5 ms·

On the one hand, your friend could just be experiencing a streak of bad luck or a series of bad organizations. On the other hand, after many years of life exper

On the one hand, your friend could just be experiencing a streak of bad luck or a series of bad organizations. On the other hand, after many years of life experience, when I hear a (first or second hand) account that takes the form “of course I was the reasonable one in every case and these N organizations were clearly behaving like idiots”, I’ve learned to consider the possibility that the speaker is just unusually difficult. The larger the value of N, the more seriously I consider it. And I’ve learned this the hard way.

mturmon 3y ago
Yes. Besides “N”, another indicator you alluded to is the degree to which the aggrieved person is willing to take any responsibility for the outcome. Sometimes gifted people can negotiate problems with a nervous college dean or engineering manager, so that their solution gets adopted. These problems exist in the world, and successful engineers will hopefully learn to cope with them.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
ip26 3y ago
Not to mention the unrecognized genius trope. In more familiar terms, the “I could do that in a weekend” guy (https://blog.codinghorror.com/code-its-trivial/amp/ https://blog.codinghorror.com/code-its-trivial/amp/)
- armchairhacker 3y ago
  Ironically Stack Overflow is one of the best-functioning sites I know of. Community issues, sure, but the pages load really quickly and the UI highlights exactly what it should. But then there are some big sites which truly suck: massive load time and basic UI issues. Like outdated government/university sites, job application sites, Kroger’s online store (https://joshstrange.com/2024/02/11/krogers-digital-struggle/ https://joshstrange.com/2024/02/11/krogers-digital-struggle/ | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39345309 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39345309). And I know some of these organizations suffer from inadequate funding, legacy systems, and/or compliance rules which make their sites’ issues legitimate, and I’m certain no developer could recreate them in a weekend. But I’m also convinced many of them have issues because of carelessness and/or inefficiency, and a few may be actively trying to emulate bad UX (probably to deter people from using them).
markerz 3y ago
I think both sides are true. On the one hand, dysfunction exists in all organizations. On the other hand, it takes effort to maintain a high functioning organization and most people don’t want to put in the real hard work. Not only are most people resistant to change, but the gratitude/reward probably won’t be there. It’s far easier to complain and wallow in a stuck situation than to sit through the discomfort of pushing for change. Schools, non-profits, government programs, corporations, they all experience it. While I can’t say I support this way of life, I can definitely understand why it exists.
- ClumsyPilot 3y ago
  > gratitude/reward probably won’t be there. It’s far easier to complain and wallow in a stuck situation than to sit through the discomfort of pushing for change. That's the job of management, that's why they get rewarded for that, and I have a feeling we have a lot of bad management.
  - Xylakant 3y ago
    “managing” their workspace and surroundings is the jobs of every senior person in a workplace. Having a line manager that cares and is good at their job helps, but if technical folks believe they can just care about the technical part of a job, they’re setting themselves up for failure and frustration. Getting a solution adopted needs much more than technical excellence, it needs communication, an eye for human factors, an idea of costs and tradeoffs. Complaining about “bad management” is a symptom of a lack of awareness. There’s a lot of bad management, but there’s about as many technical people that just ignore all of those non-technical factors and then constantly complain that their solutions never make it anywhere.
    - generic92034 3y ago
      In my eyes there is a good deal of victim blaming in that view. Time and again engineers pushing for changes, ignoring borders of teams or (sub-)orgs and the management hierarchy are met with highly toxic reactions, usually by managers who are seeing some kind of dangerous insubordination.
Dylan16807 3y ago
N here is only 2. It's pretty plausible. "Streak" and "series" are overstating 2 by a lot.
- coldtea 3y ago
  You can go to N=1000 schools and see the same attitude. It's an "unspoken understanding" that a big chunk of the students shall graduate even if most know shit, else there will be trouble from parents, the state, management, and so on.
dclowd9901 3y ago
Literally every organization I've worked (probably 10 or 12 so far) for has had some glaring example of this principle.
alok-g 3y ago
I align. We note that N is only an indicator. To actually answer, one needs to seek and analyze a detail after detail of facts. >> And I’ve learned this the hard way. I would like to hear more to learn from your experience. For the said physicist, I understand the situation well already.
jiggawatts 3y ago
> the speaker is just unusually difficult. "Your actions are making it unusually difficult for us to continue rent seeking!" I bet the Mafia considers that young police officer that actually wants to stop crime "unusually difficult" as well. Generally when everyone is corrupt, non-corruption is seen as bad and evil.
atoav 3y ago
As someone who (by the words of a collegue) put a lot of skill points into diplomacy: there are many clever people who just suck at communicating their solution to the right people in the right way. And then when things don't work out they think it is about the facts (and granted: often it is) and not about the communications. Institutional politics means it matters what you propose in front of whom in which order and in which way. This is especially true if you are not surrounded by idealists but by oportunists.
- SamPatt 3y ago
