[steveklabnik]

The issue is, you're speaking from the position of the organization itself. Yes, staff work is just as important as line work. The issue with perf isn't that it's staff work, it's that people who are ostensibly hired to do line work are forced to do staff work just to keep their jobs. And sure, you can argue "tough, that's just life," but it's not hard to see why people resent it. They want to be writing code, not putting together promo packets.

Anyway this is mostly just one example, it's just one that comes up often when I speak with my peers about how Oxide works vs other companies.

[throwanem]

I see why people resent it; I'm saying they're foolish to do so. Why should I not seek involvement in staff work that determines so much of my future? Why should I not make myself responsible for the conduct of the business within the scope of my role, rather than just the parts which I happen to like and enjoy?

And since you can't seriously mean me to believe performance is not evaluated at Oxide, I really can't see how I'm meant to take any of what you're saying at face value. Instead it seems something much akin to "don't worry your clever little head about the boring ol' money stuff, darlin'! Don't you trust me to take good care of you?"

[steveklabnik]

> I see why people resent it; I'm saying they're foolish to do so.

Okay, sure. I am also not a "I only want to put my head down and code" person either.

> And since you can't seriously mean me to believe performance is not evaluated at Oxide,

Not formally, no. Because there are no levels, no corresponding salary bands, there's no need to have a formal process, with all of the justification work that has to go in from the employee, and all of the reading and evaluating all of that stuff from management.

It is true that if you don't do your job, you'll be let go. However, that's a conversation that would happen between you and Bryan/Steve, not an annual or quarterly process with all of the paperwork and such that those formal processes demand.

Instead, we simply do our jobs, and get paid our salary.

It sounds like it isn't an environment for you, and that's okay.

[throwanem]

> Instead, we simply do our jobs, and get paid our salary.

And some of "us" have an ownership stake, and some of "us" do not. But "we" like to talk about how everyone's working on a level playing field, anyway.

You're quite right. It isn't an environment for me.

[steveklabnik]

Small nit, everyone has an ownership stake, it's that some are larger than others.

[throwanem]

The clarification is welcome, inasmuch at least as it's good to know there are no missing grants. It doesn't really surprise to hear some are larger than others, which is invariably the case, usually by one or two orders of magnitude. I assume you're satisfied with yours.

I wouldn't wish to be taken as saying no employee is ever more valuable to the business than another. That would also be absurd. What I don't understand is why all the circumlocution.