So bored and so easily distracted.
-
An agile team with no QA and no direction is basically 'wisdom of the crowd' style opensource development.
QF Fucking T. Back when I developed for the company I now QA for, we were well aware that despite not using the A-word, once our deadline was blown out of the water, the only way to complete our supposedly-waterfall projects a lot of the time was to borrow heavily from Agile. When the BA is useless and you have to go right to the business user to get any feedback, it's incredibly useful to be a QA-minded person >.>
-
There's a pool of cash for unexpected mid-year expenses that is basically 'first come first served' which basically requires convincing someone on the C-level that you need the money. Some VP layers are extremely hostile to the idea of using that, however
Is the unused part of that pot a large part of their bonus by any chance?
-
We all have that bit of nostalgia where we look on the past and think, "I used to write great code for X hours straight." No you didn't.
Or he did but it was shit code.
Nobody who writes code for X hours straight where X > 5 writes code that's any good at all. (There may be few exceptions for those people who really can pull it off, you pedantic dickweeds. But you're not one of them. You'd know if you were.)
-
Nobody who writes code for X hours straight where X > 5 writes code that's any good at all.
I think you're a little generous on the number there; I'd say it's more like X > 3.
-
I think you're a little generous on the number there; I'd say it's more like X > 3.
PEDANTIC DICKWEEDERY ASIDE, you idiot, the point still applies.
-
-
I find that it depends on what I'm working on. Then again, are we considering the amount of code as well? Is it only actually writing the commands we're counting or is constructing the algorithm counted in as well?
I can sometimes stay sharp for good 6ish hours if it's an interesting and challenging problem, but it might produce no more than 50 lines of code after all that time since most of the time is spent researching and testing approaches.
Boring boilerplate code? Yeah, churned out 500 lines of it in two hours and I'm done for the day.
-
I can sometimes stay sharp for good 6ish hours if it's an interesting and challenging problem, but it might produce no more than 50 lines of code after all that time since most of the time is spent researching and testing approaches.
That's more than just writing code, so it doesn't fall under Blakey's rule ;)
-
Nobody who writes code for X hours straight where X > 5 writes code that's any good at all.
Agreed. After 3 straight hours, it is almost like I start feeling drunk or highly fatigued. In this line of work, I feel like regular distractions actually improves productivity overall.
-
No. They have a separate pool specifically for that. Each department pays in x dollars per manager and above they have per year, and it gets wealth redistributed to all managers and above that aren't in a cost center that blew budget.
This creates a huge incentive not to hire managers if your cost center has any risk elements at all, hence why I reported directly to a director who reported directly to an SVP.
The unplanned expenses pot has never gone unused because no planning is ever done far enough in advance to actually get into the real budget. Most years its gone by August.
-
-
then he tells the fairy, "Welcome to the real world, belgium, where people have to walk."
-
wealth redistributed to all managers and above that aren't in a cost center that blew budget
Great, so if there's any cross project needs and it wasn't foreseen, so that the projects aren't assigned to the same manager. You now have projects that are unwilling to share software that solved a common problem, or unwilling to make concessions that will benefit the company as a whole.
"Any chance to push you out of budget, gets me more money".
This creates a huge incentive not to hire managers if your cost center has any risk elements at all
So that it gets less attention, and therefore runs an even greater risk.
Great job.Easy fix, make a portion of the bonus be based on the average success of all projects. And any benefit you provide to other projects affects the bonus for both projects.
Bonuses should promote cooperation.
-
If they tied bonuses to average success of projects all projects would be unmitigated successes because the goalposts would be "maintain the status quo".
Besides, that's what the annual bonus for nonmanagers is based on, and most of the company fails up a storm because we're in a dying industry and those of us not working on transformative initiatives are fighting a losing battle.
-
Damn I got it good.
Everyone in the company gets a bonus, regardless of position (scaled by their perfomance rating and paygrade), and the pot is based on the overall multinational corporation profitability - not business unit or even regional subsidiary.
