5 ms·

> You’re supposed to lead without authority John seems to be particularly calling out that he was not able to influence the people with high enough rank to mak

by troupe 4y ago

> You’re supposed to lead without authority John seems to be particularly calling out that he was not able to influence the people with high enough rank to make decisions. So it sounds like he at least thought there was an authority structure there wasn't as flat as you describe.

heather45879 4y ago
Something that popped into my mind is the role of Linus in the Linux Kernel development. Imagine how things would be without him? Or if a bunch of business exec ran things? A lot of millennials value freedom of choice and open collaboration ad nauseam, but this is the danger of too many voices—nothing gets done. No singular purpose. No authority—or rather, no respect for authority. The reality is: we are not all equal. Some people are just better at what they do than others. Perhaps we should listen to what they say? But that’s how politics goes—some schmucks who have no idea nor vision, nor experience, nor know-how, rise up on the backs of engineers who do all the work. Typically out of insecurity or over-ambition they trample on-up. And who would want to deal with the cutthroat bullshit of trying to deal with these people? Go Carmack—create something amazing with your startup. Meta will rot away in the next ten years because someone else will invent a better VR headset. Just like Linus helped invent a better OS—free to use, open to collaborate, with vision and focus. With attention-to-detail and quality-engineering as a first-class citizen.
- travisporter 4y ago
  No need to bash millennials here. He also admitted he could have pushed more but decided to code instead.
LarsDu88 4y ago
Valve is a great example of how this doesn't work in practice. Jeri Ellsworth got fired and revealed that the supposedly flat hierarchy at Valve is really composed of informal cliques - with the most influential groups having a direct line to the CEO/ Kinda what happened to communism in Russia, if you think about it
- bee_rider 4y ago
  As humans we do have built-in hardware for forming informal cliques, so this could be seen as leveraging our built-in strengths (although you have to consciously work against some of the built-in cognitive biases that people have so it might be a risky thing, maybe not worth it).
- qaq 4y ago
  How is it even remotley like communism in USSR? Russian empire had the same governance structure since the time of the Golden Horde to present day e.g. very hierarchal top down ...
  - LarsDu88 4y ago
    Right there in the title - Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) Soviets are worker's councils and the individual republics are supposed to have some degree of autonomy on paper. For at least a couple of months in 1917, some amount of collective decision making did happen, although (as you stated) with virtually all Russian governments, it quickly devolved into one-man personality cult enforced by brutality and the machinations of the NKVD.
- baby 4y ago
  The flat org of fb I described is not really flat the way Valve is. Valve is truly flat from what I understand, whereas the one at facebook is not but encourage people to behave like it is.
  - cachvico 4y ago
    I think I read that it's not flat since a few years back anyway
- savanaly 4y ago
  Can we really expect an employee who was fired to paint the most accurate picture though? What are the thoughts of folks that left on good or neutral terms?
- 4y ago
rajman187 4y ago
He wasn’t talking with senior managers and directors but almost certainly VP level and CxO
mattarm 4y ago
There is always an authority structure in these kinds of companies. I'm personally familiar with Google, but this description of Facebook makes it sound similar... The upside is that people, in theory, don't need to wait to be promoted to (attempt to) have an outsized influence on what actually happens on their team, in their org, etc. The downside is that the "real" power/influence structure can be a more nebulous/social game, rather than something concrete that is diagrammed out in a visible org structure. It was often said at Google that you get promoted to level X after already doing work at that level, which implies that the people with influence are running around influencing/leading before they've been anointed with an official title that "gives" them authority. Reading Carmack's letter, it sounds like he consciously chose to prioritize his personal programming/engineering work over his social/influence/leadership at Facebook. In all my observations, past a certain level, you kinda have to choose one or the other. Both are valid choices.
fknorangesite 4y ago
> authority structure there wasn't as flat as you describe. It never is. In the absence of formal authority, people will unconsciously build an ad hoc structure on their own.
- svieira 4y ago
  See also: The Tyranny of Structurelessness https://www.jofreeman.com/joreen/tyranny.htm https://www.jofreeman.com/joreen/tyranny.htm

