4 ms·

This is something I was actually shocked about coming from Government. People at the lower levels in a corporation just have no say, and might get lucky to hear

This is something I was actually shocked about coming from Government. People at the lower levels in a corporation just have no say, and might get lucky to hear about product direction and major decisions, often at far less detail than they actually need. The only way to really get in the know is to move up the chain, but those up the chain don't really seem to understand their own software products very well. Any discussion from an engineer is brushed off as being too "in the weeds" or "not high level enough," but it's not clear that those operating at a high level usually understand what's going on. I really don't know what it is, but the corporate folks are just obsessed with hierarchy. It feels like it's in their blood. Even at the lower levels, they want to move up the chain so that they can have "real input," and they believe that culture must be set "from the top." Why? This is certainly one way to run things but it's not inherently the only way to run things. Individual teams _can_ set culture, and an individual team _could_ have better input on a strategic decision than the "decision makers." It just seems to be a forgone conclusion in the corporate world, and I can't see any reason for it other than status-seeking.

_nalply 2y ago
> corporate folks are just obsessed with hierarchy You should read "The Dictator's Handbook." While it primarily applies to politicians in both democracies and authoritarian regimes, the thinking proposed in the book also applies to the corporate world. In other words, some people thrive on power, but these individuals are not always the best for the company due to a misalignment between their desires and the company's needs. Nevertheless, the system still works because... well, just read the book (or at least a summary of it)! I'm somewhat pessimistic about corporate culture: companies have an instinctual drive to hunt for profit. If they didn't, they would go extinct by going bankrupt. This leads to a self-selection process that explains a lot. Combine this with the tendency of some people to strive for power—as you mentioned, "they want to move up the chain"—and we end up with a somewhat toxic mixture in today's economy. Regarding the topic "Agile is killing software innovation," I would argue that it's not Agile itself that's stifling innovation, but rather the emergent structure and behavior of corporate entities. The combination of power-hungry individuals and profit-seeking companies stifles a lot of potential. It's highly inefficient and causes considerable misery, but it seems to function just well enough to keep the economy limping along. One of the saving graces of corporate entities is their ability to buy up startups, for example.
- kaycey2022 2y ago
  That's an amazing book. Easily one of the most entertaining reads of that year for me. I remember it saying a lot about "inner circles" and the absolutely critical need for leadership to maintain a hold over them. So much so that it isn't that important for leadership to be good at the "job description" as long as they can identify the other centers of power and keep them happy.
- Zacru 2y ago
  A fun 20-minute summary: https://youtu.be/rStL7niR7gs https://youtu.be/rStL7niR7gs

_nalply 2y ago

> corporate folks are just obsessed with hierarchy You should read "The Dictator's Handbook." While it primarily applies to politicians in both democracies and authoritarian regimes, the thinking proposed in the book also applies to the corporate world. In other words, some people thrive on power, but these individuals are not always the best for the company due to a misalignment between their desires and the company's needs. Nevertheless, the system still works because... well, just read the book (or at least a summary of it)! I'm somewhat pessimistic about corporate culture: companies have an instinctual drive to hunt for profit. If they didn't, they would go extinct by going bankrupt. This leads to a self-selection process that explains a lot. Combine this with the tendency of some people to strive for power—as you mentioned, "they want to move up the chain"—and we end up with a somewhat toxic mixture in today's economy. Regarding the topic "Agile is killing software innovation," I would argue that it's not Agile itself that's stifling innovation, but rather the emergent structure and behavior of corporate entities. The combination of power-hungry individuals and profit-seeking companies stifles a lot of potential. It's highly inefficient and causes considerable misery, but it seems to function just well enough to keep the economy limping along. One of the saving graces of corporate entities is their ability to buy up startups, for example.

kaycey2022 2y ago
That's an amazing book. Easily one of the most entertaining reads of that year for me. I remember it saying a lot about "inner circles" and the absolutely critical need for leadership to maintain a hold over them. So much so that it isn't that important for leadership to be good at the "job description" as long as they can identify the other centers of power and keep them happy.
Zacru 2y ago
A fun 20-minute summary: https://youtu.be/rStL7niR7gs https://youtu.be/rStL7niR7gs