When to Leave That First Tech Job 689
An anonymous reader writes "Chris Wilson has an interesting piece about a scenario all CompSci/Engineering students dread, getting a job out of college and having it quickly turn sour. He writes: 'The first layoff is tough. After bending over backward, after being a loyal employee, this is the reward? To summarize how I felt: Disillusioned.' He discusses warning signs you should look for in your own work environment that point toward "Getting out". An interesting read, especially for aspiring engineers or engineers out on their first job."
Well... (Score:5, Insightful)
Hint: don't bend over backward.
The ultimate sign...... (Score:1, Insightful)
I bet the mail server had trouble handling the load of outgoing resumes within minutes.
Cubicles (Score:5, Insightful)
I worked at Google. We had cubicles. Good thing this guy came along to tell me it wasn't a successful company or I never would have known.
Good advice (Score:2, Insightful)
Cubes (Score:5, Insightful)
Huh. I work at one successful company with plenty o' cubes, my girlfriend at a very successful company where practically no one below VP has an office. So, there's probably something more going on here.
First off, a small company, or a startup, has a hell of lot better things to do with its money than build offices for its employees. If it's not demonstrably benefiting the customer, it's not worth the investment.
Second, yes, cubes do allow more noise in, and yes, it can sometimes be a problem. But the root cause is usually not the absence of a door and ceiling: it's the lack of self-discipline that causes some folks to holler back and forth over cube walls, and it's the lack of an ability to focus that causes some folks to be distracted by any conversation in earshot. As engineers, we shouldn't be paid big bucks just because we can crank out good software under ideal working conditions. We should be able to do quality work under less than ideal conditions, and we should have enough discipline to not create those conditions for others.
Now, if your company doesn't recognize that excessive noise is a distraction and a productivity killer, then that might be a good reason to leave. But at the end of the day, demanding complete quiet and isolation is a prima donna attitude. Learning to filter out minor distractions is achievable, and greatly increases the range of places you'll be able to be productive in. That will only help you in the long run.
He's not in a position to offer career advice. (Score:5, Insightful)
Welcome to reality... (Score:5, Insightful)
At all times you should have 20+ people you could call to have a resume on the right desk the next day. Network (the people kind). Then network more.
You are in a place where job turnover is worse then at McDonalds. Outsourcing, cutbacks, takeovers by another company, etc. Your job is about as safe as a house below sea level in New Orleans - you WILL lose it, just a matter of time.
So plan ahead.
Re:article text (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't want to imply that happiness on the job is overrated, but very few of us can claim to be happy all, or even nearly all, of the time with our work--even the self-employed. For most of us, a significant chunk of whatever our given job is involves Sadly Boring Shit. Drudge work, waiting for work, paperwork about waiting for drudge work.
Do look out for warning signs about when to quit your job, sure. But make sure those aren't just signs of a bad day (or week, or even month). And if at all possible, get the next job before you quit the crappy one.
If you don't do that, make sure you're prepared for unemployment. Try to follow all the standard cliche advice: have enough money to live on for six months. (This means figuring out what your minimum outflow--housing, food, gas, utilities, other debt payments--is per month. A whole lot of people I know have no idea what this is.) You can expect to spend a month looking for work for every $10K of salary in the range you're looking for (I know people who've spent a lot less, yes, but I also know people who've spent well past that time)
would you like some cheese with your WHINE? (Score:5, Insightful)
He's complaining about cubicles??? I recall one time a client (the president and the head of technology) came to visit us and they commented that it's too quiet in the office. They said that they wanted to hear and see people talking, discussing, and creating new ideas, etc. Sorry, kid, but you don't get a shiny office straight out of college, or even ever in life. He's got his expectations way, way, way too high. (I wonder if this carries over in his interpersonal relationships, or not, with the fairer sex.)
And yes, management is dumb in some areas, but really, really, really smart in the one area that counts - longevity. If a project fails, management doesn't get the can. They find the "problem" in I.T. and fire them. They can always shift the blame, pass the buck, and fudge the bottom line. The question to ask is how can you stay on managements' good side? Time to put your pride aside and learn how to suck up.
Personal growth is something you do on your own time not on company's time. They ain't paying ya to discover your inner calling.
Compensation & Overtime has been ruled null & void by the the greater supply of IT people. We are interchangeable. If you don't like and tell that to management they'll find a replacement for you, not pay you more. Every programmer thinks he's the hot shit. Don't let that get to your head. You're not.
I think this kid needs to growing up to do. It's funny because the older guys at the office just smile when I complain. It's the "been there, done that" experience that you learn as you grow older.
Re:article text (Score:5, Insightful)
You should think of yourself as somewhat of a free agent, not totally unlike a professional athlete. Money is the bottom line with any company and is independent of the behaviour of anyone in the company. Even employers "who put their money where their mouth is" are helpless if the money just isn't there for whatever reason.
So while your boss may be the nicest guy in the world able to inspire the troops through any adversity, if the money ever runs out then the troops will die, period. And blaming the employer is pointless, even if they deserve it. You have to think "I'm in this situation...how do I get out of it and if possible, how do I guard against it in the future". Let others waste time and energy whining. You can join in later...after you get your new job.
