• TomMasz@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    46
    ·
    4 days ago

    You get the behavior your incentives encourage, whether you realize what those behaviors are or not.

    • MurrayL@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      84
      ·
      4 days ago

      The fact they had to do this to earn a promotion is an institutional problem. Don’t hate the player, hate the game.

          • uncouple9831@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            4 days ago

            Yes, everyone should be evil at all times because otherwise someone else might out-evil you.

            • maniclucky@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              4 days ago

              No. That putting the onus of change on individuals is a losing proposition. The incentives have to change or no number of good people will fix it. I hear the French have had very effective solutions in the past.

              • uncouple9831@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                4 days ago

                That’s just repeating the same thing: you think life being shitty is a reason to be evil, and someone not you has to make life less shitty before being evil is no longer acceptable. I disagree.

                • maniclucky@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  4 days ago

                  You seem to believe that I think it a justification for evil. I do not, people should not do such things and they are shitty people for doing them.

                  I’m saying that the idea of some good people doing the right thing fixing the problem is naive and doomed to failure and a real solution to the problem has to be bigger than the lazy “just no one be evil” proposition you seem into to champion.

      • Lembot_0006@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        22
        ·
        4 days ago

        hate the game.

        Game rules: You want a promotion? Make something cool, improve something while using approaches that will show that you deserve a higher position and, therefore, a bigger salary.

        Player: (Lies and creates shit that is even worse than the initial situation.)

        Lemmy: Don’t hate the player, hate the game.

        • crunchy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          4 days ago

          More like game rules: manager needs shiny buzzwords and big number go up. Having something that works fine for 5 years is considered stale and corporate culture is all about useless innovation.

        • hayvan@piefed.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          34
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          4 days ago

          You are contradicting yourself. If writing bullshit and making things worse gets you a better career position

          You want a promotion? Make something cool, improve something while using approaches that will show that you deserve a higher position and, therefore, a bigger salary

          Is not the rule of the game. Sell your story to your superiors is the rule of the game, that’s the real metric, the the thing that really matters.

          • uncouple9831@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            4 days ago

            Some people will do anything to justify scumbag behavior. How about instead of trying to define what a player and a game are we just say “this guy is clearly a scumbag, he should be sued”.

          • Lembot_0006@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            14
            ·
            4 days ago

            You are contradicting yourself.

            Do you want me to present you with a definition of “lie”? I believe you don’t understand the phrase “Lies and creates shit”.

            • Bronzebeard@lemmy.zip
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              9
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              4 days ago

              They built something worse and we’re still promoted for it despite it being demonstrably worse. Where’s the lie? They described something complex and techy sounding, did it, and got the promotion anyway regardless of the actual results, proving the results didn’t matter.

              • Lembot_0006@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                8
                ·
                4 days ago

                So you want the manager to be cleverer than the engineer in engineering, so the manager would be able to detect a deliberate lie from the engineer?

                • Bronzebeard@lemmy.zip
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  4 days ago

                  I’d expect a manager to be able to determine that testing data for the new process is showing it is worse than the previous system it replaced, and NOT promote that person, at the very least …

        • Honytawk@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          4 days ago

          But that isn’t the game rule, now is it?

          The rule is more: convince the c-suite that you deserve a promotion by any means necessary. Even if you have to make things up.

          This is the difference between RAW and RAI.

  • MalReynolds@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    4 days ago

    All of you who can’t understand the concept of feature complete (see syncthing drama for example) find something useful to do. I promise it’s out there.

  • JackbyDev@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    57
    ·
    4 days ago

    I fought for getting a 4/5 rating at an old job and gave lots of examples. Their argument was that I didn’t deserve it because those were just expected. I pointed out my work compared to others in my team and was told that it compares across the company, not the team. I kept causing a fuss about it because I was so angry about it and finally my manager said something about the bonuses has already been communicated and people would be angry to get less. I was confused because I didn’t want more money, I was just offended they said I was performing on average when I was going above and beyond every day. It was also really embarrassing to me. If they’d just said the rating doesn’t affect anything except your bonus I wouldn’t have even cared.

    The whole thing is all BS.

    • bitchkat@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      3 days ago

      At one job, my manager had a spreadsheet that he was tapping away at during my review. He had the audacity to tell me that he had to downgrade some things so that he wouldn’t have to go to a committee to defend at the individual or group level.

      I transferred to a different product.

    • 1984@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      3 days ago

      You will soon become just as jaded as the rest of us, and stop expecting your company to appreciate you. It wont feel good but you can change jobs often and get your salary up without any feelings of illusional loyalty.

    • Natanael@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      22
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      finally my manager said something about the bonuses has already been communicated and people would be angry to get less

      That’s because they have a fixed budget and the proportions are tied to evaluated performance tiers, increasing your rating would contractually require them to compensate you more from the same pool of money

      • 1984@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        3 days ago

        That fixed budget is what they always say. The budget for the company is their problem, not yours.

