3 ms·
> what is people's typical response and what is the dynamic? Not the OP. One place, a few times when I was doing an integration with a large company, I discov
by neilv 3y ago
> what is people's typical response and what is the dynamic?
Not the OP. One place, a few times when I was doing an integration with a large company, I discovered a grave security flaw in the customer's systems.
One time, had I done the integration despite the flaw, it would've required me to knowingly code some obviously 100% wrong use of cryptographic protocol.
When I started to tell the director to whom I reported, I felt an initial "oh no..." mixed with skepticism, from hints in their voice. So I explained, and answered their questions.
Then they seemed to switch from dread, to solving it. Instead of quietly taking the client's money, they halted integration, and put together a presentation for the customer, telling them how part of their security had a grave problem. (Possibly awkward, because it might've been a team internal to the customer who had made such a mistake on something so sensitive.)
I'd say that the dynamic in that case was what you'd like to imagine from engineers who'd risen in influence: acknowledging the problem, understanding and doing the right thing, when it had to be done, even when they wish it didn't.
- neilv 3y agoI've also seen other dynamics, in which pointing out what should be showstopper problems didn't go as well. I assume that the most common in business as a whole is a variation on: someone doesn't want to hear about it, because (put broadly) acknowledging it would conflict with business goals or their individual goals. Example conflicts: don't get a sale, slip the schedule, fail to meet some individual OKR/KPI, or expose an earlier mistake of the individual. Also, the dynamic doesn't have to come down to conflicts between plausibly rational motivations (for business or self). Egos and irrational cognition are also parts of our collective human situation, and an individual's particular traits (or a personal challenge they're going through) can sometimes lead to that taking over decisions. It happens, and we should try to realize when that's the cause (rather than just an attempt at cover for some rational motive they don't want to state), so that we can try to get to rational decision-making. A different thing, or a complication: There are also be dynamics in which an 'ambitious' person in an org, not naturally involved in the situation, uses the situation to grandstand or hit a rival. And obviously this can affect the dynamics for people who are involved (e.g., person A would normally do the aligned thing for the company, but it's more complicated now that B will twist that to gun for their job). Fortunately, I don't immediately recall seeing an egregious example first-hand, but have heard of it.