3 ms·

Or in other words, artificial/arbitrary management metrics/deadlines force through a possibly dangerous change to factory operations?

• yosefk 3y ago
  What procedure mitigating the supposed risk of this change was skipped due to management pressure according to TFA? The way I read it, the original change of the constant "3" to "4" was tested, it was observed to have the desired effect, and none of the delays before the coding and the testing by the developer or after it did anything to reduce the risk further.
  • jacknews 3y ago
    That would be the (non-existent) tests that should perhaps be run because "This affects everything in the factory." Probably the code still works with this change, but does the factory?
• raverbashing 3y ago
  Yes Because, in this case, the buck stops with him All deadlines are "artificial" and some have a lot of $$$ attached to them (due to regulatory/market/customer/supplier issues) But I know, a blame culture begets a CYA culture, which begets the opposite of "help me help you" (hence why such a parameter is hardcoded in the code - the issue here is not stopping the ~~orphan~~ developer crushing machine but why does it exist in the first place)
  • deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  • jacknews 3y ago
    A CEO is entirely responsible for the culture of an organization.