Some people may read this and think I have a totally self-centered attitude...and that'd be true to an extent. However it doesn't mean that you have to become a callous asshole. You can still be a nice, moral person. However, being nice doesn't mean you're a naive pushover. You have a duty to look out for yourself.
We're still in the growing pains of a new era in the American/Global economy where getting a job doesn't mean you can retire there if you so choose. Let this layoff be a wakeup call.
more warning signs (Score:2, Insightful)
If management is saying things that everyone in the room knows to be lies then you've got a major problem.
If new people are coming in and making things worse, you've got an incurable problem. "A players hire A players, B players hire C players". You cannot fix that kind of death spiral by working hard or even by working brilliantly.
How do you tell if you're job-jumping too quickly, overreacting to normal frustrations? Here's a hint. If you wake up two hours before your alarm goes off, throw up, and can't get back to sleep, then the time for toughing it out has been over for a long time.
Re:article text (Score:5, Insightful)
Offices are expensive. If you're THAT bothered by distractions, you can buy huge jars of very good foam earplugs for like $8 at your local drugstore. You don't need to hear everything going on around you. You don't need to see it either. Wear earplugs for a few weeks. Realize how little you're missing by not paying attention to everything around you. Soon, you'll likely develop virtual earplugs that will serve you just as well, and cost nothing.
Demanding that your employer provide the workforce with offices is saying "I require that you quadruple your rent to suit me." It is very, very unlikely that you are that much better than everyone else, nearly all of whom work just fine in cubes.
Your complaints about poor management, though, are spot-on. That is the telltale of a bad company. If you realize that the management is dumb, get the hell out.
THAT'S your sign, not cubicles.
Re:article text (Score:4, Insightful)
nuclear plants would really be good off with some really old boxes running single threaded os's on them ( and that are backed up by some failover boxes just to be sure ). this way you have no lockups , no blue screens, no nuclear mushrooms over your city.
Waste of time. Run a modern design incapable of meltdown and use simple monitors where possible. Old, reliable is good, but address the root problem first. Oh, and nuke plants don't explode.
Re:article text (Score:5, Insightful)
Great point. The cubicle backlash is a tad extreme and the idea of being always happy at your job is probably getting too much airplay. You CAN be happy working in a cubicle and you can be miserable working in a job with an office.
Also, chances are, you're not working at Adobe or Microsoft, so you may need to realistically redefine what the employer has to provide for you to be "happy"...or you need to get a job at Adobe or Microsoft. Just because you boss doesn't let you bring your dog into the office, it may turn out that you can live with that concession if you try.
You make several other excellent points in a post worthy of a +5 insightful.
Reality calling... (Score:2, Insightful)
The only time to leave that first job is when you have the second job lined up. There seems to be a large lack of reality inherent in the attached article
Don't work in cubicles, ever. Working in cubicles is the sure sign that you're not working for a successful company. Imagine the smartest person you know, working in your field. Now imagine how they would react if they were told they're going to work in a box with no door or roof, allowing them no privacy.
Many graduates will never get a job with this advice. Most of the companies I have seen with graduate programs are large companies which means cubicles. Of course it also means a very good name on your resume, graduate rotations so you can experience different workstreams and some form of mentor program if you care to take advantage of it.
It also means many of the evils that come with corporations such as bad bosses, bad methods and general cluelessness. These can be opportunities to learn, or the bane of your existance. They can be both if you choose to learn everything you can from them and then do not move on. Learn how to achieve things in the corporate world, how to persuade management without offending them. That way when you go work at a smaller firm you will be able to communicate with your customers on their terms and understand where their requirements are coming from. If you have never experienced ISO9000 or the like from the inside you can never really appreciate some customer requirements.
This guy is setting himself and a number of people who buy into his philosophy for a rude shock. If you do not have the perfect boss, move on. If your boss allocates a function to a co-worker that you think you are better prepared for, move on. If your boss does not accept your estimates on times, move on. Basically if you are not Lord of all the eye can see, move on.
Reality is, some bosses are pains in the butt. So are customers. Learn to work with and aroudn them, then when you have learned all you can and learned how to recognise this type, feel free to move on. If you are a programmer advising the boss on how to manage a server, and he has server gusy for that, then there is a balance you need to strike. The boss is paying the other guy to perform these tasks. If he isn't up to scratch the boss should move him out and get someone else in. He shouldn't be delegating to you the tasks from other departments that you want. I have seen this issue so often with new people in companies who want to focus on what interests them and not on the job they were employed to do. The other guy probably can't program, so the boss would be paying two resources for the same role, and his project would be behind.
If you want to be proactive, I support it, ubt start in house. Suggest improvements to your own processes, document the undocumented, set standards. Then you get your bosses attention and suggestions for other areas will get more attention. But if you are a grad and you come in creating issues for other workers, you are the one who will suffer.
And you are a graduate, and you are giving estimates on how long it will take you to complete a task. Do you always have only one task or are you expected to run multiple jobs at once? You need to learn to negotiate. You can have this module in 8 days, but one of these others will slip. Email is your negotiating friend, as long as you use it as a record of agreements as opposed to a blackmail tool.
