Hacker News Reader

Hacker News

Comment by thaumasiotes | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

thaumasiotes

What is the difference between your team lead's bad reasons not to push internally for a better system:

> The other team doesn't know how to do the release.

> He wants to be a "team player" so he can't deny the release.

> Project managers will never allocate time to improve the release process.

and your good reasons not to push internally for a better system?

> My manager doesn't know anything about the code, my project, or the release project.

> He may assume it's complaining for the sake of complaining.

> It has been used as ammunition in reviews against me.

View on HN

The last bullet of each scenario is fundamentally different, and the ammunition bit is the most important part.

The team lead seems to carry a lot but has a certain "job safety", so no incentive to share the release process.

In fact the team leader is a "hero" who extinguished a fire caused by other department.

I do push for changes, such as bringing ideas to the team lead and bringing these things up with my manager (hence being brought up in reviews).

There is a self-reinforcing aspect to learned helplessness in teams, as you've pointed out.

In my experience, this sort of thing is why good leadership has an outsized impact.

All you have to do is say no once in a while.

No, don't bring the company to a halt with a tantrum. Just insist on getting one thing fixed a month and nine months from now everyone will be a lot happier.

Can't teach everyone to have a backbone. Heck, nerds are infamous for being easy to manipulate.

Anecdotally, the most manipulative individual I've ever met was a nerd.

Who better to profit off of nerds? It's not like there is any kind of solidarity or union among techies.

> All you have to do is say no once in a while...

> Just insist...

Some companies work like this, but many don't. Such utterances could be charting a course to the door for you.

Plenty of openings out there. Not worth suffering to get a 2% raise rather than 1%. If they won't let you fix something once a month it's time to get moving.

Learned helplessness, indeed.

It isn't learned helplessness if you are actually helpless.

The whole point of the article is that the vast majority of engineering teams have some power. It's not a license to derail the company with technical OCD, but as in all things… "balance, grasshopper."

Yes, there is 1% who can't follow that advice for various reasons of desperation. Not enough to continue arguing this thread.

> All you have to do is say no once in a while.

Being able to say "no" is absolutely critical.

Of course, you do incur a risk and you may fail or hurt your career in that org up to the point of termination even if you're "right". Moreover your follow-up after saying "no" will be judged harshly and silently for every little snag, real or not.

But that's part of the deal, right? It's not easy, if it were easy you'd have dream-teams all over the place rather than an industry where occupational dysfunction is normal.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com