4 ms·

That sounds an awful lot like the business model of IBM or Oracle... He was able to coordinate $100's of thousands of dollars worth of outsourced work that his

That sounds an awful lot like the business model of IBM or Oracle... He was able to coordinate $100's of thousands of dollars worth of outsourced work that his employers (more like 'customers' as the case may be) found to be top notch, essentially in what amounted to his spare time so they fired him. I'm sure they called it "stealing". I'd call that "management" and damn good management at that.

eridius 14y ago
It's also lying to his employer(s), and that alone is worth the firing. Not to mention the fact that, while the code the Chinese firm submitted was apparently good quality, there was presumably no security vetting at all done to make sure that it was safe to give them access to the internal network of a "US critical infrastructure company".
- noonespecial 14y ago
  I do understand the point that this was unethical. What I found interesting is that most outsourcing projects fail. This guy had a talent that let him not only outsource(1), but get results that beat everyone else in the building. The skill and deviousness of this individual would have put him on the fast-track for management if he'd been a little more careful. But you are nonetheless correct. Usually you have to rise to the level of VP of a division before this level of unethical behavior becomes acceptable business as usual. (1) Interesting what happens when engineers outsource vs. managers, no?
  - eridius 14y ago
    It's not just unethical, it was also risky and stupid. See my point about security concerns. I understand what you're saying about his ability to find an outsourcing firm that actually did good work, and maybe that is because he's skilled in that area, or maybe he was just lucky. But given his demonstrated inability to make good decisions, his unethical behavior, and his disregard for the security implications of his actions, I don't think he'd make for a good manager.
  - triplesec 14y ago
    You seem to have the perspective down rightly in how business works, compared to the moralists.
coryl 14y ago
To be fair, what you work on is almost always confidential and thus protected by signed agreements. If your technical specs and docs were passed along to an outside party, you probably wouldn't be happy either.
rayiner 14y ago
No, it's like selling non-inspected meat as FDA inspected meat. The customer is paying for one product (American developer with certain security profile), and getting another (access by Chinese programs into a sensitive system).
blindhippo 14y ago
It's "management" IF and ONLY IF his employers knew about it. Otherwise it's fraud. He gave permission to access company resources and property and who knows what else without the actual owners knowing about it. There is nothing laudable about his actions - frankly this is the type of thing I'd like to see "professionals" lose the ability work in the profession for.

eridius 14y ago

It's also lying to his employer(s), and that alone is worth the firing. Not to mention the fact that, while the code the Chinese firm submitted was apparently good quality, there was presumably no security vetting at all done to make sure that it was safe to give them access to the internal network of a "US critical infrastructure company".

noonespecial 14y ago
I do understand the point that this was unethical. What I found interesting is that most outsourcing projects fail. This guy had a talent that let him not only outsource(1), but get results that beat everyone else in the building. The skill and deviousness of this individual would have put him on the fast-track for management if he'd been a little more careful. But you are nonetheless correct. Usually you have to rise to the level of VP of a division before this level of unethical behavior becomes acceptable business as usual. (1) Interesting what happens when engineers outsource vs. managers, no?
- eridius 14y ago
  It's not just unethical, it was also risky and stupid. See my point about security concerns. I understand what you're saying about his ability to find an outsourcing firm that actually did good work, and maybe that is because he's skilled in that area, or maybe he was just lucky. But given his demonstrated inability to make good decisions, his unethical behavior, and his disregard for the security implications of his actions, I don't think he'd make for a good manager.
- triplesec 14y ago
  You seem to have the perspective down rightly in how business works, compared to the moralists.

coryl 14y ago

To be fair, what you work on is almost always confidential and thus protected by signed agreements. If your technical specs and docs were passed along to an outside party, you probably wouldn't be happy either.

rayiner 14y ago

No, it's like selling non-inspected meat as FDA inspected meat. The customer is paying for one product (American developer with certain security profile), and getting another (access by Chinese programs into a sensitive system).

blindhippo 14y ago

It's "management" IF and ONLY IF his employers knew about it. Otherwise it's fraud. He gave permission to access company resources and property and who knows what else without the actual owners knowing about it. There is nothing laudable about his actions - frankly this is the type of thing I'd like to see "professionals" lose the ability work in the profession for.