[pdimitar]

How? Programmers don't have executive powers. You are very often told that this is not your job and you should be doing yours and leave the "experts" to theirs.

Well, they are not experts. They are not even at the level of informed amateurs. But they have the power.

What would you do?

Sure, there are good companies and you can switch until you find one but let's recognize that statistically speaking this absolutely does not scale -- likely maximum 20% of the programmer workforce can do that. Maybe even only 10%.

So again, what would you do?

[ludicity]

Hello! I am the author, and you've saved me writing this out. The whole point is that you actually can't do something (and that's okay! I don't complain anymore either!). Burnout comes from believing what people are saying in corporate contexts without looking at what they're actually doing.

I have come across so many government teams that say they want to start using version control... as if someone has been stopping them all these years! If they were serious, they'd just do it, so you're better off just looking at what they're doing than talking.

[patmcc]

>>>How? Programmers don't have executive powers.

The secret is - and this is wielded a million times a day in a million small ways - of course we do. Lots of people do in lots of jobs, whether intended or not.

You just do the thing. You don't ask about doing the thing, you don't put in a project planning proposal, you don't beg your manager to devote 20% of your time to the thing, you just go and do it because you probably can. And as long as you do it, and it goes well, and nobody really notices until it's working, then it turns out you did have executive powers the whole time.

Just do the thing. Ask forgiveness, not permission.

[lmm]

The best case, if you're lucky, no-one notices. More likely you're marked as a troublemaker and pushed out. You're literally better off slacking off for that 20%.

[princeb]

the best case is that you make the firm a lot of money, and you were successful justifying your contribution and your deserved commiseration.

the least bad case is that you realize why nobody wanted to go ahead with your proposal in the first place but you caused no harm other than wasting several months of your own effort.

the worst case obviously is that you caused a huge amount of problems for the firm and people are aware of where those problems came from.

[pdimitar]

Yeah, that's the only thing that ever worked. I still don't recommend it because people do notice, it's just that many don't care. But when they do, you're in trouble.

But yeah, I've done it.

[kukkeliskuu]

Yes, this is important. Most people seem to self-sabotage their power. But many managers at least profess to look for "self-guided" people.

I do this so regularly it is kind of a second nature to me. Sometimes is backfires, but if you really know what you are doing, mostly you will be fine. Might even get rewarded or promoted.

[ornornor]

When do you do it? In between the constant firefighting or in between poorly planned “we need this yesterday” tickets?

[kukkeliskuu]

Just start right away. But first you need to understand where you are and what will bring the most value for your effort. Start with the immediate issues.

For example, is there some process improvement such as getting more data, new monitoring tool or logging solution that would reduce time spent in firefighting? Something that would immediately help you solve the next issue more easily? Do it while working the issue.

Can you rewrite the tickets so they are no longer poorly planned, making them easier and quicker to implement? Do it while working on one ticket. Depending on the organization, you can probably rewrite the tickets even if it is not your job, but that may cause waves. If that is too risky, another alternative is to create sub-tasks for the high-level issue that are better planned. If you need another high-level ticket, just ask for it.

When work is not optimal due to time pressure, there are probably costs related with that. Saving time and resources requires longer-term perspective and making some investment. But often there are things that require only smallish investment, and that is what you can very likely do.

When you save time for your company, re-invest that time into some other improvements that bring bigger results but might require a little bit more effort.

The lesson is that you have more flexibility than you realize, because your manager probably does not understand what you are doing. If you get good results, you may be eventually granted more flexibility. But that will most likely take time if you are working in an environment that is constantly fighting fires.

[smokefoot]

In no particular order: 1. Use your powers of persuasion to drive better decisions 2. Recruit some good people 3. Suggest and execute some positive changes—“there’s this thing called source control and it’s great…” or, “seems like the reports we built aren’t that useful—how can we make this better”

There’s a trap here which is thinking it’s all crap so I may as well not try. It’s seductive but quite poinsonous to the organization and to the individual.

[pdimitar]

> 1. Use your powers of persuasion to drive better decisions

"Appreciate the feedback but we got this covered. Please resume your duties."

> 2. Recruit some good people

Did you miss the part where I said that my comment is from the point of view of a working programmer and not an executive?

> 3. Suggest and execute some positive changes

See my reply to your (1) above.

> “there’s this thing called source control and it’s great…”

"Don't be a condescending smart-ass please, you are not being a team player right now."

> “seems like the reports we built aren’t that useful—how can we make this better”

"They work well enough for us and we have no time budget for any modifications, and we are not convinced the said modifications are necessary at all".

---

Your move.

[jsocuwl]

In a big enough organization, it is a complex system with unpredictable outcome. Pouring your soul into it may lead to unexpected consequences as opposed to simpler environments where your contribution actually make a relative difference.

[pdimitar]

True, that's why if I get to work for a big organization again I'll not even entertain the idea of trying to make a difference in improving processes. I'll just gulp the salary and never stick my nose out of my direct responsibilities as written in the contract.

Making a difference can only happen in small tight-knit teams.

[lr4444lr]

I'd leave, and prioritize a functional organization in my next job requirements.

[pdimitar]

I did that. A number of times, because it turns out people lie through their teeth that their organization is functional (during interviews).

At one point people started asking why I have 3 contracts in a single year.

Checkmate.

What would you do?

[lr4444lr]

Either develop a better intuition for when people are lying and how ti read between the lines, or use friends, family, and associates you can trust who can do so.

[pdimitar]

Not once in my life did I ever use friends / family / associates to get a job but who knows, maybe I will do it once before I hit 45.

[lr4444lr]

To be clear, I mean that when you apply for jobs, try to convey these trusted people in your life as much as you can about the role - conversations you've had, things you saw on a site visit, public info about the company, and ask whether they see any red flags, esp. as relate to your incompatibilities. Not that you use them as actual connections to find a job.

[adastra22]

Make my own organization.

[pdimitar]

I have one, since 2008. Did not automatically make me financially independent so as not to care what my customers do, sadly.