6 ms·

At a company the size of Facebook, the CEO should not be involved at that level.

by frankincense 4y ago

charcircuit 4y ago
Why not? It's his company. He can do what he wants.
- malermeister 4y ago
  Should not, not must not. He can do what he wants, but he shouldn't.
- onion2k 4y ago
  His company pays design and UX experts a huge amount of money to come up with designs that work for users, not for him personally. Meta isn't Zuckerberg's toy. Ignoring that expertise, and designing for himself instead of users, is failing the shareholders by wasting money and not maximizing revenue. The parallel to Steve Jobs is a fair one, except that Steve was brilliant at design and UX and got things right. He wasn't bothered about tiny details like the padding on a single button but rather the design of the entire system, and he picked up on things that didn't sit in the overall architecture brilliantly. He also drove people to leave Apple, and that was a bad thing. Things aren't right or justifiable just because they're like things Steve did. Sometimes he got things wrong, particularly when it came to managing people.
  - charcircuit 4y ago
    CEOs dog fooding their products and leaving feedback on them is not failing shareholders. Would you prefer a CEO to completely ignore everything their company makes and just trust others to tell him how things are going?
    - jjav 4y ago
      A wise CEO doesn't bypass the product and engineering process he's delegated to be put in place. Bypasing the process not only interferes with someones sprint and product roadmap, but more importantly, tells the people who own the process that they don't really own it after all. Which leads to people quitting.
      - andsoitis 4y ago
        If the CEO of my company prodded me about a feature I work on, I think that's actually a great opportunity to build rapport.
        whiplash451 4y ago
        Right…
        adhesive_wombat 4y ago
        Happy to talk about it (who doesn't like talking about what they're up to?), and indeed it is nice if they're taking a genuine technical interest. If they want a change made that's basically a completely trivial detail that was already within my ability to have done when I was doing the work (e.g. just putting some padding that just felt about right), then sure, I guess. Not sure it's actually important, but whatever. If it will go against other work (e.g. the padding comes from some central styling rules), entails substantial off-route work, or adds future maintenance debt or project risk, it should go via the product manager if there is one. A good CEO knows not to preempt the people who decide how the product works, what it needs to do and how the team(s) are going to get there. He should also know that product will consider a valid suggestion (and he should know if they're so slammed that they can't even think about it, in which case he can help in other ways than moaning about padding). In this case it sounds like Zuckerberg is bikeshedding over something trivial (doesn't get much more trivial than padding on a specific button) just to swing his dick about. If he has something insightful to say about the business logic, that would actually show engagement and understanding.
- cycomanic 4y ago
  I'm surprised that nobody is questioning this. Zuckerberg owns ~17% of Meta shares, so it quite clearly not "his" company where he can do whatever he pleases. Primarily he is an employee and has a responsibility to the owners (which does include him) to do his job, arguably looking at button padding is not part of his job description.
  - colinmhayes 4y ago
    Zuckerberg has a voting majority. As long as he believes he is acting in the companies best interests he can do whatever he likes.
    - fleetwoodsnack 4y ago
      Not really. The role of the fiduciary is to act in the best interests of the organization, including seeking counsel and advice from experts. “I was doing what I thought was best,” is not an affirmative defense, and has been successfully argued to be a dereliction of duty in corporate and contract law.
    - henryfjordan 4y ago
      This isn't strictly true, Zuckerberg has to act in the interests of the minority shareholders as well. He can't take a deal that helps himself while hurting all other shareholders. Getting involved in button padding issues isn't one of those cases though. He can spend all the time in the world on that if he likes.
    - tsimionescu 4y ago
      That's irrelevant when discussing ownership. He owns 17% of Meta. That he retains control of 90% of Meta doesn't mean that he has the moral right to ignore his responsibilities to his co-owners.
      - colinmhayes 4y ago
        No one has the moral right to do anything since the entire idea of moral rights is absurd. Yes, Zuckerberg has a duty to act in the best interest of shareholders. Courts have repeatedly ruled that good faith belief is all that requires. Unless you think his interest in button ui is somehow in self interest over company interest he didn’t do anything wrong.
- darthrupert 4y ago
  You're essentially right. It's not the job of the corporation to act morally. The job to create a moral framework under which corporations operate is the nation's. Unfortunately, corporations have been successfully lobbying on removing constraints on what they are doing and against adding new ones.
beambot 4y ago
Respectfully: Zuckerberg has earned the right to care about whatever he darn-well pleases at company the size of his.
- eru 4y ago
  Sure. But random employees also have the right to quit, if they don't like that meddling.
- KyeRussell 4y ago
  As soon as you start talking about “rights” you’re just having your own argument. We are obviously talking about what’s best practice.
achow 4y ago
Steve Jobs was famously known to be involved in even more micro product details than that.
- martingoodson 4y ago
  “So Vic, we have an urgent issue, one that I need addressed right away. I’ve already assigned someone from my team to help you, and I hope you can fix this tomorrow” said Steve. “I’ve been looking at the Google logo on the iPhone and I’m not happy with the icon. The second O in Google doesn’t have the right yellow gradient. It’s just wrong and I’m going to have Greg fix it tomorrow. Is that okay with you?” Of course this was okay with me.
- Kye 4y ago
  Just like working hard won't make you rich on its own, it's not enough to be a micromanager. The directions you give have to actually produce results. Facebook is no iPod.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