  Agreed. The mistake I made when I was younger was thinking that good communication was about being able to clearly and concisely convey the information in your head into another head. I eventually learned that this was necessary but not sufficient, because "the right way" to communicate varies significantly based on social / political / cultural / emotional / institutional dynamics. As a young man I simply didn't understand enough of those dynamics to be able to model the when and the why of communication (meta-communication?), even if I was good at the idea transmission part. Life experience helps immensely here.
  - navane 3y ago
    Or you became "one of them", and now you too have an agenda.
    - catlifeonmars 3y ago
      No it’s not about that. I’ve seen this failure case over and over again. When you communicate, it’s not enough to explain a solution. You have to painstakingly help others internalize the problem. Once you’ve done that, and gained enough critical mass, you find that the solution almost communicates itself. It’s almost like magic when you see an organization shift its thinking like this
      - Xcelerate 3y ago
        > When you communicate, it’s not enough to explain a solution. You have to painstakingly help others internalize the problem. This is why I think startups or small groups of people are still able to outcompete bigger incumbents. So many people worry “if I share my great idea, someone will steal it and implement it!” Far more often I’ve found it to be the case that I catch myself wondering if it would be less work to start a competitor to my current company based on my idea rather than continue attempting to translate it, broadcast it, and massage it into some form that convinces a critical mass of coworkers of its value such that it eventually turns into action. At least by starting my own company, I’ll know pretty quickly whether it was actually a good idea or not.
underdeserver 3y ago
I completely agree with your sentiment, but I think whether or not you did vector arithmetic correctly at a first-year undergraduate course level is not subjective.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
jokethrowaway 3y ago
I matured a different, if not opposite viewpoint: every entity acts in it own self interest, so if the incentives are not aligned, things will tend go south. It may work for a long period of time because of sheer will power and commitment to a greater good from the people involved in the organisation, but over time, everything will follow market incentives. Public health care seems to be a primary example (and my family has been in the sector for more than 40 years); HC was good for a long period of time then it got progressively worse and nowadays it's just an item in your tax bill. If you literally don't want to die you better know someone on the inside which can push the right buttons or go private. The money spent on law enforcement had a reverse effect on crime rate, the police actually got less efficient the more money they manage to extract from public funds. They got really good at getting more money from ridiculous speed limits and automated systems though. Looking in the private tech sector my experience has been similar: the larger the organisation the more it resemble a government and the more inefficiency is tolerated. Within layers and layers of middle management it's easy to waste plenty of investors' money - albeit not indefinitely, like a government would.
coldtea 3y ago
>On the one hand, your friend could just be experiencing a streak of bad luck or a series of bad organizations. I've seen the same play out in several organizations, including the public sector. You don't even need to be cynical to know this is the case... >when I hear a (first or second hand) account that takes the form “of course I was the reasonable one in every case and these N organizations were clearly behaving like idiots”, I’ve learned to consider the possibility that the speaker is just unusually difficult. Probably based on different experiences, with different context. Because in the context described (e.g. the educational example) this is par for the course - and any number of teachers and professors can attest that if you do your work too well and apply rigid standards, you're out of there in no time, or at least make enemies very fast. >the speaker is just unusually difficult. Of course, if the baseline is complacency, profiteering, and lack of standards, anybody who stirs those waters is "unusually difficult.".
- simonh 3y ago
  The college example doesn’t seem likely though. Exams are set by central authorities and independently adjudicated. It’s not up to teachers whether students pass or not, and parents and education authorities look at exam results to judge colleges, not teacher assessments.
  - coldtea 3y ago
    Not sure if you have in mind entrance exams or something that's not set by professors (he mentions mid-terms). Or perhaps you have your local example in mind. This however is absolutely the case in my country, exam questions are set by the teachers, and are graded by them (well, often also by postgraduates given this task by the teacher so they can slack). As for the US, I did a quick search now, and found this: "Unlike final exams, which are scheduled by the university’s Registrar, midterm exams are typically scheduled during class time by the professor. Some classes may have two midterm exams, in which case they are spread further throughout the semester. Professors outline these exams in the course syllabus, so they will not come as a surprise. The weight of each midterm exam on the final grade is also usually provided in the course syllabus. Many instructors are open to telling students about the format of the midterm exam, as well as the topics or themes that the exam will cover." So looks like it's on the instructors, as the grandparent says there too.
itronitron 3y ago
In the case of the college professor and the dean, who is being the reasonable one?
whatshisface 3y ago
Two is not a large value of N for the phenomenon you're talking about. Also... is it really that hard to believe that a manager would defend their headcount and a community college would let standards slide in their hardest courses? You also have to consider the plausibility of the stories at hand before writing off the person who's complaining. I don't think your skepticism is at all warranted.

