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.)
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.
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.
You expect a manager to be more competent in engineering than an engineer? You expect the manager to always expect a lie from an engineer and recheck any data received from the engineer?
Well, we have very different ideas about how engineers and managers work.
Ok, now fire him.
The fact they had to do this to earn a promotion is an institutional problem. Don’t hate the player, 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.
You are contradicting yourself. If writing bullshit and making things worse gets you a better career position
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.
Do you want me to present you with a definition of “lie”? I believe you don’t understand the phrase “Lies and creates shit”.
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.
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?
Yes, but more competent, not cleverer. Some managers aren’t fit to be in IT.
You expect a manager to be more competent in engineering than an engineer? You expect the manager to always expect a lie from an engineer and recheck any data received from the engineer?
Well, we have very different ideas about how engineers and managers work.