          • 1984@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            3 days ago

            Yeah exactly. So it keeps everyone in their place, powerless to change anything within the structure that exist. Exactly as intended.

      • Feyd@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        20
        ·
        3 days ago

        You’re falling for the “we’ve constructed this machine to tell you no so you can’t argue with us” ploy

        • Natanael@infosec.pub
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          3 days ago

          No, as I said to another, upper management has every opportunity to fix the budget. Your direct manager however can not

          • Feyd@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            I’ve found that laughing in their faces and putting in 2 weeks is fairly effective at breaking that wall. Amazing what money they can find when faced with the alternative. Otherwise, the correct move is to actually leave. All of you cowards that submit to the machine make it worse for everyone.

            • Natanael@infosec.pub
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 days ago

              And I have in fact left that kind of jobs myself. Not trivial in a job market like this one though.

              Need to make unions stronger again.

      • JackbyDev@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        4 days ago

        Yeah, no shit, thank you for repeating what I said. The point being I never cared about the money and didn’t even understand it was only about the money. I only wanted recognition.

      • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        Nah, that’s bogus. It’s a private company, they can do what they want. They could have absolutely given OP the 5/5 rating, and just had them sign something saying that they were content with the bonus appropriate to a 4/5 rating. No one would have had to receive a penny less.

        • JackbyDev@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          3 days ago

          It’s very annoying to have managers say their hands are tied when they very well could go to bat for you with their superiors. I was lucky to have one manager really push for me in the past like that. It’s rare.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 days ago

      I don’t work at Amazon, but we have a similar system. I’ve gone all-in on a couple of subordinates saying they deserved a 4/5 for this or that work. And because they were new-hires, I eventually got the grades punched through after a bunch of hemming and hawing.

      Also advocated for my own higher-than-average marks on a few occasions. And just arguing the case gave me the grade as often as not. If everyone in the department had been as stubborn and insistent, I don’t know that they’d have given the whole floor these grades. But the squeaky wheel…

    • cub Gucci@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      3 days ago

      Haha, the same. Was doing great, supported customer calls, onboarding new engineers, along with ongoing incoming tickets and got 3/5, wrote a few good and a dozen bad RFCs.

      Then the manager had the audacity to ask why I am changing the company with a 40% raise. I could’ve asked for promotion, he said.

  • anugeshtu@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    The one thing which COULD justify it, is technical debt. A programming language not supported anymore or in short-term/mid-term, bus factor, too much knowledge transfer, etc. But yeah, lots of times it’s “business as usual” just for “progress” and fancy buzzwords.

    • sping@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      18 hours ago

      Golang is technical debt in language form. A language that gained limited and now sagging popularity, for good reason. I hate to work in Java but hate golang more. It’s the lightsaber of programming languages. I’ve got shit to do, give me blasters and all the rest. And I’m not interested in wanking myself off about how I did it all with channels. [edited for typo/clarity]

  • fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    3 days ago

    Honestly probably got the project to more maintainable state. Probably didn’t need the rewrite to do it in a new lang to do it (the real killer hear it sounds like).

    Those monoliths suck on the operations side, and even worse when it’s a corpse holding up the foundation to other projects that actually need it to change. Need to scale? good luck that decades old pizza box we call a server isn’t supported anymore. Oh of course we can spend millions virtualizing dead hardware to keep it running the same.

    • tetris11@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      Yeah, longterm wise - Go is far easier than Java to maintain. This is still a win, albeit with a slight initial disadvantage

  • 4grams@awful.systems
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    4 days ago

    Yep, this is the culture I keep running head first into as I try to level up my career.

    • ilinamorato@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      4 days ago

      Same. Generally speaking our company is pretty healthy, but we’re still stuck in this really stupid leveling system where advancement is tied to greenfield development and I’ve been doing maintenance and compliance work for the last five years.

    • wheezy@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      3 days ago

      Was in this position at Microsoft for two years. I already hated them because I ended up working for them after they acquired my smaller company. Pennies on the dollar, massive layoffs beforehand, fired literally all the most important people (which is why I wasn’t fired, I really am just trying to collect a paycheck and do nothing more).

      Anyway, ended up basically being placed in a middleman position that I quickly realized didn’t need to exist. Basically, spent two years slowing down communication between my companies team and the existing Microsoft team. Literally, I just kept the two teams from directly communicating and going through me for everything. I think I wrote less than 1000 lines of code during that time.

      And no, I didn’t like my team either from the original company. They were all new hires prior to us being acquired and they fired everyone on my team that had worked on the project for nearly 5 years. So, didn’t feel bad about slowing them down either.

