3 ms·

Happened in America too. Boss took the "hacker" to the side and said "Look, I'd have to fire my entire staff if the higher ups learned of this and then I'd be o

Happened in America too. Boss took the "hacker" to the side and said "Look, I'd have to fire my entire staff if the higher ups learned of this and then I'd be out of a job too." Ah, nothing like firing the guy who could save your company tons of money just in self-interest.

3143 14y ago
What was stopping the guy from skipping his boss and talking to the higher-ups himself? He could probably prove his boss right by taking his boss' job.
- kamaal 14y ago
  In most organizations, Management layers aren't layers. They are actually clubs that protect each others interests. This goes on until the system gather enough dust to cause it to collapse. Its futile to complain to a manager about another manager in general. Those people know each other, and they will never side with you. All that politics will only back fire on you.
  - Confusion 14y ago
    Edit: I now realize you are talking about your experience in India, where of course things may be different. However, I would think that even there, 'managers' are a distinct subgroup from other human beings. Original: That's an unnecessarily negative view. Managers are people too and come in all the variations people come. Some of them care about whether the company does well, just like people whose title doesn't contain the word 'manager'. Their relation with other managers is exactly like the relation of your manager with you. That someones title includes the word 'manager' doesn't mean they suddenly like all other people whose title includes the word 'manager' and it doesn't mean he suddenly considers them equals. Being a 'manager' is not a binary thing. Team leaders are managers, even when their title doesn't say so.
    - noahc 14y ago
      I know of an organization where if you wanted to purchase say $50,000 worth of new computers, HR (yes, human resources) had the power to make that purchase very difficult. It wasn't because HR actually had any say in the matter, but instead the head of HR actually sat in on meetings with the CEO and the rest of VPs on a very regular basis. Now in this case and in this company, they would not have blocked innovation like this. However, had they had different attitudes automation could have easily been blocked. It's not so much about the manager title, as it is that the graph doesn't look like a bunch of layers that you can just skip one. There are multiple inputs that can can come from people above, below, and beside and that is what makes it a club of people, who generally will protect others in the club.
brown9-2 14y ago
Don't these anecdotes just reenforce patio11's point though about the difference in mindsets? These two anecdotes describes places/bosses that seem completely toxic. It's trite to say "in the end you don't want to work at a place like this, they did the well-meaning guy a favor" but it seems to be true - some environments/teams/people cannot be saved. This mindset is self-defeating in the end, and I don't see why it deserves to be reenforced.
astrodust 14y ago
Always know the business objectives of your client before proposing a technical solution to anything. Sometimes the business objectives are simple, obvious, like make the department more efficient or save the company money. Other times they're more sinister, like increase the head-count in order to earn your boss a higher salary, or to exert more influence over other departments by hijacking part of their process or rendering their people redundant while further solidifying your own base. For more radical change you'll have to be on good terms with people much higher up in the organization that can save your ass when someone lower down tries to sabotage your work or push you out of your position in often misguided self-defense. Perhaps the simple equilibrium position in many environments is to just quietly automate your tasks without rocking the boat in other ways.

3143 14y ago

What was stopping the guy from skipping his boss and talking to the higher-ups himself? He could probably prove his boss right by taking his boss' job.

kamaal 14y ago
In most organizations, Management layers aren't layers. They are actually clubs that protect each others interests. This goes on until the system gather enough dust to cause it to collapse. Its futile to complain to a manager about another manager in general. Those people know each other, and they will never side with you. All that politics will only back fire on you.
- Confusion 14y ago
  Edit: I now realize you are talking about your experience in India, where of course things may be different. However, I would think that even there, 'managers' are a distinct subgroup from other human beings. Original: That's an unnecessarily negative view. Managers are people too and come in all the variations people come. Some of them care about whether the company does well, just like people whose title doesn't contain the word 'manager'. Their relation with other managers is exactly like the relation of your manager with you. That someones title includes the word 'manager' doesn't mean they suddenly like all other people whose title includes the word 'manager' and it doesn't mean he suddenly considers them equals. Being a 'manager' is not a binary thing. Team leaders are managers, even when their title doesn't say so.
  - noahc 14y ago
    I know of an organization where if you wanted to purchase say $50,000 worth of new computers, HR (yes, human resources) had the power to make that purchase very difficult. It wasn't because HR actually had any say in the matter, but instead the head of HR actually sat in on meetings with the CEO and the rest of VPs on a very regular basis. Now in this case and in this company, they would not have blocked innovation like this. However, had they had different attitudes automation could have easily been blocked. It's not so much about the manager title, as it is that the graph doesn't look like a bunch of layers that you can just skip one. There are multiple inputs that can can come from people above, below, and beside and that is what makes it a club of people, who generally will protect others in the club.

brown9-2 14y ago

Don't these anecdotes just reenforce patio11's point though about the difference in mindsets? These two anecdotes describes places/bosses that seem completely toxic. It's trite to say "in the end you don't want to work at a place like this, they did the well-meaning guy a favor" but it seems to be true - some environments/teams/people cannot be saved. This mindset is self-defeating in the end, and I don't see why it deserves to be reenforced.

astrodust 14y ago

Always know the business objectives of your client before proposing a technical solution to anything. Sometimes the business objectives are simple, obvious, like make the department more efficient or save the company money. Other times they're more sinister, like increase the head-count in order to earn your boss a higher salary, or to exert more influence over other departments by hijacking part of their process or rendering their people redundant while further solidifying your own base. For more radical change you'll have to be on good terms with people much higher up in the organization that can save your ass when someone lower down tries to sabotage your work or push you out of your position in often misguided self-defense. Perhaps the simple equilibrium position in many environments is to just quietly automate your tasks without rocking the boat in other ways.