by troupe 4y ago

heather45879 4y ago

Something that popped into my mind is the role of Linus in the Linux Kernel development. Imagine how things would be without him? Or if a bunch of business exec ran things? A lot of millennials value freedom of choice and open collaboration ad nauseam, but this is the danger of too many voices—nothing gets done. No singular purpose. No authority—or rather, no respect for authority. The reality is: we are not all equal. Some people are just better at what they do than others. Perhaps we should listen to what they say? But that’s how politics goes—some schmucks who have no idea nor vision, nor experience, nor know-how, rise up on the backs of engineers who do all the work. Typically out of insecurity or over-ambition they trample on-up. And who would want to deal with the cutthroat bullshit of trying to deal with these people? Go Carmack—create something amazing with your startup. Meta will rot away in the next ten years because someone else will invent a better VR headset. Just like Linus helped invent a better OS—free to use, open to collaborate, with vision and focus. With attention-to-detail and quality-engineering as a first-class citizen.

travisporter 4y ago
No need to bash millennials here. He also admitted he could have pushed more but decided to code instead.

LarsDu88 4y ago

Valve is a great example of how this doesn't work in practice. Jeri Ellsworth got fired and revealed that the supposedly flat hierarchy at Valve is really composed of informal cliques - with the most influential groups having a direct line to the CEO/ Kinda what happened to communism in Russia, if you think about it

bee_rider 4y ago
As humans we do have built-in hardware for forming informal cliques, so this could be seen as leveraging our built-in strengths (although you have to consciously work against some of the built-in cognitive biases that people have so it might be a risky thing, maybe not worth it).
qaq 4y ago
How is it even remotley like communism in USSR? Russian empire had the same governance structure since the time of the Golden Horde to present day e.g. very hierarchal top down ...
- LarsDu88 4y ago
  Right there in the title - Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) Soviets are worker's councils and the individual republics are supposed to have some degree of autonomy on paper. For at least a couple of months in 1917, some amount of collective decision making did happen, although (as you stated) with virtually all Russian governments, it quickly devolved into one-man personality cult enforced by brutality and the machinations of the NKVD.
baby 4y ago
The flat org of fb I described is not really flat the way Valve is. Valve is truly flat from what I understand, whereas the one at facebook is not but encourage people to behave like it is.
- cachvico 4y ago
  I think I read that it's not flat since a few years back anyway
savanaly 4y ago
Can we really expect an employee who was fired to paint the most accurate picture though? What are the thoughts of folks that left on good or neutral terms?
4y ago

rajman187 4y ago

He wasn’t talking with senior managers and directors but almost certainly VP level and CxO

mattarm 4y ago

There is always an authority structure in these kinds of companies. I'm personally familiar with Google, but this description of Facebook makes it sound similar... The upside is that people, in theory, don't need to wait to be promoted to (attempt to) have an outsized influence on what actually happens on their team, in their org, etc. The downside is that the "real" power/influence structure can be a more nebulous/social game, rather than something concrete that is diagrammed out in a visible org structure. It was often said at Google that you get promoted to level X after already doing work at that level, which implies that the people with influence are running around influencing/leading before they've been anointed with an official title that "gives" them authority. Reading Carmack's letter, it sounds like he consciously chose to prioritize his personal programming/engineering work over his social/influence/leadership at Facebook. In all my observations, past a certain level, you kinda have to choose one or the other. Both are valid choices.

fknorangesite 4y ago

> authority structure there wasn't as flat as you describe. It never is. In the absence of formal authority, people will unconsciously build an ad hoc structure on their own.

svieira 4y ago
See also: The Tyranny of Structurelessness https://www.jofreeman.com/joreen/tyranny.htm https://www.jofreeman.com/joreen/tyranny.htm