Finally, you need to stay in your first job for about 2 years. This gives you a job history as well as a reputation ofr being able to commit. 3 weeks in a job before kicking it will look negative on any resume, and you won't get a reference worth squat. The first 5 years in IT were hard work taking the job that best equipped me to get another job. Now I get to choose what I want to do and where I work, and I can demand an office. But I earned that, I didn't just complain or walk out when it wasn't handed to me
Re:article text (Score:5, Insightful)
You know, for someone who really seems to hate 'stupid', you are making a pretty big assumption. Just because they were writing sortware for the nuclear power industry, doesn't mean that they were writing reactor control systems. I mean, the nuclear power industry needs infrastructure databases like any other businuess.
Re:article text (Score:3, Insightful)
Chernobyl !!!
Stuff it. You were talking about mushroom clouds, not overpressurized steam. Anyway, pebble-bed reactors don't behave like chernobyl.
Re:Cubicles (Score:3, Insightful)
I realise bits of the above sound like a whinge, but my current job is actually towards the respecting-and-working-well-with end. All I'm saying is that getting an office doesn't change the fact that you have to work with people, and if they're hard to work near then they'll be just as hard to work with.
Re:would you like some cheese with your WHINE? (Score:3, Insightful)
Possibly. But, as an "older" guy I think it's better to keep trying to improve your life rather than just let it beat you down until you accept whatever slop they want to put on your plate. I'm all for checking the ego at the door, but this time I'm with the "kid." If we didn't push for things that we wanted or felt would be better for us we might as well live in some feudal society somewhere.
Oh My... (Score:4, Insightful)
A) This was your fisrt job. If you truly feel you can judge everything about the working world from your first job, you're shallow, incompetent and pathetic.
B) If you think succesful companies don't have cubicles, you're in for a very rude awakening when you get jobs #2 and #3, etc.
C) You were working for a startup. You should have demanded a very lucrative stock package. Most startups (and I really need to stress most--ask the SBA) fail! That's a risk you take and the stock package is the payoff if the comapny succeeds.
D)
Hey Chris, if you're expetations are this high for your first job, I pity you. You've got a long way to go and a great many things to learn.
--James
What a doofus (Score:4, Insightful)
As far as I'm concerned, since he put NO effort into looking for a job, researching companies and talking to people about the company, he has little right to complain about the way things turned out.
There are plenty of students in their senior years who put some effort into their job hunts. Depending on your school, you may have a quality Career Services department that can be a lot of help. Or they may be idiots who don't know a thing about it.
If he got a job by doing nothing and waiting for a phone call, he should thank his guardian angel that he had the opportunity to work for a year.
Re:article text (Score:5, Insightful)
The article's author should consider himself fortunate to have landed a job without even looking for one. The next time around, when he actually puts some effort into finding a job at a good company instead of taking whatever falls into his lap, maybe he'll actually have a job he enjoys at a company that treats him right.
Re:Oh, for Pete's sake... (Score:5, Insightful)
Care to elaborate what "top company" you work for, so that I don't apply there, given what the colleagues and the employee selection process appear to be like? Are you one of their "smartest Comp Sci" grads? Does your job require computer science skills, but not manners?
Re:Oh, for Pete's sake... (Score:2, Insightful)
He's new, big supprise he's unrealistic (Score:5, Insightful)
Guy strikes me as one of those. Ok, so maybe he really did get in a bad situation but his gripes scream of lack of experience. Cubicles are not always bad, maybe even not often. Personally, I wouldn't want an office at my current job. If we were all in offices, it would just make shit much harder and necessitate twice weekly staff meetings. As is, with us all in one room, we just talk as needed. If you are busy, you put your headphones on and people leave you alone. If not, you listen. Maybe people are talking about something that relates to you.
Not saying that's the case at all companies but to pretend cubicles are universally bad is stupid.
Same thing with the management gripe. On the surface it's some valid stuff, but tech people often get too caught up in thinking management is stupid. Well guess what? Just because they don't agree with you, doesn't make them dumb. There are realities in business that most tech people don't deal with. If your boss is good, you won't have to. However that doesn't mean they aren't there and that they don't have to be dealt with. Just because they have a different view than you, or won't do what you want doesn't make them stupid.
I mean I'd really like to spend about a million dollars upgrading labs in our department. That would be enough for all the top of the line hardware, software, desks, presentation equipment, etc that I'd like to have. However my boss would not be stupid for telling me no if I asked. Would it improve the education of our students? No question, and that is our prime goal here, it would be our product if we were a business. However it's not at all cost effective, nor within the amount of money available to us. Each year our group requests several hundred thousands of dollars for upgrades, and we never get near that much. However, we don't cry about management not supporting us. They want to know what we'd like, and we tell them. They weigh that, and decide based off of our resources what we can afford to get.
It's valuable to know when to leave a company but "when you work in a cube" and "when you and your boss disagree" aren't valid times. Also, when you are new to the market, espically wiht no work experience, consider lower pay. I'm ot saying lowball yourself, but look at what's offered. Often people who hire newbies for insane saliries are doing so because their expecations are unrealistic, much like yours. Realise that you aren't worth a ton and find someone who understands that. If you find a good place, you'll be given realistic tasks to your skills, chances to learn and grow, and people who know what's going on to guide you.
Re:would you like some cheese with your WHINE? (Score:5, Insightful)
Who really needs to "grow up", I wonder-those who know what they are worth and are not afraid to shoot for it, or those who constantly are telling them to "grow up" and accept mediocrity?
If that's "growing up" for you...well then, I'm sure thankful that I (apparently) never have.
