3 ms·

You're kind of missing the early step where some executive had to sign off on this dumb idea. Otherwise it doesn't launch. It's only "impactful" to engineer p

by loeg 2y ago

You're kind of missing the early step where some executive had to sign off on this dumb idea. Otherwise it doesn't launch. It's only "impactful" to engineer performance review because some exec said so.

jedberg 2y ago
Execs go through the promo process too. And also, some execs will sign off on projects that they know are bad but will make for good promo material for them and their reports.
- loeg 2y ago
  Yeah this is true, just missing from the original comment.
mvdtnz 2y ago
No, execs do not sign off on every feature. Even at medium size (2000+ employees say) there is far more output being produced than could possibly be signed off by an exec team.
- loeg 2y ago
  I don't mean Zuck personally blessed it, but this went up at least three levels of management and all of them said "sure."
- thephyber 2y ago
  Maybe not for the initial ideation and test, but it was mentioned on an investor call, so execs adopted the idea if they didn’t originate it.
troupo 2y ago
The idea came from an exec. That's why no one questioned it, and it was executed.
thephyber 2y ago
It worked great for Ashley Madison until it didn’t. Execs don’t need to stay at Meta for a decade. They succeed, then exchange musical chairs. On average, it will work well for several iterations.
skizm 2y ago
The exec gets "credit" for the project, so same promo culture issue. They just need to show increased engagement numbers for like one quarter and they can add it to their end of year performance packet. The fact that the project gets cancelled is either 1) another "win" because they're "making hard choices" and they can obviously justify why it should be cancelled, or 2) someone else's problem. Also, another note, these sorts of big swing and misses are actually still identified as a positive, even when looked at retroactively. They're "big bets" that could pay off huge if they hit. Similar to VC culture, Meta is probably fine with 99 misses if 1 big bet hits. If they increase engagement even 1%, they're raking in billions and it is worth it.

by loeg 2y ago

jedberg 2y ago

Execs go through the promo process too. And also, some execs will sign off on projects that they know are bad but will make for good promo material for them and their reports.

loeg 2y ago
Yeah this is true, just missing from the original comment.

mvdtnz 2y ago

No, execs do not sign off on every feature. Even at medium size (2000+ employees say) there is far more output being produced than could possibly be signed off by an exec team.

loeg 2y ago
I don't mean Zuck personally blessed it, but this went up at least three levels of management and all of them said "sure."
thephyber 2y ago
Maybe not for the initial ideation and test, but it was mentioned on an investor call, so execs adopted the idea if they didn’t originate it.

troupo 2y ago

The idea came from an exec. That's why no one questioned it, and it was executed.

thephyber 2y ago

It worked great for Ashley Madison until it didn’t. Execs don’t need to stay at Meta for a decade. They succeed, then exchange musical chairs. On average, it will work well for several iterations.

skizm 2y ago

The exec gets "credit" for the project, so same promo culture issue. They just need to show increased engagement numbers for like one quarter and they can add it to their end of year performance packet. The fact that the project gets cancelled is either 1) another "win" because they're "making hard choices" and they can obviously justify why it should be cancelled, or 2) someone else's problem. Also, another note, these sorts of big swing and misses are actually still identified as a positive, even when looked at retroactively. They're "big bets" that could pay off huge if they hit. Similar to VC culture, Meta is probably fine with 99 misses if 1 big bet hits. If they increase engagement even 1%, they're raking in billions and it is worth it.