3 ms·

He made a classic mistake that I think all of us make once: overperformance without proper (managerial or executive) support. Overperformance fucks up more car

He made a classic mistake that I think all of us make once: overperformance without proper (managerial or executive) support. Overperformance fucks up more careers than underperformance, because it makes enemies. (No one actually gives a shit about the pittance drawn away by an underperformer on salary, but overperformance puts peoples' reputations on the line and is generally volatile.) You don't want to fall into that trap. I'm not saying that people should do shoddy work, but if you're going to do more than that you're asked to do, make sure it's behalf on someone powerful enough to clear obstacles and get your back, and who will. He improved the product and, through no intention of his own, ended up ears deep in office politics. It's a perennial risk. It takes at least one of those, for most of us, before people realize that if you're going to overperform, it should be for something you own. That way, you avoid the risks (you can't get fired from your own side project) and keep the rewards, instead of the reverse.

jack9 12y ago
> because it makes enemies In 20+ years, I've never seen better performance (according to casual metrics) make enemies. But then again, there are some awfully backward people here.
lafar6502 12y ago
Totally agree. "Overzealousness worse than fascism" And I don't believe in such idealism, if he was doing it for the sake of performance he should show it to the developers first, and not perform a show for his boss and boss's boss and THE BOSS and who knows who else. So what was the real intention behind this?
- michaelochurch 12y ago
  I don't think he had an ulterior motive. I think he was young and had never had a negative career experience and therefore didn't realize what office politics were about and that, even if the execs seem like nice people, any information you furnish to them stands a nontrivial chance of being used in a horrible way. In a collegial, sympathetic R&D type environment, people are happy when others improve their work. However, in an office environment, it's not the same thing, because you can hurt peoples' careers without even trying and unintentionally make enemies.

jack9 12y ago

> because it makes enemies In 20+ years, I've never seen better performance (according to casual metrics) make enemies. But then again, there are some awfully backward people here.

lafar6502 12y ago

Totally agree. "Overzealousness worse than fascism" And I don't believe in such idealism, if he was doing it for the sake of performance he should show it to the developers first, and not perform a show for his boss and boss's boss and THE BOSS and who knows who else. So what was the real intention behind this?

michaelochurch 12y ago
I don't think he had an ulterior motive. I think he was young and had never had a negative career experience and therefore didn't realize what office politics were about and that, even if the execs seem like nice people, any information you furnish to them stands a nontrivial chance of being used in a horrible way. In a collegial, sympathetic R&D type environment, people are happy when others improve their work. However, in an office environment, it's not the same thing, because you can hurt peoples' careers without even trying and unintentionally make enemies.