. Perhaps "unachievable"? It's a bit like dieting. You take someone who has been chubby their entire life, put them through a bootcamp, and then look at their weight 5 years later. The stats are not looking good in those cases, and I think they largely reflect our efforts in up-leveling the political landscape in historically corrupt countries. I am not saying that we shouldn't keep trying. But I think we should internalize that the chances of success are slim, and then make that a part of our upfront decisioning process on budget, casualties, political cost, etc.

renewiltord 5y ago

Does anyone have a neutral example? All the examples I have of military people who are in or adjacent to this part of Amazon have been disastrous. Full of themselves and not particularly high performance. In my experience, ex military people are just like any other ex government office people. Mostly afraid to be known as having made mistakes, a bit too cocksure, and leaning on their “when I was at X”. Maybe it’s different in different sub sections of the armed services. However, the local characteristics make sense considering the environment they were in (I only know two combat veterans). After all, similar mistakes lead to the Navy routinely bashing ships into each other. I think it’s likely that the rubber meets the road very little in the US armed forces. Perhaps the people experienced in that have different characteristics.

rootusrootus 5y ago

> after being in the military around people who put so much effort into getting things right I met some really bright, hard working people when I was in the military. But I met a huge number of slackers doing the absolute minimum required to skate by. I don't think the military has any particular monopoly on driven individuals.

asdff 5y ago
It's pretty common to join for tuition too.

aerosmile 5y ago

You have to give it to the military - they really succeed in indoctrinating their community in their success metrics. Everyone who leaves the military has a very high opinion of their peers' professionalism, dedication, and so forth. From an outside observer's perspective, the results are not as strong - the budgetary, humanitarian, environmental, collateral, and political costs of most of the military engagements of the past 50 years have been quite bad. You never hear the veterans talk about that - it's always about the success metrics that they define for themselves (eg: casualty ratio - "we lost only 2 lives on our end, and they lost XXXXX"). Compare that to the Googlers who constantly complain about their employer, and contrast that to Google's net impact on our society. First of all, it's not a cost center but a massive revenue center, and it paid for endless road constructions and similar projects across California, New York, and all other states that Google operates in. And while we can argue about the political bias in their search results, I believe Google has made information more accessible, and that's fundamentally a good thing. I imagine it has to do with how these two organizations approach their communities from the very beginning: - Google: don't be evil - Military: we have our own law where your jury can consist of as few as just 3 officers, and only 2 of them need to agree to send you to jail. Oh, and you don't get a lawyer until the investigation is finished, including your own deposition. So... still want to download all those incriminating documents and expose someone in the military? Not saying that we should operate like the military, but it's important to realize that anyone who joins the military is ok with this set of rules. So they are fundamentally not opposed to how the military works to begin with, and it's therefore not surprising that they are largely happy with their internal success metrics.

lupire 5y ago
People complaing about the military too. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_assault_in_the_United_States_military https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_assault_in_the_United... Everyone who works anywhere is not "fundamentally opposed to how it works".
Jansen312 5y ago
As long as their internal success metrics align with civilian interest, I am ok with that. But some can't integrate back especially when jobs require creativity, extensive domain knowledge and experience, and multi-tasking with multi-roles. It is that later that most veterans can't function well. In their previous life, things are predefined and roles are limited to just 1 or 2. Civilians have to juggle a lot and has no clear cut directions how things work out. Employers also won't tolerate your disabilities if that can be taken over by any other normal persons.

estaseuropano 5y ago

Its incredibly painful to read Americans perspective about work. I'm sorry if that comes across as rude, but this is incredible: > I'm a clock watcher at work, ... As is your right! As you should! What you're really saying is: I do value my lifetime. I do value the time with my partner, kids, friends. I do value my hobbies and spare time. I appreciate that I exist not just to serve some corporate (or government) goal. What a sad world to be so brainwashed by american corporate culture that you call this 'clock watching'. Sorry I really don't want to come across as rude or insulting as the term is ladden, but there's no other way to express this.