- cross-posted to:
- programmerhumor@lemmy.ml
- cross-posted to:
- programmerhumor@lemmy.ml
You must log in or register to comment.
MBAs in action: John was the biggest expense, his professional infidelity a welcome justification and his importance just a number on a sheet.
Unfortunately for him, the fallout hit too hard and too fast, so he couldn’t leverage the cost savings brag for a better position and let some other lucky fella deal with the disaster.
basically where I work right now. our John sadly tried their best but the company did not hire any more engineers. he was the sole engineer for about 7 years and everything is built from the ground up by him. John came across weird issues and used a very stinky legacy language to fix those issues.
about 9 years into his career they hired Andy and Andy tried to make as much sense of John’s code but it was challenging and for the next 5 or so years millions of dollars ran through an application made by 2 developers.
anyways now I’m getting paid a lot of money because John does consulting and Andy found a way better job, but I also get the “house of cards” questions a lot.
I think management thinks they can replace me as well because I came in here and things seem to be running after Andy’s departure.
But if I quit or they fire me the entire company is going under as the next engineers in line will simply quit
Where I work, we have 5 “Johns” and they have built some crazy shit to run our org, including things we could have just bought SAAS. They just got bored and made things. We love you, IT department!
Does management love them too? Financially, in particular? I don’t know their hobbies, but Games Workshop don’t accept colleague approval as payment.
None of us are paid well, but we’re working for a charity. So…
Ive seen this pattern in many companies. I would say its the natural evolution of having a strong engineer stick with the same company for many years. He will eventually know so much that he makes his own solutions to fix things. Or she, can be a woman. Even though ive never seen that personally.
Honestly, it sounds like John was a problem and needed to be fired a long time ago, before he created this unmaintainable mess.
I agree that John was the problem, but I think it was management responsibly to fix. Either through some coaching or as you say, before he became business-critical.
Every single other person could also be called the problem, because they knowingly let John do all the work, and apparently weren’t interested in sharing the responsibility.
If someone else is getting paid the most amount of money, I’m happy to let the most amount of work fall to them. “Sharing the responsibility” doesn’t make sense if I don’t get to share the reward. It’s a company, not a community or a family.
It could happen that way. More often, the company can’t or won’t get them back.
It’s not a mistake until you admit it.
“Failure of leadership”
Yeah. Always cross train, always document. What if John had died?
What if John had died?
Ah yes, the car/train/plane crash argument.