At a company the size of Facebook, the CEO should not be involved at that level.

charcircuit 4y ago

Why not? It's his company. He can do what he wants.

malermeister 4y ago
Should not, not must not. He can do what he wants, but he shouldn't.
onion2k 4y ago
His company pays design and UX experts a huge amount of money to come up with designs that work for users, not for him personally. Meta isn't Zuckerberg's toy. Ignoring that expertise, and designing for himself instead of users, is failing the shareholders by wasting money and not maximizing revenue. The parallel to Steve Jobs is a fair one, except that Steve was brilliant at design and UX and got things right. He wasn't bothered about tiny details like the padding on a single button but rather the design of the entire system, and he picked up on things that didn't sit in the overall architecture brilliantly. He also drove people to leave Apple, and that was a bad thing. Things aren't right or justifiable just because they're like things Steve did. Sometimes he got things wrong, particularly when it came to managing people.
- charcircuit 4y ago
  CEOs dog fooding their products and leaving feedback on them is not failing shareholders. Would you prefer a CEO to completely ignore everything their company makes and just trust others to tell him how things are going?
  - jjav 4y ago
    A wise CEO doesn't bypass the product and engineering process he's delegated to be put in place. Bypasing the process not only interferes with someones sprint and product roadmap, but more importantly, tells the people who own the process that they don't really own it after all. Which leads to people quitting.
    - andsoitis 4y ago
      If the CEO of my company prodded me about a feature I work on, I think that's actually a great opportunity to build rapport.
      - whiplash451 4y ago
        Right…
      - adhesive_wombat 4y ago
        Happy to talk about it (who doesn't like talking about what they're up to?), and indeed it is nice if they're taking a genuine technical interest. If they want a change made that's basically a completely trivial detail that was already within my ability to have done when I was doing the work (e.g. just putting some padding that just felt about right), then sure, I guess. Not sure it's actually important, but whatever. If it will go against other work (e.g. the padding comes from some central styling rules), entails substantial off-route work, or adds future maintenance debt or project risk, it should go via the product manager if there is one. A good CEO knows not to preempt the people who decide how the product works, what it needs to do and how the team(s) are going to get there. He should also know that product will consider a valid suggestion (and he should know if they're so slammed that they can't even think about it, in which case he can help in other ways than moaning about padding). In this case it sounds like Zuckerberg is bikeshedding over something trivial (doesn't get much more trivial than padding on a specific button) just to swing his dick about. If he has something insightful to say about the business logic, that would actually show engagement and understanding.
cycomanic 4y ago
I'm surprised that nobody is questioning this. Zuckerberg owns ~17% of Meta shares, so it quite clearly not "his" company where he can do whatever he pleases. Primarily he is an employee and has a responsibility to the owners (which does include him) to do his job, arguably looking at button padding is not part of his job description.
- colinmhayes 4y ago
  Zuckerberg has a voting majority. As long as he believes he is acting in the companies best interests he can do whatever he likes.
  - fleetwoodsnack 4y ago
    Not really. The role of the fiduciary is to act in the best interests of the organization, including seeking counsel and advice from experts. “I was doing what I thought was best,” is not an affirmative defense, and has been successfully argued to be a dereliction of duty in corporate and contract law.
  - henryfjordan 4y ago
    This isn't strictly true, Zuckerberg has to act in the interests of the minority shareholders as well. He can't take a deal that helps himself while hurting all other shareholders. Getting involved in button padding issues isn't one of those cases though. He can spend all the time in the world on that if he likes.
  - tsimionescu 4y ago
    That's irrelevant when discussing ownership. He owns 17% of Meta. That he retains control of 90% of Meta doesn't mean that he has the moral right to ignore his responsibilities to his co-owners.
    - colinmhayes 4y ago
      No one has the moral right to do anything since the entire idea of moral rights is absurd. Yes, Zuckerberg has a duty to act in the best interest of shareholders. Courts have repeatedly ruled that good faith belief is all that requires. Unless you think his interest in button ui is somehow in self interest over company interest he didn’t do anything wrong.
darthrupert 4y ago
You're essentially right. It's not the job of the corporation to act morally. The job to create a moral framework under which corporations operate is the nation's. Unfortunately, corporations have been successfully lobbying on removing constraints on what they are doing and against adding new ones.

beambot 4y ago

Respectfully: Zuckerberg has earned the right to care about whatever he darn-well pleases at company the size of his.

eru 4y ago
Sure. But random employees also have the right to quit, if they don't like that meddling.
KyeRussell 4y ago
As soon as you start talking about “rights” you’re just having your own argument. We are obviously talking about what’s best practice.

achow 4y ago

Steve Jobs was famously known to be involved in even more micro product details than that.

martingoodson 4y ago
“So Vic, we have an urgent issue, one that I need addressed right away. I’ve already assigned someone from my team to help you, and I hope you can fix this tomorrow” said Steve. “I’ve been looking at the Google logo on the iPhone and I’m not happy with the icon. The second O in Google doesn’t have the right yellow gradient. It’s just wrong and I’m going to have Greg fix it tomorrow. Is that okay with you?” Of course this was okay with me.
Kye 4y ago
Just like working hard won't make you rich on its own, it's not enough to be a micromanager. The directions you give have to actually produce results. Facebook is no iPod.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]