3 ms·
I think you could go further - the old Google culture was not great at teamwork, and most definitely not when teams crossed boundaries with third parties, where
by fidotron 3y ago
I think you could go further - the old Google culture was not great at teamwork, and most definitely not when teams crossed boundaries with third parties, where they would expect to be dictating reality and struggled when this wasn’t possible. (Credit where it is due - certain people in the Android group worked this out and changed their tune, and much money was made as a result).
There are limits to how much tiny teams can do and old Google was pushing those limits too often.
Part of the function of a Jobs type character is to be the defining asshole in the organization that no one has a chance of defeating alone.
- vharish 3y agoThe current Google is no better when it comes to team work. It's likely worse when it comes to cross team work.
- fidotron 3y agoAbsolutely. My outside impression of current Google is everyone is at war with everyone at their level. Get promoted and it's war with a new level. Your success at a given level is based on your ability to persuade the level above of your use to them ascending further levels. It's tempting to blame Sundar for this, but he is the result of this game being setup that way in the first place, and he simply eliminated all possible other contenders, now using the viper pit around him as a moat. What amazed me was how long it has taken most Googlers to notice that actually their VPs were at war with each other to a ludicrously counterproductive degree, and they were all being used as pawns in this. I heard some stories (and the post linked to here alludes to some) which are just off the charts craziness, and yet many are seemingly oblivious.
- psunavy03 3y agoSo basically Microsoft under Ballmer?
- dralley 3y agoAs per the famous "engineering org chart" comic
- refulgentis 3y agoThey fixed the VPs but they're way too busy to appeal to, even when they agree with you and everyone was told as much. And now you have extremes of rest-and-vest and "if I get the Visibility(tm) for this, maybe I'll get one more promo..." behavior from the L7s and lower.
- psunavy03 3y ago> Part of the function of a Jobs type character is to be the defining asshole in the organization that no one has a chance of defeating alone. Except you don't have to be an asshole to be that person, just in charge.
- hn8305823 3y agoJust having the power isn't enough. Nobody respects pushovers. Think of "Asshole" in corporate leadership as "a show of force" that earns begrudging respect. But to your point you can earn respect without always being an asshole, or being one for no reason at all.
- kbenson 3y agoI think Jobs as an example here is confusing, because he's noted as being an asshole and also an asshole, so people will read it your way and people will read it the other way.
- neuromanser 3y agoI could use a clarification here.
- kbenson 3y ago>>> Think of "Asshole" in corporate leadership as "a show of force" that earns begrudging respect. Compare that to just being an asshole in a petty way that doesn't have a positive outcome, and just causes fear or stress in those you interact with.
- behnamoh 3y agoI wonder what it is about leaders like Steve Jobs that makes them popular despite how programmers working for them know the guy in charge has never written a line of code. Is it charisma (whatever that means)? Is it vision? Is it luck and being at the right place at the right time? Is it a few devoted loyal programmers who spread the word about how amazing the Führer is? I often think it also has to do with the person positioning himself/herself in crowds that appreciate/respect/value him/her. For instance, it's hard to imagine someone like Jobs at an Oracle-style corporation, or imagine Elon Musk running a bank. It seems like these types of people soon understand that certain groups match their "vibe" better, and it works as a positive feedback loop for them.