Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by bko 1587 days ago
You have it exactly opposite in almost every way.

Corporate attempts to be meritocratic. They have every incentive to be. Executives want to hire the more effective people to perform tasks so they can maximize profits. They can be greedy or stupid, but not both. They can hire their friends and family, sure, and sometimes they do. But they have an incentive to make decisions on merit otherwise they would go out of business and be out-competed.

What incentive does a school have to reward hard work? The teachers and administrators don't get a bonus if they're school does well. Many don't even get evaluated and firing teachers is very difficult in the US. I knew plenty of teachers that would just phone it in year after year. Everyone knew this, but really couldn't do anything about it. Many do care because its the right thing to do, but it's not built into the system.

> [re schools] If you are treated unjustly by the system, you can at least appeal to the concept of meritocracy, and you have a chance of winning.

Yeah, I don't know your experience but I was treated unjustly in school. The disciplinarian (yes this was a real thing in my high school) was a tyrant. He would selectively yell at certain kids, humiliate others and apply uneven justice. What could I have done about it? Some parents complained sure but you're pretty much stuck there unless you want to pack your bags and move to a different town. In corporate world you just find another job. It's a lot easier than convincing your parents to move

> Corporate is easier, in the sense that the work is almost never demanding, and the evaluation thereof is invariably political

Not all jobs are bullshit jobs. Some jobs actually deliver some kind of value with a feedback loop

4 comments

> Corporate attempts to be meritocratic. They have every incentive to be. Executives want to hire the more effective people to perform tasks so they can maximize profits.

Not where I work. They hire people who they think will make them look good, and it's not always by hiring the most productive. They'll deny promotions to their most effective workers out of fear they will leave. They block transfers.

Companies make a show of being meritocratic, but most of their rewards system fall apart under the smallest scrutiny. On average, those who self promote are more likely to get rewarded than those who do the better work. Some companies even formalize this by insisting the managers are not supposed to know who is better, and you have to convince them by writing your semi-annual review yourself.

Lots of managers who want "yes-men" who'll reward those who say "yes" and fail and punish those who correctly say "no".

I don't get this "promotion = leaving". I'm pretty sure there's a very sizable chunk of people leaving because they're stuck.
Not everyone is in SW where finding a job at another company is easy.

My company used to pay at the top of the market for certain fields. Leaving the company would mean a pay cut.

> But they have an incentive to make decisions on merit otherwise they would go out of business and be out-competed.

Yeah, you would think so. To some extent you are right. But I think corporations are still very inefficient and get away with promoting or hiring less than ideal candidates. Why do they not get out-competed? Because the competition is also flawed in similar ways.

Well, to provide a different case, compare the situation of the US corporate space to the US government. Both are flawed efficiency wise, but boy does the one with no incentives behave as expected.
“Many don't even get evaluated and firing teachers is very difficult in the US”

I am a high school English teacher in the US. I have two to four performance reviews every school year (each entailing a pre & post meeting along with an in-class performance evaluation). I have tenure, but the only barrier to firing me between now and next September (barring fireable offenses) is a PIP which is ultimately based on subjective administrative reviews. If my boss doesn’t want me back next year, I won’t be.

Stories about ‘rubber rooms’ in NYC are hardly demonstrative of teaching conditions nationwide.

I didn't know what rubber rooms were, here's the wiki link [0] [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rubber_Room
> The teachers and administrators don't get a bonus if they're school does well

They don't, but a lot of administrators like showing off scores and stats to their administrator friends from different schools. There definitely is an incentive, even if it's imperfect - optimized for objective stats not subjective learning.