Re:would you like some cheese with your WHINE? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:article text (Score:2, Insightful)
"If you're not happy with the amount of money that you're making, do a reality check. Find out what you're worth."
To me it feels like he's saying, "You're worth more than you think you are, you could do better!". Well if everyone thinks they're worth a million bucks, how come we're not all millionares?
Cubicles? Try open plan - that really sucks! (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:article text (Score:5, Insightful)
Cubicles are indeed the massive suck. But
TFA missed an important point on my list though.
Death By Meeting
If you find yourself in a repetitive slew of non-technical (read: sales and marketing) meetings filled with the scum of the earth (ok, maybe only if you work at a law firm), and you aren't either (a) some sort of S&M liason or (b) upper-management, something is very very nordically decomposed.
Re:article text (Score:3, Insightful)
The one time I worked in a cubicle, it was not only hard to concentrate over the noise, but you lacked privacy and it seemed Big Brother was watching you, plus it also seemed like you were valued less, this was a step down from my offices of past.
It did help you not work and chat to your neighbour instead though.... Nice one management.
"2 Just How Dumb is Management, Anyway?"
Never underestimate the power of the Dark Side.
I've worked for managers who are knowledgeable ex-programmer types (useless managers and too out-of-date to be useful regarding programming other than basic logic) and managers who think they are knowledgeable as they've got some BSc from Bangalore Tech, and managers who are just managers and manage you instead of try to be your coding buddy.
"Does he base his assumptions of how you should be doing things based off the way that he did things?"
I remember a boss bitching at me as the PHP/Perl templating system we were using to knock out HTML was taking us too long to make changes to site design. He came up with some bullshit about "back in the day we did web design with Visual Basic and it was all drag'n'drop". He didn't understand that we were creating the pages dynamically - they were actually changing every time you refreshed the page, they were realtime reports FFS!
"B. Relies on, but disregards your technical advice"
Yup been there too, I actually had a boss who would say to your face that he didn't believe you, I expect as he thought we were saying something couldn't/shouldn't be done as we didn't want to do the work!
Me: Erm boss, I really don't think we should force a logoff of all our users mid-session, especially without telling them in advance.
Shitface: Ah you're just being lazy!
"C. Schedule Bullies:"
Ah n00b! You never tell them how long it will actually take (who knows anyway?) Read some BOFH. You tell them it will take 2 weeks every time. Then it will take you one week and you either tell them you're done early and get praise, or slack off for a week and hand it in on time in 2 weeks. Either way you don't get people breathing down your neck - daily progress meetings actually get in the way of progress!
"3. Personal Growth:"
This really is your first job isn't it?!
You never get the opportunity for growth at work. You'll only ever get training if it's free or has something directly to do with a task at hand and not the possibility of training you for your next job outside the company. Your boss is always mindful of people who could fill his shoes.
Personal growth is achieved by taking in a "Learn X in 21 Days" book and reading it in the slow times. Or surfing www.X-programming.com then getting a job at a new company.
"4. Compensation and Overtime."
Two words you don't usually see in the same sentence in programming circles. Developers don't get PAID overtime, unless you're a contractor and you're charging the fuckers by the hour.
Never EVER give them free overtime out of dedication, they'll just come to expect it after that, you always get some suck-up who will ruin it for everybody though (and they don't get thought any better of be either side).
Also, as soon as you go to the boss asking about more money, they know you'll be looking for a new job if they refuse, so if they do refuse (or give you the alternative of some bullshit quarterly MBO bonus scheme) you know you're finished there.
"Work is not all bad."
No you're right, payday and Friday are good.
Re:article text (Score:4, Insightful)
As for "companies with cubicles are doomed", how does that explain Intel? IIRC they were kicking ass and taking names under Andy Grove's watch, and HE worked in a cubicle along with everyone else at his insistence.
Re:article text (Score:5, Insightful)
On the contrary. I have a house, a wife and two kids to feed and take care of, and I applaud you for being determined giving them top priority. That means standing firm when management keeps asking for more.
I've heard colleagues regret putting their work at #1, only to be surprised when their spose says she was leaving tomorrow.
Re:Loyalty to a company? (Score:4, Insightful)
I learned long ago that corporate loyalty is an outdated concept because companies are no longer loyal to their employees.
The expression about "commanding respect" does not mean that someone demands respect without earning it, but rather someone that has earned and controls respect.
Example: Linus commands the respect of the open source software community.
Very very wrong, IMHO (Score:5, Insightful)
Money is a means, not an end. You can't eat money, you can't get much entertainment out of just looking at a bunch of 100$ bills, etc. The question is what you can do with them to improve your life quality, not the number alone, like some screwed-up game score.
And before you lash back with "well, duh, with more money you can buy more stuff and be happier", no, that's still not getting it.
Yeah, you can buy a bigger plasma TV or some high-end stereo or whatever, but if you end up in a job where an asshole demands your presence there 14 hours a day, and occasionally that you bring a sleeping bag and don't leave until he sees some program ready (yes, I've actually seen such an asshole)... you won't actually have the _time_ to actually _use_ those. You'll just have time to eat and flop into bed.
Additionally, let's talk about happiness on the whole. Even if money could buy some happiness, it's not a linear scale. Twice the money doesn't make you twice as happy. So you gain, what? Maybe 5% extra happiness in those 4-5 hours at home. If the price to pay is anywhere between 8 and 14 hours of pure hell at work, I'd say on the average you're actually worse off.
Guarding against the future? Hah. I'll tell you what's more likely to happen, because I personally know people who chose to work for an asshole for a lot more pay. You know how much they've saved for the future? Well, one was telling me at the end of last week that he's some $2000 in debt... right after salary day. (And that's not counting the debts for his car, the house, etc.)
Welcome to the deathtrap of consumerism. See, most people who try too hard to believe that success is measured in money alone, and that more money can literally buy happiness... end up literally trying to buy it. Or failing that, trying to convince themselves that theirs is the right way. ("Hey, look how much stuff I can buy with that money! Of course it's worth it! Why, that's what success is all about!")
The guy I was mentioning above, we're good friends, so I hear about it each time he gets a raise or a promotion. Also when he buys new stuff. Guess what? Each raise was followed by an even bigger increase in how much he spends. Each time he'll just get a bigger car, a bigger computer, then military-grade IR goggles for when he goes fishing, then now a bigger house in a whole other (more fashionable) town. (Just in case those 12 hours a day at the office weren't enough, now he'll also spend an extra 2 hours commuting.)
Those in turn just dig the trap deeper. Now with all those monthly payments and being in debt he _has_ to keep at it.
So what did he _really_ get out of it? Well, from where I stand, it looks like he's got $2000 debt, plus the loans for the car and house, and some 12 hours a day of high stress. Now with the extra commuting, he only gets to see his infant son briefly before going to sleep, and on weekends. Yeah, way to go.
My advice? Forget it. I've saved a lot more on a lesser wage. Not falling into the "money is everything, and consumerism is the way to show it off" trap tends to have that effect.
You just described bad management (Score:5, Insightful)
No, not everyone. Only PHBs act like that. If the company you work for has to do all that charade, and you _still_ end up with massive overtime, you've just told me you have a complete idiot for a boss. And let me get back to one particular management idiocy there:
"If they didn't reduce the schedule from 8 to 6 days then they wouldn't be "productive"."
No. Measuring productivity like that has got to count as not just clueless, downright surrelistic lack of clue. And let me give you just one reason why.
In this job everything can be done in 1001 ways, and about 900 of them are bad shortcuts. They involve write-only code, lack of testing, and generally just hoping that the quickest and dirtiest and most unmaintainable hack will just work on the first try. If you cut someone's time by 25% you've just told them to take such a bad shortcut.
The result isn't just bad unmaintainable code (which _will_ bite you in the ass when you want to make a v2.0), and not only just buggy, but it might blow the deadline even worse. Debugging bad code takes a lot longer, and debugging (in one form or another) is what you do some 90% of the time. A shortcut that's nearly impossible to debug, and nearly impossible to change into something else (e.g., when debugging says that your very choice of algorithm was wrong) will likely take longer to be ready.
Or it may never be ready. Someone I know is still stuck in a project that should have been finished in the last quarter of _2002_. But yeah, they were always under pressure, so they skipped testing almost completely until the end of 2004, they always fixed bugs via the quickest hack that can sorta work, never had time to figure out a _consistent_ way to implement that spec, or to get a good spec out of the client for that matter, and so on.
Having to add fluff to justify the deadline wrangling game, again, adds complexity and adds places where bad shortcuts will bite you in the ass.
So that kind of approach "productivity" just means making a bad product.
A product's architecture and the allocated time should involve understanding the pros and cons of each approach. That's what design is all about: making an informed choice, and knowing the price you pay for that choice. (And there will _always_ be a price to pay. In some cases it will just be much smaller than the gains.) Replacing it with a sad game in which management pats just themselves on the back for imposing an arbitrary 25% to 75% without even asking what's the effect, is pretty much _the_ nemesis of any kind of good design.
Re:would you like some cheese with your WHINE? (Score:3, Insightful)
1. Cubicles are not that bad. They are better then not having them. First you have some reasonable privacy where you don't feel like you are being watched all the time. And most cubicles and support shelves etc so you have an extra dimension to put stuff. Real Offices are OK but first they are expensive for the company to build, and they don't allow for expansion, especially for tech workers when you may need an extra network cable that is on a different subnet or just more power having a real office slows things down greatly making adding you extra needs a more laborious process.
2. Managers are not really that stupid. While you may disagree with some of their decisions most of the managers I have met are actually fairly intelligent individuals. Especially if you realize that you are not the center of their management universe, they have other concerns then debating if you should make a SQL stored Procedure or just hard code it in the application. Even though his technology may not be up to date much of the reasoning is the same. By saying well I could do this in Access fairly quickly why not in
Yea Yea being a programmer requires brain power but in truth it is not that mind taxing. It is just understanding the spec (the hard part) and put it into code (The easy part). Because other people choose not to know that the line iif(True,print "Hello World", print "Good Bye") is just a waist of typing doesn't mean they are stupid they will probably know a lot of things that you don't which concepts may be equally as simple or simpler.
It is not the 90s or the 80s or before it is the 21st century. Most people are computer literate, they are able to make a computer do multiple functions. They don't want programmers to bring them to the future, they just want them to automate their business processes, and give it a shiny new look.
Re:Here are my tips (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:would you like some cheese with your WHINE? (Score:3, Insightful)
If they allow you to make your own decisions on details, fine. Unfortunately, managers who make uninformed decisions about minor details DO exist. Micromanagement is annoying at the best of times. If the micro-manager is badly informed on top of that, he becomes a serious problem for both the company and the employees in his team.
I call such managers stupid, and IMHO they should be fired at the next opportunity.
Re:article text (Score:5, Insightful)
Depression limits focus and creativity, which will make any job more difficult, which leads to more depression; when little shit starts to bothers you, maybe its time to look at the comp package and use one or two of those sick days for mental health.
Everybody is going to go through a sitsuational depressions/burn-outs, and the first time is going to be a real whammy, after you've learned how you react to it and develope some compensitory behaviours it easy to nip it in the bud before its too self-reinforcing for self-help.
Re:article text (Score:5, Insightful)
Agreed. I've worked for some truly craptastic companies where everyone had their own office. I've also worked for several Fortune 500 companies where everyone except directors on up had cubicles. It has nothing to do with the success of the company whatsoever.
Re:article text (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:article text (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:article text (Score:2, Insightful)
Some time ago at work, we had a bit of a fire that needed to be put out with one of our products. Everyone assumed that the guy with the most knowledge of that part of the product (let's call him "Joe") would be the one to take care of it. The boss ignored this, and assigned the work to me. Joe and I were both very stunned at this, because I had never even looked at the code in question. None of this made sense. The boss explained that since we had project funding for the other things that Joe was working on right now, and I was between projects, he wanted Joe to continue working on the funded project. It was a non-technical, management decision.
But it still didn't make sense to me. It would take me two or three days to get the code working the way it needed to, while Joe could do it in one. The wisdom of my boss was made clear later in the month, when some other changes needed to be made to the product in question, and he had two developers who were both able to handle it, no problem.
Technical advice is all well and good, but management is supposed to keep their eyes on the bigger picture, and part of their job is to be a filter for the business decisions the engineers should not have to worry about. If you tell them the code will take eight days, and they tell you that it has to be done in six, they very well may have a reason for doing so. If a customer or contract states that something is required in six days, the most beautiful, elegant piece of software ever written will go to waste if it takes eight. Sure, constantly compromising on code quality will get you in trouble, and give your company a reputation for bad code. But sometimes even the best plans run into hard deadlines or unforseen time-crunches.
In short, if your boss tells you to do something that doesn't make sense to you, or isn't as technologically sound as the path you suggest, the solution is not to jump ship. Most people I've worked for have been happy to explain their reasoning if I've asked. Truly exceptional managers will walk the line between keeping crap and politics off the plates of their developers, and giving the engineers the general reasons of why they need to do things this way. Truly exceptional engineers will acknowledge that there is more to the company than the tech, and meet them halfway on this.
Cubicle solution (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Very very wrong, IMHO (Score:3, Insightful)
Right. Now some practical advice... (Score:5, Insightful)
The social contract is broken irretrievably, and we all need to adapt to the new reality. The new reality is, don't get too comfortable, keep the resume up to date, and move on the minute things are the slightest bit fishy. Some signs to look for:
o No more free pens in the stockroom, now the admin hands them out one by one and makes you sign for them.
o An all-company memorandum from the CEO shows up suddenly, responding to hallway rumors or soft-pedaling bad news.
o The perennial blame game between Sales, Marketing, and Engineering stops simmering and comes to a full boil in the hallway.
o A top executive (any top executive) leaves mysteriously.
o Sales guys start leaving (more than one is big trouble)
o "The Board" starts poking around and introducing themselves to people.
o A routine purchase request for equipment is turned down, regardless of justifications presented.
o There is an odd new emphasis on collections activity.
o "Investors" start showing up for tours of the engineering department.
o The annual customer conference is canceled or postponed.
o A delivery date is moved forward inexplicably, without consulting the engineers on the project.
o It is impossible to get a reasonable explanation from your boss for a clearly unreasonable situation or request.
o You are asked to stop work and "document" your project at a time that seems inappropriate and wrong.
o You are asked to sign any document "acknowledging" your equity position (if any), when it should be abundantly clear what your equity position is.
One small way to protect yourself (and to acquire information about the company's activities that they would not normally share with you) is to take advantage of any stock purchase plan (real stock, not options) put forward, and buy a few shares (preferably as few as possible). This will at least make you privy to the legal documents around acquisition scenarios and so on.
But the best way to protect yourself is to get the resume engine revved up the minute you see the warning signs above. No need to delay. Get the hell out.
Re:article text (Score:4, Insightful)
".NET Ninjas"
"our kung fu grip on
"We all hoped to have company cars..."
"Only one thing kept me going -- pure ego."
"Don't work in cubicles, ever."
"knowledge workers, so they can get into the zone"
"Put it as close to your ear as humanly possible"
"disregards your technical advice...If they were smart, they'd actually take it"
"I studied up on the re-install procedures...That task was going to another employee"
"Schedule Bullies...I'm writing this, I'm the only one who can tell how long this is going to take"
"have you developing in-house tools, when you'd rather be developing next-generation user interfaces"
"What about management classes?"
"If you are confident your compensation is inadequate, extend your superior the opportunity to rectify this mistake"
Perhaps some of this was involved with their decision that there wasn't enough money to continue your employment??
Re:article text (Score:3, Insightful)
I will grant you that all of this was directly associated with the operation of the reactor itself, but even if you're talking about something that deals with infrastructural support, it can play its own part. What if, for example, the system was reporting incorrect information due to some kind of file corruption? Or what if a key maintenance/test record had been inadvertently lost due to a software failure, causing plant operators/maintenance engineers to repeat something unecessarily, or initiate an investigation into a problem that may never have existed? I'd opine that *anything* associated with the day-to-day operation of a nuclear power plant needs to a very high degree of reliability.
This is just as much an indictment of
Re:article text (Score:2, Insightful)
Most grad students have their schooling paid for them by their professor. (RAship) And they get a stipend. So it does compare.
It also does compare to slave labor, from what my friends have told me.
what's wrong with cubicles? (Score:3, Insightful)
I rate this article a 2 out of 5 - if the kid hadn't put his graduation year in the article, I still would have been able to guess his age just from his idealistic rant with little real substance - "don't work for a manager that's an idiot" - Brilliant advice, captain underpants! yes, it's true that it's difficult to work for someone you don't respect, but in the real world (aka, not in your high school honors class) you're going to work with people who are of different levels of intelligence, people with different types of analytical skills, etc. Calling everybody stupid just because you're, as mentioned in the article, 'disillusioned' is what we call (in the grown up world) "being a fucking baby" - which we normally follow with "grow up"
Some advice... (Score:2, Insightful)
Always be aware of the writing on the wall. Generally, bankruptcy makes for a really bright red flag.
Also, they had taken away the water coolers. Another pretty good sign.
In my last few days, they told me that as a non-exempt employee, my status would have been determined by performance, not how long I'd worked there (I was the youngest). I didn't perform too badly, but honestly, I wasn't going to stick around and find out.
Also, networking is a great thing. It's how I got my current job.
Re:Cubicles? (Score:3, Insightful)
I really like the way some European companies structure their space: shared offices. 2-4 people in a large office, with a door and window. (Something about it being illegal to make employees work in windowless rooms in some countires, I hear.) It seems to be a good compromise between all cubes and all offices. I wonder why I don't see this more in the US?
Re:article text (Score:4, Insightful)
The bottom line, and my response to the article, is this : with rare exception, there is no such thing as company loyalty. A business is a business, and they will do whatever it takes to stay in business, even if it means laying off their most loyal employees. I learned a long time ago to treat a company as a shark while I act as the lamprey. Find "resume building activities" that can help you while helping the company reach their goals (making shitloads of money). Always look out for yourself and your family and your career first so you're not stuck when the company decides that your department no longer meets the companies needs.
I know it sounds bad, but I've been burned too many times over the past 10 years as a developer. I've also seen way too many friends burned as well. I've worked for some high profile companies in the past several years, and all of them ultimately put their needs over the needs of the employees. The faster you learn that this is the way the world works, the better off you'll be!
Experience (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Inexperienced author = bad advice (Score:2, Insightful)
I don't like cubicles, I think they make too much distance, personally I prefer a small dark room with all the programmers sitting within easy talking distance. Alot of noise (like phones constantly ringing) is a problem, but no energy at all like being locked in an isolated office would make me fall asleep rather than code better
Schedule pressure. I've never seen a company without it. True if they constantly insist on unrealistic estimates and hold you to them its time to leave. But this isn't academia, product does have to get shipped eventually. Often a little schedule pressure results in better code, it tends to limit over engineering. When the code hits the real world you will find out where you really need to make improvements which is often not where you thought you needed to optimize.
Now to add one bad sign to look for, its what I'd call 'thrashing', it always happens some, plans always change. But when plans change so often that nothings getting done and moral starts dropping you've got a big problem. If you come in to work everyday and your work assignment is different "Stop coding on project A, we've got super high priority from upper management on project B" "Stop coding on B, sales urgently needs C"
When you have that conversation its getting about time to send out the resume
Re:article text (Score:3, Insightful)
You're right, kid was clueless (Score:3, Insightful)
Agreed, this guy may have simply have been clueless.
"Oftentimes, a non-technical manager, or an "old hand" who's edge is no longer sharp will be impressed enough to listen to your technical advice. If they were smart, they'd actually take it."
As someone who worked full time while in school I offer the following advice to recent grads. What we learned in class, and from textbooks, is often more theoretical than practical. Also, believe it or not there are sometimes rational reasons for not choosing the ideal technical solution. YMMV.
"This one needs no explanation
Actual it does, the original author's words are those of a clueless newbie. Classic. Hopefully he was just overstating things out of frustration.
"... If you tell management that it will take 8 days, and they turn around and tell you they think it will take six, you need to leave. Rushed work is almost always subpar."
Rushed work is not the only solution to the timeframe problem. For example you can drop features. It often turns out that some are not essential. Cutting your timeframes may be management's subtle way to tell you that you are consistently over-designing, gold-plating, or otherwise doing unnecessary work.
Misleading submission title (Score:3, Insightful)
My own advice could be summed up thusly:
1. If you HATE your job, leave and find another one. Nothing's worth being miserable for 1/2 to 3/4 of your waking hours every day.
2. If you think your job is just mostly OK, and you've been there for less than a year, stick it out for the full 12 months before you move on. Nobody's going to want to hire someone who has a history of job-hopping every six months, because they assume you'll do the same thing to them.
3. If you've been at your current company for more that five years, and the company has not shown you signs that they're trying hard to keep you there (fat raises, promotions, etc.), then it's likely time to move on.
4. If you can't imagine enjoying anything more than you enjoy your current job, stay with it!
Motivate yourself already... (Score:3, Insightful)
Commencement address by Steve Jobs on June 12, 2005 [stanford.edu]
Here's an interesting book about a little company called ID Software
Masters of Doom [thinkgeek.com]
Note to author, the glass is half full. You're less than two years into (possibly) a long career and already very jaded. Open your eyes and try to learn more about your situation instead of pointing fingers at why the world has wronged you...
Counterpoints, and an Apology for Management (Score:2, Insightful)
I think a big misconception is the idea that a BS in anything should be hired by a company like Microsoft or Google as developer right out of college. People all over the world want that job, and if you think you deserve better pay and perquisites than a kid working his ass off in Bangalore--or anywhere--you'll have to prove it. What's more, there's always going to be a demand for nuts and bolts "in-house" guys. I'm not sure that there's ever going to be *any* demand for 20-somethings with vague ideas about "next generation user interfaces"--at least, not since 1999.
Also, you may not have written this article with
I think your only defense here is that you're *just* talking about developers, developers, developers. In finance, I've worked on open desks that make my current cube feel like a Fortress of Solitude. My supervisor worked on the same loud, open desk where everyone could see everyone else's work and hear their phone conversations, and he was pulling in well over seven figures GBP. An open floor is just better for communication, and that can be important in collaborative work. Besides that, who wants an office without a window? And don't try to tell me that everyone should have an office *with* a window--that would result in either a lot of giant offices or a lot of empty buildings.
The point is, if I were still on an open floor I'd *never* have the nerve to cruise
I guess my final point is that you seem to be doing to management exactly what you accuse them of doing to you. That is, saying that you know how to do their job better than they do, despite the fact that you aren't trained in it. Are there a lot of truly crappy managers out there? Of course. Is a degree in management a good predictor of managerial ability? Probably not. But everyone thinks that they can be a manager/executive, just like everybody thinks they can be a politician. The truth is that it's harder than it looks. Management makes decisions that affect a lot of different groups, and it's usually impossible to make decisions that each individual group agrees with wholeheartedly. While you may feel entitled to things like well-paid overtime, a private office, and de facto managerial control over your time and projects that you take an interest in, it's management's job to define your job in the best interests of the company.
In the end, I think you're right to think that you should have left earlier, and management was probably right to let you go. It wasn't a good fit. Whether you can find a good fit without changing your expectati
Re:article text (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm 3 days away from leaving my first job and taking one with(you guessed it) IBM.
The problem started when I stopped and noticed my co-workers, most of them had been with the company for less than I had (under 2 years), were being treated like crap, and the turnover rate was astonishing. My company absolutly refused to hire anyone in with experience and ended up overworking any experienced employee.
So by looking for a new job, and getting a 40% pay increase without having to move, that was huge. And in these last 2 weeks I've been at work, 3 experienced employees have left the company as well to work for a direct competitor and half of my teammates came to me and confessed they were looking as well.
The individuals need to stop thinking "I'm lucky to have a job" and start thinking "what am I really worth" and get what you're worth.
If the employees started to do this, corporations would realize the value a trained and loyal employee is worth and stop putting limits on their raises.
Re:Very very wrong, IMHO (Score:2, Insightful)
Stressful in the sense that you have to research what you're buying (waste of time), opinions and contradictory opinions. You have to find the best place to order (not just cheap, but reliable). Once you order, there's a good chance that something will go wrong, like they're out of stock or send the wrong item. Once you get it, you realize the gadget would have been great if only.... You spend a bunch of time configuring the gadget. You have to clean up the packaging (yes, I can be lazy) and find a spot in your house for the gadget. A month later, you hardly use it and wonder what even prompted you to buy it in the first place. It's nothing more than a symbol that has likely brought you more stress than joy.
I use to move from job to job, thinking I was being underpaid. I end up back at once of my first jobs because I can work normal hours, work from home when I need to, flex my hours, surf the web when I have the time, wear jeans, speak freely, and most important or all, I have sensible management for a change. I could get more money somewhere else, but I don't have the fortitude to work in a place that makes me miserable. I'm happy here and I get enough money. I still buy gadgets once in a while, but I realize that peace comes from silence and not having a million things on my plate, so I only buy them sparingly. Well I've kind of fallen off the wagon as I got a raise a few months back. I've been going through a mini-spending spree and have been strugling to get back to my pre-raise balanced self ever since. But at least I feel I've pulled myself away from the trap and can see it for what it is.
Re:article text (Score:3, Insightful)
If you want to insinuate that noise sensitivity is only a factor for the depressed, I'd ask you to go take a Chainsaw into the next PGA match in your area... Or the next surgery.... Or the next pr0n shoot for that matter. Concentration is, in varying degree, a factor of the noise level. This is thoroughly demonstrated and acknowledged throughout human history. If your employer is so clueless as to not realize that they're employing thinkers, or not take the logical and prudent steps to ensure the success of those employees, then they are not the place to be working. I agree with the author wholeheartedly, cubes are the bane of coders.