5 ms·

The definition of “bullshit jobs” is fuzzy. Middle managers are extremely important. Corporate compliance officers exist to represent the interests of external

The definition of “bullshit jobs” is fuzzy. Middle managers are extremely important. Corporate compliance officers exist to represent the interests of external stakeholders in a company. I’m sure many people resent having to go to compliance training every week (in some highly regulated jobs). But it’s not bullshit work.

lordnacho 4y ago
Doesn't it depend on whether the job holder himself thinks the job is BS? I'd say anecdotally there's a heck of a lot of people doing jobs that they themselves don't think really contributes anything worthwhile. If you loosen the definition a bit you might also count things that the job holder would say could be done vastly better, which would start to encompass some of your middle managers and compliance people. I dare say most of what we do in society is essentially useless, it doesn't need to be done, and only exists because everyone in the current system needs to be seen to contribute. That need itself grew out of an inherited fear of hunger that might result if we let people slack off, and might take a long time for us to change.
- pyuser583 4y ago
  > Doesn't it depend on whether the job holder himself thinks the job is BS? That’s the initial definition, but eventually the author makes his own assessments. At once point he describes being in the military as a bullshit job. Tell that to the Ukrainians.
  - Kwpolska 4y ago
    Ukraine is in a place in which an army is required for survival. But does a peaceful country surrounded by an ocean or by peaceful countries — say, Iceland or Austria — need a large army?
    - sokoloff 4y ago
      Do I need to exercise if I’m already fit and healthy? It’s quite plausible that some countries are peaceful because of the deterrent effect of their (and their allies’) military.
    - rufus_foreman 4y ago
      "Iceland's defence forces consist of the Icelandic Coast Guard, which patrols Icelandic waters and monitors its airspace, and other services such as the National Commissioner's National Security and Special Forces Units. Iceland maintains no standing army, the only NATO member for which this is the case. The Coast Guard consists of three ships and four aircraft" -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defence_of_Iceland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defence_of_Iceland
    - pyuser583 4y ago
      Even if you’re not at war, a military is necessary to enforce neutrality. For example, if a pilot from a belligerent country crashes in your territory, they must be internet for the duration of the war. You’ll also want a military to evacuate your nationals from places like Afghanistan, and manage defectors trying to reach another power. There’s also a good chance you’ll be asked to participate it peacekeeping forces. You don’t need a large army. You might not even need a standing army: reservists might do. But you need some military capacity.
esel2k 4y ago
> Middle managers are extremely important. This is quiet a fuzzy and unsupported claim. In what respect are these important and what is their main goal: Coaching the team or sitting in meetings to align and make sure everything is aligned and they are visible? Are their head on the table of the product is not delivered and not flying? To me middle management has to be redefined with a clear responsibility that has very much changed from the past.
- pyuser583 4y ago
  A good defense of middle management: https://www.economist.com/business/2021/10/02/why-companies-need-middle-managers https://www.economist.com/business/2021/10/02/why-companies-... Summary: companies that go “flat” and remove middle managers often end up with informal pecking orders. These orders have power but lack accountability. Something else to go sider - the removal of middle managers had coincided with the rise of HR departments. At my work, I won’t have a boss. I have a product manager, HR, a scrum master, a team lead, and the CTO who I never see, but is my direct superior.
- refurb 4y ago
  I'll say it's quite eye opening to work for a place with ineffective middle management. I did it for a couple years. When people asked what it was like I quoted the famous phrase "an infinite number of monkeys at an infinite number of typewriters". Every group was doing something different. People would start numerous projects and then just forget about them. Really important things were never planned for and ended up being a mad rush once some random person figure out how bad the consequences of not doing it were. The people were all very smart. There was just no management. Nobody to say "no, don't do X, do Y" or a leader to say "yes, we could do all of those things, but we've prioritized these 2". After a while I was begging for the bureaucracy and paperwork of a big company just so that I could feel like I wasn't just spinning my wheel 90% of the time.
ravenstine 4y ago
> Middle managers are extremely important. Depends on the company and what those middle managers are doing. By default, middle managers exist to manage risk and distribute blame away from senior management. When middle managers become redundant to the point where an employee has multiple bosses to report to, arguably some of those managers aren't that important. Ever see how, in Office Space, the protagonist has multiple managers bug him when he makes a minor error? That's common in a lot of mediocre companies, and is something I and others I know have experienced at one point or another.

lordnacho 4y ago

Doesn't it depend on whether the job holder himself thinks the job is BS? I'd say anecdotally there's a heck of a lot of people doing jobs that they themselves don't think really contributes anything worthwhile. If you loosen the definition a bit you might also count things that the job holder would say could be done vastly better, which would start to encompass some of your middle managers and compliance people. I dare say most of what we do in society is essentially useless, it doesn't need to be done, and only exists because everyone in the current system needs to be seen to contribute. That need itself grew out of an inherited fear of hunger that might result if we let people slack off, and might take a long time for us to change.

pyuser583 4y ago
> Doesn't it depend on whether the job holder himself thinks the job is BS? That’s the initial definition, but eventually the author makes his own assessments. At once point he describes being in the military as a bullshit job. Tell that to the Ukrainians.
- Kwpolska 4y ago
  Ukraine is in a place in which an army is required for survival. But does a peaceful country surrounded by an ocean or by peaceful countries — say, Iceland or Austria — need a large army?
  - sokoloff 4y ago
    Do I need to exercise if I’m already fit and healthy? It’s quite plausible that some countries are peaceful because of the deterrent effect of their (and their allies’) military.
  - rufus_foreman 4y ago
    "Iceland's defence forces consist of the Icelandic Coast Guard, which patrols Icelandic waters and monitors its airspace, and other services such as the National Commissioner's National Security and Special Forces Units. Iceland maintains no standing army, the only NATO member for which this is the case. The Coast Guard consists of three ships and four aircraft" -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defence_of_Iceland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defence_of_Iceland
  - pyuser583 4y ago
    Even if you’re not at war, a military is necessary to enforce neutrality. For example, if a pilot from a belligerent country crashes in your territory, they must be internet for the duration of the war. You’ll also want a military to evacuate your nationals from places like Afghanistan, and manage defectors trying to reach another power. There’s also a good chance you’ll be asked to participate it peacekeeping forces. You don’t need a large army. You might not even need a standing army: reservists might do. But you need some military capacity.

esel2k 4y ago

> Middle managers are extremely important. This is quiet a fuzzy and unsupported claim. In what respect are these important and what is their main goal: Coaching the team or sitting in meetings to align and make sure everything is aligned and they are visible? Are their head on the table of the product is not delivered and not flying? To me middle management has to be redefined with a clear responsibility that has very much changed from the past.

pyuser583 4y ago
A good defense of middle management: https://www.economist.com/business/2021/10/02/why-companies-need-middle-managers https://www.economist.com/business/2021/10/02/why-companies-... Summary: companies that go “flat” and remove middle managers often end up with informal pecking orders. These orders have power but lack accountability. Something else to go sider - the removal of middle managers had coincided with the rise of HR departments. At my work, I won’t have a boss. I have a product manager, HR, a scrum master, a team lead, and the CTO who I never see, but is my direct superior.
refurb 4y ago
I'll say it's quite eye opening to work for a place with ineffective middle management. I did it for a couple years. When people asked what it was like I quoted the famous phrase "an infinite number of monkeys at an infinite number of typewriters". Every group was doing something different. People would start numerous projects and then just forget about them. Really important things were never planned for and ended up being a mad rush once some random person figure out how bad the consequences of not doing it were. The people were all very smart. There was just no management. Nobody to say "no, don't do X, do Y" or a leader to say "yes, we could do all of those things, but we've prioritized these 2". After a while I was begging for the bureaucracy and paperwork of a big company just so that I could feel like I wasn't just spinning my wheel 90% of the time.

ravenstine 4y ago

> Middle managers are extremely important. Depends on the company and what those middle managers are doing. By default, middle managers exist to manage risk and distribute blame away from senior management. When middle managers become redundant to the point where an employee has multiple bosses to report to, arguably some of those managers aren't that important. Ever see how, in Office Space, the protagonist has multiple managers bug him when he makes a minor error? That's common in a lot of mediocre companies, and is something I and others I know have experienced at one point or another.