mturmon 3y ago

Yes. Besides “N”, another indicator you alluded to is the degree to which the aggrieved person is willing to take any responsibility for the outcome. Sometimes gifted people can negotiate problems with a nervous college dean or engineering manager, so that their solution gets adopted. These problems exist in the world, and successful engineers will hopefully learn to cope with them.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

ip26 3y ago

Not to mention the unrecognized genius trope. In more familiar terms, the “I could do that in a weekend” guy (https://blog.codinghorror.com/code-its-trivial/amp/ https://blog.codinghorror.com/code-its-trivial/amp/)

armchairhacker 3y ago
Ironically Stack Overflow is one of the best-functioning sites I know of. Community issues, sure, but the pages load really quickly and the UI highlights exactly what it should. But then there are some big sites which truly suck: massive load time and basic UI issues. Like outdated government/university sites, job application sites, Kroger’s online store (https://joshstrange.com/2024/02/11/krogers-digital-struggle/ https://joshstrange.com/2024/02/11/krogers-digital-struggle/ | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39345309 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39345309). And I know some of these organizations suffer from inadequate funding, legacy systems, and/or compliance rules which make their sites’ issues legitimate, and I’m certain no developer could recreate them in a weekend. But I’m also convinced many of them have issues because of carelessness and/or inefficiency, and a few may be actively trying to emulate bad UX (probably to deter people from using them).

markerz 3y ago

I think both sides are true. On the one hand, dysfunction exists in all organizations. On the other hand, it takes effort to maintain a high functioning organization and most people don’t want to put in the real hard work. Not only are most people resistant to change, but the gratitude/reward probably won’t be there. It’s far easier to complain and wallow in a stuck situation than to sit through the discomfort of pushing for change. Schools, non-profits, government programs, corporations, they all experience it. While I can’t say I support this way of life, I can definitely understand why it exists.

ClumsyPilot 3y ago
> gratitude/reward probably won’t be there. It’s far easier to complain and wallow in a stuck situation than to sit through the discomfort of pushing for change. That's the job of management, that's why they get rewarded for that, and I have a feeling we have a lot of bad management.
- Xylakant 3y ago
  “managing” their workspace and surroundings is the jobs of every senior person in a workplace. Having a line manager that cares and is good at their job helps, but if technical folks believe they can just care about the technical part of a job, they’re setting themselves up for failure and frustration. Getting a solution adopted needs much more than technical excellence, it needs communication, an eye for human factors, an idea of costs and tradeoffs. Complaining about “bad management” is a symptom of a lack of awareness. There’s a lot of bad management, but there’s about as many technical people that just ignore all of those non-technical factors and then constantly complain that their solutions never make it anywhere.
  - generic92034 3y ago
    In my eyes there is a good deal of victim blaming in that view. Time and again engineers pushing for changes, ignoring borders of teams or (sub-)orgs and the management hierarchy are met with highly toxic reactions, usually by managers who are seeing some kind of dangerous insubordination.

Dylan16807 3y ago

N here is only 2. It's pretty plausible. "Streak" and "series" are overstating 2 by a lot.

coldtea 3y ago
You can go to N=1000 schools and see the same attitude. It's an "unspoken understanding" that a big chunk of the students shall graduate even if most know shit, else there will be trouble from parents, the state, management, and so on.

dclowd9901 3y ago

Literally every organization I've worked (probably 10 or 12 so far) for has had some glaring example of this principle.

alok-g 3y ago

I align. We note that N is only an indicator. To actually answer, one needs to seek and analyze a detail after detail of facts. >> And I’ve learned this the hard way. I would like to hear more to learn from your experience. For the said physicist, I understand the situation well already.

jiggawatts 3y ago

> the speaker is just unusually difficult. "Your actions are making it unusually difficult for us to continue rent seeking!" I bet the Mafia considers that young police officer that actually wants to stop crime "unusually difficult" as well. Generally when everyone is corrupt, non-corruption is seen as bad and evil.

atoav 3y ago

As someone who (by the words of a collegue) put a lot of skill points into diplomacy: there are many clever people who just suck at communicating their solution to the right people in the right way. And then when things don't work out they think it is about the facts (and granted: often it is) and not about the communications. Institutional politics means it matters what you propose in front of whom in which order and in which way. This is especially true if you are not surrounded by idealists but by oportunists.