So everyone has an incentive to improve overall corporate profits, regardless of what job they do or whether their actions directly benefit their particular business unit or another one.Seems I work for a company which figured out how to get (most of) us to game the system to the corporate advantage.
Individual managers could still screw it up of course, but one hopes the VPs will notice - that is what they're for and of course, they get hit harder by drops in profitability.
-
If they tied bonuses to average success of projects all projects
One portion of the bonus.
And it's not a complete idea.
I seriously don't have the time to work out a true alternative.
But defending your own pot does not make good profits. I've watched the damage this has caused.
I've watched people literally implement the same thing for 4 or 5 different projects because instead of realizing we can share the efforts and spread the margin, everyone is intensely guarding their own honey pot. Thus causing work duplicity, and overall costing the company margin on EVERY SINGLE project.
O(n) instead of O(1).
-
Our previous VP had his team make a cheap Chinese clone of my teams platform that would only work for one particular client, burning 21000 man hours in 6 months (note the entire original is multi tenant and only has about 21000 hours over a decade, and the average client implementation is about 100 hours).
The guy then power grabbed my team, tried to kill the original off, pitched his knockoff as the future, etc. And then the client fired us for breach of contract on every performance metric and deliverable. And sued for millions.
Suddenly, we the original was the future.
There's another team making a khyber pass copy of us now.....
-
They could have just hacked you, taken the source, and implemented a really bad Chinese version for sale only in China.
That's what the Chinese usually do.
-
China doesn't need our product because they are more socially progressive than the United States.
On this one front anyway.
-
We have that. It's called "profit-sharing" -- the better the company does in a given year compared to our targets, the more we all take home.
-
-
-
"I am not a destroyer of productivity. I am a liberator of it! The point is, ladies and gentleman, that laziness, for lack of a better word, is good. Laziness is right, laziness works. Laziness clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit. Laziness, in all of its forms; slacking off to have a life, for money, for love, knowledge has marked the upward surge of mankind. And laziness, you mark my words, will not only save Initrode, but that other malfunctioning corporation called IT. Thank you very much."
-- Gordon Gecko/20020826, in an email to Initrode shareholders. The email was sent half an hour late on account of new cat videos which had arrived on Gordon's RSS reader.
-
Any advice on keeping focused?
Try switching to a standing desk.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yCYZZPwJr_c
Filed under: what this workplace needs is less floor area
-
That would be some mixture of terrifying and awesomely fun, but I don't know in what mixture.
-
I'm getting vertigo just watching the video, and I don't normally suffer from vertigo...
-
terrifying and awesomely fun
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Fs0hkdJzk8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSruX8Z_Mz8
-
Fuuuuuucccckkkkkkk no.
-
Yeah, not even going to hit on those...
-
Climbing up a latter with safety gear available? Something like rock climbing with safety gear always active? That's one thing.
Balancing across a couple-inch-wide thing and then hanging off of it with one arm? Yeah. No.
-
Darwin Award
-
Why are you talking about free climbing? What does it has to do with standing desks? What the fuck!
-
We're bored and easily distracted.
-
you pedantic dickweeds
Welcome[1] to the club, bub.
[1] speaking metaphorically, that is. Oh wait, Drax doesn't know what means. Carry on with whatever rant you're involved in.
-
-
-
That one those two blokes climbed up with their toolbag was about that tall, wasn't it?
-
Next you'll be telling me that Andy Green's office isn't an office.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MgwWrALEe4E
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8XXvVfOLm7U
-
That one those two blokes climbed up with their toolbag was about that tall, wasn't it?
Yah, I double-checked...
-
Well there you go then. Available in a range of convenient heights to suit all personnel.
-
Well there you go then. Available in a range of inconvenient heights to suit all personnel.
FTFY
-
You're one of those freaks who insists they can't be comfortable on the standard 1768' model and wants a 1768' 6" one instead, aren't you. Bloody troublemakers.
