Sure. Corporate or HR or someone is pushing for a perspective that is not natural. Real example: I created documentation for a specific team, showed it to my s

Sure. Corporate or HR or someone is pushing for a perspective that is not natural. Real example: I created documentation for a specific team, showed it to my supervisor, who approved with one requested change: that I embed alternate text for every image. I knew the target team had no sight impaired people so I asked why. Her explanation was that perhaps someone who was sight impaired might at some point want to review the documentation. Because of a hypothetical future reality, I was instructed to make changes that were not apart of the original requirement, to benefit someone who to all of our known realities does not yet exist. I was not asked to translate the document into the 30 languages our company employees speak - this is a true reality. Now we can argue that text can be converted into languages using existing technology and at the time image to text translation does not capture the intent of the flow charts and screenshots that I had created so a human would have to generate these alternate text blobs. This one person had a perspective that while admirable was not exactly grounded in reality or practicality but was manifested from their own desires, bias, or influence. Now, my text was not screened for vocabulary levels that match the intended audience so it is possible that I was either being condescending or esoteric but that was not addressed because the concern was brought up. I do believe we each have a desire to shape to shape our world into our vision - and that bias should be met grace, humility, and thoughtful expression when spoken by someone in authority or with power. My frustration is when an unrelated preference or opinion shapes the way a goal is met instead of the completion of the task.