[rossdavidh]

I have seen situations much like what you describe, and also others where I much enjoyed working. Not all software jobs are like that (although many are).

When you are not able to just leave, I find it helps emotionally to engage my analytical self on the problem. Keep a journal (at home, not at work) about what is going on, and try to understand it as well as you can.

Why is upper management paying you to "clean up a pile of trash"? Is it their business model? The fact that they just want to IPO or sell the company soon? A lack of understanding of software at the very top? Is there any of that which you could learn to recognize at the job interview stage, moving forward, to improve your odds of ending up at a similar place in the future?

Look at their recruitment efforts, their QA process, their way of organizing sprints (or whatever they use), etc. There is a lot to learn about how to make good software, and good software organizations, by analyzing a bad one.

Of course, if you can get a job elsewhere now, do that. But in the meantime, you may feel better about the time spent if you are learning more than just "this place is no good". The knowledge learned will serve you well later.

[zaneyard]

I have definitely been thinking about this a lot, however, it's difficult to know what to do when this is the only long term job I've ever had, and the first time I've really had a career.

I don't think the company is looking to sell; it feels like the top is just not concerned with reliability and most of our funding goes into new feature development, which in turn makes things less stable.

Identifying what's wrong is probably the most difficult part for me. It feels like a systematic failure that I can't affect.

[rossdavidh]

Right, it's not at all unusual that you can't affect it. In any large organization, if you're not one of the top few, you usually cannot, by which I really mean you may not, because the things that need to change you're not allowed to touch.

But, it's not time wasted, if you analyze how it works. What happens when good suggestions are made? What is it about the business that makes the leaders unconcerned with reliability? Sometimes it's that the wrong metrics are being looked at (e.g. new customers, not looking at attrition rate). Sometimes it's that the people who can sign the checks for a sale are not the ones who use it, so new features (in theory) make a bigger difference to the bottom line than real-world reliability. Sometimes it's that there are too many levels of management between the top and the developers. It's an interesting problem to look at as a feedback loop, from reality/users to management, and figure out where the signal is getting lost or drowned out.

But, in the meantime, start looking for new jobs. Also, when interviewing for new jobs, try to find a way to talk about this which gets the point across about why you are dissatisfied, that does not sound so negative that you come across as a negative person. A diplomatic way of phrasing this may be important in a job interview, not a thing to try to come up with on the spot.

[zaneyard]

Part of me wonders if I need to rewire how I think about this. Like I realize that there are things outside of my control but deep down I don't accept it, or something like that. Maybe it would help to get out and have conversations like these more often with peers. I'll look around on meetup to see if I can connect with people; I don't really have any friends in tech that I can talk to other than my co-workers.