SamPatt 3y ago
Agreed. The mistake I made when I was younger was thinking that good communication was about being able to clearly and concisely convey the information in your head into another head. I eventually learned that this was necessary but not sufficient, because "the right way" to communicate varies significantly based on social / political / cultural / emotional / institutional dynamics. As a young man I simply didn't understand enough of those dynamics to be able to model the when and the why of communication (meta-communication?), even if I was good at the idea transmission part. Life experience helps immensely here.
- navane 3y ago
  Or you became "one of them", and now you too have an agenda.
  - catlifeonmars 3y ago
    No it’s not about that. I’ve seen this failure case over and over again. When you communicate, it’s not enough to explain a solution. You have to painstakingly help others internalize the problem. Once you’ve done that, and gained enough critical mass, you find that the solution almost communicates itself. It’s almost like magic when you see an organization shift its thinking like this
    - Xcelerate 3y ago
      > When you communicate, it’s not enough to explain a solution. You have to painstakingly help others internalize the problem. This is why I think startups or small groups of people are still able to outcompete bigger incumbents. So many people worry “if I share my great idea, someone will steal it and implement it!” Far more often I’ve found it to be the case that I catch myself wondering if it would be less work to start a competitor to my current company based on my idea rather than continue attempting to translate it, broadcast it, and massage it into some form that convinces a critical mass of coworkers of its value such that it eventually turns into action. At least by starting my own company, I’ll know pretty quickly whether it was actually a good idea or not.

underdeserver 3y ago

I completely agree with your sentiment, but I think whether or not you did vector arithmetic correctly at a first-year undergraduate course level is not subjective.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

jokethrowaway 3y ago

I matured a different, if not opposite viewpoint: every entity acts in it own self interest, so if the incentives are not aligned, things will tend go south. It may work for a long period of time because of sheer will power and commitment to a greater good from the people involved in the organisation, but over time, everything will follow market incentives. Public health care seems to be a primary example (and my family has been in the sector for more than 40 years); HC was good for a long period of time then it got progressively worse and nowadays it's just an item in your tax bill. If you literally don't want to die you better know someone on the inside which can push the right buttons or go private. The money spent on law enforcement had a reverse effect on crime rate, the police actually got less efficient the more money they manage to extract from public funds. They got really good at getting more money from ridiculous speed limits and automated systems though. Looking in the private tech sector my experience has been similar: the larger the organisation the more it resemble a government and the more inefficiency is tolerated. Within layers and layers of middle management it's easy to waste plenty of investors' money - albeit not indefinitely, like a government would.

coldtea 3y ago

>On the one hand, your friend could just be experiencing a streak of bad luck or a series of bad organizations. I've seen the same play out in several organizations, including the public sector. You don't even need to be cynical to know this is the case... >when I hear a (first or second hand) account that takes the form “of course I was the reasonable one in every case and these N organizations were clearly behaving like idiots”, I’ve learned to consider the possibility that the speaker is just unusually difficult. Probably based on different experiences, with different context. Because in the context described (e.g. the educational example) this is par for the course - and any number of teachers and professors can attest that if you do your work too well and apply rigid standards, you're out of there in no time, or at least make enemies very fast. >the speaker is just unusually difficult. Of course, if the baseline is complacency, profiteering, and lack of standards, anybody who stirs those waters is "unusually difficult.".

simonh 3y ago
The college example doesn’t seem likely though. Exams are set by central authorities and independently adjudicated. It’s not up to teachers whether students pass or not, and parents and education authorities look at exam results to judge colleges, not teacher assessments.
- coldtea 3y ago
  Not sure if you have in mind entrance exams or something that's not set by professors (he mentions mid-terms). Or perhaps you have your local example in mind. This however is absolutely the case in my country, exam questions are set by the teachers, and are graded by them (well, often also by postgraduates given this task by the teacher so they can slack). As for the US, I did a quick search now, and found this: "Unlike final exams, which are scheduled by the university’s Registrar, midterm exams are typically scheduled during class time by the professor. Some classes may have two midterm exams, in which case they are spread further throughout the semester. Professors outline these exams in the course syllabus, so they will not come as a surprise. The weight of each midterm exam on the final grade is also usually provided in the course syllabus. Many instructors are open to telling students about the format of the midterm exam, as well as the topics or themes that the exam will cover." So looks like it's on the instructors, as the grandparent says there too.

itronitron 3y ago

In the case of the college professor and the dean, who is being the reasonable one?

whatshisface 3y ago

Two is not a large value of N for the phenomenon you're talking about. Also... is it really that hard to believe that a manager would defend their headcount and a community college would let standards slide in their hardest courses? You also have to consider the plausibility of the stories at hand before writing off the person who's complaining. I don't think your skepticism is at all warranted.