      Basically a shitty startup that milked it’s employees with hopes of Microsoft becoming our customer. Encouraging people to exercise their options only to sell the company for pennies on the dollar and fire them.

      Got through two years of slowing down an awful genocide supporting company before the layoffs finally got me.

      Was a good run.

  • DylanMc6 [any, any]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 days ago

    somebody please hack into amazon’s services so that they can tell amazon shoppers the truth about jeff bezos. seriously!

  • Krauerking@lemy.lol
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    3 days ago

    I am so tired of worse products in the name of upgraded products that are literally worse in every way but a bunch of buzzwords and in groups bragging at the top while not knowing anything at all about programs or even the product at all but just seem to be there because they drink with the CTO.

    Ugh. The twiddling thumb era of trying to look busy by dismantling the old machines for parts.

  • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    4 days ago

    This almost makes me appreciate my current job, where most stuff has been in place for years and any changes take forever.

    It’s kind of a bummer that it’s going to take like six months to add a linter, and they only started using git like last year.

    • vrek@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      4 days ago

      I worked in a heavily regulated industry. Everything required a manual test. Let’s say you have an employee ID that is 10 digits long which they use to log in. You had to have some else (couldn’t be the developer) to write a series of tests, get those tests approved by 5 people(with specific titles) then a third person to execute the test, then the second person had to write a report saying it all passed, then that report had to be approved by the same 5 people.

      That typically wasn’t the delay. The delay was to execute the tests we needed to stop production. That typically was a 6 week wait(unless urgent for “reasons”) and changes like “I will drop scrap by 83%” was typically told wait till July 4th or Christmas breaks. Why? Because production would be down for 3-4 days typically. Someone had to start the system, ok no entry produces error, executor and developer have to sign a physical paper, restart the whole system, now an entry of 1 digit produces an error, sign the form, repeat for all digit quantities up to 9, repeat for all digit quantities up to the choosen value(based on severity if an issue occurred), 2 people sign for each one, system restarted between each. If you had say an enter button and a cancel button each had to be checked for each quantities of digits. Oh but wait what if someone just types there name… Now repeat everything for alphabet values… What if someone does combination, more tests, more restarts, more signing.

      Reports easily surpassed 1000 pages, no one really had time to check all that so I saw so many missed signatures and missed tests. I asked the “senior validation expert” can I just automate a lot of these tests using unit tests and attach a computer generated report of all tests passing and the source code of the tests? " the response I got was" what’s a unit test? "they still don’t use any of them to my knowledge.

      • jjjalljs@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        4 days ago

        SCP to prod, or ssh in and copy paste. Devops only removed write access to prod machines this month, and people complained. (No, we don’t have docker)

        I think they used Amazon CodeCommit for a while, but I don’t know what that’s like.

          • tempest@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            4 days ago

            You would be surprised how far that type of thing can get you when the team is small and experienced.

            It tends to explode when you hit a certain number of people or you replace a senior with a junior who promptly explodes the thing.

            • mrgoosmoos@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              4 days ago

              we dealt with similar stuff at our company as the design team grew. amazing how far simple systems can get you with basic practices and common sense.

              now with triple the team size and a few less than extremely competent people, we have tons of file management issues, even though there are more processes in place to avoid them. I hate it.

        • Trainguyrom@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          4 days ago

          I’d ask if you’re at my work, but this is an amount of organizational improvement that they haven’t yet been able to begin

  • criss_cross@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    54
    ·
    4 days ago

    Yeah this was my experience when I worked there. Driving goals and doing good work isn’t enough. You need a fancy project to demonstrate “expanded scope” otherwise your promo would get rejected.

    Sometimes things worked the way you wanted and people got promoted doing their normal job. A lot of times though there were a lot of fancy projects built to get people promos that suckers got stuck with the bill on.

    This ain’t a case of one dude scamming the system as much as it is institutional rot from red tape.

    • drosophila@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 days ago

      Its pretty well known that “lines of code” is a horrible metric to judge programmers with. It seems “number of new projects” is pretty similar, though at a higher level of abstraction.

      Unfortunately that metric is applied to a lot more than just programmers; and I think getting rid of it would involve completely restructuring the type of activity our society is oriented around, and would run up against the life philosophy of the people in charge.

      Of course I’m not against progress, but I’m talking about executives that don’t plan beyond the next quarter, politicians that don’t plan beyond the next election cycle, the endless pursuit of growth, and the inability of market economies to cope with the fact that sometimes inaction is more advantagous than action. All of this encourages endlessly churning out ‘new’ things, without designing those things to last or putting in the effort to maintain them.

  • belated_frog_pants@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    4 days ago

    This is directly caused by squeezing promos down to making your skip level manager horny for the sound of your work instead of having any actual impact on what you are doing.

    Its all such stupid horse shit.

    “Why does X feature in Y app/game/device take so long??”

    This is why