5 ms·
AFAICT, smaller, privately owned software companies are more popular in Europe, and they are often much more competently managed (because the owners actually ca
by globalreset 4y ago
AFAICT, smaller, privately owned software companies are more popular in Europe, and they are often much more competently managed (because the owners actually care). Easy access to funding in US makes building large, collectively owned companies more popular, and these while usually very poorly managed can dominate global markets due to better funding, better initial market (one language, more people, richer users, whole world knows English anyway).
- BlargMcLarg 4y agoIf it is, I have yet to see it. Managers, owners and middlemen making everything a slog to work with is very much a thing in Europe. And when you realize European managers are also sitting on ivory towers relative to ICs, it becomes pretty apparent why this behavior is somewhat universal.
- Mo3 4y agoI know, I am European and am the CTO for a US-based institution these days. Of course the same mechanisms of management exist here also, but in no way, shape or form in the same way they do in the US. It’s still like night and day on average. After talking with the CEO a lot, he had some sort of realization himself and almost seemed like he began questioning his whole reality. Some of my (subjective) impressions after working for small- and medium-sized (=< 500) European companies for over a decade and now being in US executive management: Generally employees in the US tend do not have a sense of responsibility for the bigger picture, honestly, most just don’t give a shit. There’s no sense of belonging to a bigger cause. This is not meant as some sort of accusation, because I can understand 100% why that is. There's no reason for anyone to be actually motivated. People are treated like slaves, the general mindset is one of extreme superficiality, and even the most self-motivated and ambitious thought leaders end up being drained and exhausted and then dumped. US work environments have brutal and insane administrative and technical overhead, are extremely inefficient and there is an abhorrent amount of parasitic middlemen ventures that have penetrated deep into even the most simple tasks and concepts. The environment itself is hostile towards efficiency and creativity. US workers work more hours than in almost any developed country, yet efficiency is lower than anywhere else. It’s a common theme apparently, same shit with healthcare. Most expensive, least efficient and worst health outcomes in the developed world. Decreasing life expectancy, more infant deaths than in Russia and for some parts of the US, lower life expectancy than in Bangladesh. Sounds absolutely wonderful, and is a perfect example of exactly what’s wrong with the general work culture as well. It’s not about reaching some sort of long-term goal together, it’s just splitting the 3 step way up into 30 pieces and leeching and draining money out of every single one no matter the outcome. Short-term profit over anything else, fuck the future, fuck the new debt and fuck everyone else. Personally, I had to distance myself from getting too invested and attached as well (so, in a sense, also giving less of a shit) because I got seriously depressed after a while. But yeah, socialism is “evil”. Tell that to anyone of the happy, healthy and wealthy people in Europe enjoying their paid vacation after taking pride in their work, doing it efficiently and being respected as human beings. I guarantee you they’ll know you’re an American. We must have different definitions of freedom over here.
- akagusu 4y agoThanks for your comment. It's save me to write my own.
- Apocryphon 4y agoBasically, we've just privatized socialism, not only because we've outsourced health insurance into an employer-provider benefit, but also in the sense that large corporate structures are overseen by bureaucracies that lead to huge amounts of opacity and waste, akin to stereotypical Soviet era governments. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30928403 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30928403 And gains are redistributed similarly. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30724348 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30724348
- ceeplusplus 4y agoYou sound like you're working at a dysfunctional company. The people I've worked with at high performing companies have greater productivity than any F500 company I've seen. The trick is to hire few high performers, pay them a lot, and pay them according to their impact on the business. Go work in HFT some time and you'll see what I mean. No X years of experience required to be Y level bureaucracy. There's a reason that every European car company has failed to compete with Tesla on software.
- Mo3 4y agoOf course its dysfunctional, that’s what I’m saying, but a dysfunctional company like this would go bankrupt in Europe while it is almost (besides the examples mentioned by you) the norm in the US. And then, consider how many of your awesome HFT ventures actually produce anything of value instead of being parasitic and you’ll come to some good conclusions on why even some third world countries have a dramatically higher living and work standard. Who cares about Tesla in the bigger picture? Guess where most of the good cars come from - it’s also not the US. Tesla has first movers advantage, but I would strongly disagree that their software is in any way exceptionally better than other software - unless we’re not talking about the same software that powers autopilot killing people left and right. If you’re referring to the general concept of advanced autopilot and so on, sure, they toot their horn a lot, but I’d argue that having stable and reliable software (that inherently takes longer to develop and test) is still the best long term strategy. But it makes sense in the perspective of short term profit over anything… Give it a few years and Tesla will be overtaken by a mile by even Ford and then another mile by VW and Hyundai.