133
all 29 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] maynarkh@feddit.nl 62 points 1 year ago

Workers who choose the path of least resistance may not speak up about barriers to work that they face for fear of conflict or apprehension to change.

Or because it's not their job to do that. Tech perpetuates this "entrepreneurial mindset" bullshit, saying that for the wage paid for your work, you are also responsible for the company as a whole. Fuck no, especially since most devs can't do shit about it. If you own a company and decide that I spend most of my productive time in bullshit meetings, you still pay me, just not for stuff you can actually sell. If the meetings start grinding my gears, I might hop over to a place where stuff makes more sense.

Workers are not there to make up for the bullshit management pulls. If your company is inefficient and mismanaged, look for the problem in management.

[-] dinckelman@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago

The moment i’m told that i’m responsible for the success of the company as a whole, i’m asking to be promoted to CEO. I’m doing my job, as hired for. No more, no less

Not to mention, in many cases, the CEO is also the CEO of something else, and is on the board of a third and fourth entity (or something like that).

How about we apply the same standard to CEOs that the rest of us fucking peons have to abide by? Because I can sure as shit focus on two jobs better than my CEO can focus on 4+ jobs, and I’ve got ADHD.

[-] jadero@programming.dev 9 points 1 year ago

You've just described my 50 years in the workforce, jumping from job to job, only just barely anything resembling an actual career.

[-] Ephera@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago

Personally, I understood that sentence as mainly pointing out that you're hindered in your work.

If you don't have to perform activitism to get things changed, and you don't have to fear any kind of consequences for pointing them out, then having a good rant in a retroperspective is therapeutic, fun.

You even just considering this to be extracurricular work, already seems indicative of some problem with management to me...

[-] Tolstoshev@lemmy.world 46 points 1 year ago

We’d like you to be “agile” by following these very specific and rigid set of rules and procedures.

[-] jkrtn@lemmy.ml 17 points 1 year ago

Hello, we need you to spend more time discussing schedules in meetings with your whole team attending so that everyone can go faster.

[-] BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world 33 points 1 year ago

When my company introduced the concept of "Agile Metrics" I knew the shit went off the rails.

[-] Phoenix3875@lemmy.world 33 points 1 year ago

The original "agile" is a reaction to the overly rigid planning and emphasizes worker self-management. It makes sense since the people who are closest to the work (the workers) know best how to plan and implement the work.

It immediately breaks down when a specialized management tier emerges and tries to push their own agenda, i.e. to sell themselves rather than do something meaningful.

At this point, whichever form is used doesn't matter. The management, endowed with the power from above, will exploit the weakness of any agile-shmagile methodology to push their own agenda.

[-] lambda@programming.dev 3 points 1 year ago

Makes sense. My company was recently purchased and now we're getting ready to start "working more agile". I love the idea of it helping with the structure of our team. But, I can also read between the lines.

[-] JoeKrogan@lemmy.world 20 points 1 year ago

It's time to break free from Corporate.

[-] onlinepersona@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Worker-owned enterprises are doomed to end up going the way of corporate, just like Animal Farm. It's just human nature to seek power in any way, shape or form.

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[-] GoodEye8@lemm.ee 9 points 1 year ago

You're awarded the bad take of the day.

[-] onlinepersona@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago

Why? Are you telling me humans in big enough numbers are not driven by power and greed?

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[-] GoodEye8@lemm.ee 6 points 1 year ago

Because there are literally real world examples of this working, they're called cooperatives.

[-] onlinepersona@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago

And when they grew they didn't become more corporate-like? Are you sure?

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[-] GoodEye8@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

I'm going to leave it up for you to decide. Mondragon corporation has been around for over half a century and is one of the largest worker coops in the world.

[-] onlinepersona@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)
[-] GoodEye8@lemm.ee 4 points 1 year ago

I'm just going to pretend you said nothing at all, because that statement was incomprehensibly idiotic.

[-] onlinepersona@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago

Lol, I don't know what you think you read, bud. I said worker owned enterprises end up being corporate, you say it ain't so then provide an example that literally has "corporation" in its name. If you don't see the irony maybe get your biological L1-L3 caches checked. You might have an attention deficit disorder.

CC BY-NC-SA 4.0

[-] GoodEye8@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

Do you also believe Nazis are actually socialists because Nazism is short for national socialism. Or that North Korea is a democratic country because their official name is literally Democratic People's Republic of Korea. Do you really want to prove you're that stupid?

[-] SmartmanApps@programming.dev 1 points 1 year ago

Every strata building has a body corporate, and it's nothing to do with seeking power - it's about, you know, collectively running the building. In fact body corporate is a bit of a misnomer, since the word "corporate" comes from the word "corpus", which means "body". More precisely in this context it's a legal body, and may or may not be for-profit (a strata building's body corporate is definitely not-for-profit).

[-] SorteKanin@feddit.dk 19 points 1 year ago

My experience is that a team should self-organize and decide how to work by trying things out and see what works well for them.

Anyone trying to force a framework down on people is wrong because different people/teams prefer working in different ways. I've never experienced following a framework rigidly as beneficial.

[-] fubarx@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 year ago

"Burndown charts."

Best cover for teams trying to look busy and justify their headcount.

[-] RecallMadness@lemmy.nz 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

This is too close to home.

this post was submitted on 12 Feb 2024
133 points (100.0% liked)

Programming

19333 readers
77 users here now

Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!

Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.

Hope you enjoy the instance!

Rules

Rules

  • Follow the programming.dev instance rules
  • Keep content related to programming in some way
  • If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos

Wormhole

Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev



founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS