6 ms·

Yeah, the whole culture there (and other places like Oracle) is all about implanting mindshare at the decision-maker level and driving unilateral adoption from

Yeah, the whole culture there (and other places like Oracle) is all about implanting mindshare at the decision-maker level and driving unilateral adoption from the top down. Pursuing such an approach is highly revealing because if the technology actually worked, that approach would not be necessary. Once they’re “in” at the decision-maker level, they can continue to milk the organisation with long-duration support and consulting contracts, feeding parasitically and gradually becoming more and more entangled. One spectacular example, 7M budget but in actuality, 1.2B down the drain and nothing to show for it https://blog.beyondsoftware.com/the-queensland-health-payroll-fiasco https://blog.beyondsoftware.com/the-queensland-health-payrol...

pram 5y ago
Oh yeah I worked on a similar project at Oracle. The sales people basically sold the state on a 'stack' with a bunch of random horseshit that was magically supposed to work together and then dumped it on engineering. I mean that in a totally serious way, sales seemingly just grabbed a bunch of names of Oracle software and mashed it together. It literally never worked at any point. Then Oracle sued THEM about it, lmao. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cover_Oregon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cover_Oregon
- selimthegrim 5y ago
  I met one of the "managers" on that who told me with a straight face "All you need is a college degree in anything to manage developers" (hers was in English IIRC)
fphhotchips 5y ago
> Pursuing such an approach is highly revealing because if the technology actually worked, that approach would not be necessary. This is, sadly, untrue. Enterprise reps do this because on the whole, it doesn't matter if you have the best technology - if the other guy is successful at the CxO level, the customer will go their way.
- throwaheyy 5y ago
  Correct - not saying that the best technology assures success, but that without working tech, marketing to the CxO level is the sole viable option.
spikej 5y ago
Add this one to the list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_pay_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_pay_system
bambataa 5y ago
> Once they’re “in” at the decision-maker level, they can continue to milk the organisation with long-duration support and consulting contracts, feeding parasitically and gradually becoming more and more entangled. IBM seems like a really interesting case study in parasitism at the organisational level. Just moving around, feeding from host to host. I wonder if anyone’s studied it in those terms.

pram 5y ago

Oh yeah I worked on a similar project at Oracle. The sales people basically sold the state on a 'stack' with a bunch of random horseshit that was magically supposed to work together and then dumped it on engineering. I mean that in a totally serious way, sales seemingly just grabbed a bunch of names of Oracle software and mashed it together. It literally never worked at any point. Then Oracle sued THEM about it, lmao. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cover_Oregon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cover_Oregon

selimthegrim 5y ago
I met one of the "managers" on that who told me with a straight face "All you need is a college degree in anything to manage developers" (hers was in English IIRC)

fphhotchips 5y ago

> Pursuing such an approach is highly revealing because if the technology actually worked, that approach would not be necessary. This is, sadly, untrue. Enterprise reps do this because on the whole, it doesn't matter if you have the best technology - if the other guy is successful at the CxO level, the customer will go their way.

throwaheyy 5y ago
Correct - not saying that the best technology assures success, but that without working tech, marketing to the CxO level is the sole viable option.

spikej 5y ago

Add this one to the list: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_pay_system https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_pay_system

bambataa 5y ago

> Once they’re “in” at the decision-maker level, they can continue to milk the organisation with long-duration support and consulting contracts, feeding parasitically and gradually becoming more and more entangled. IBM seems like a really interesting case study in parasitism at the organisational level. Just moving around, feeding from host to host. I wonder if anyone’s studied it in those terms.