"Raising the Bar"

How entitled technology execs hand-selected by their bros fail to understand basic operational leadership. Part 2 in the "unfair, unprofessional and about someone we all know" series.

The subject of developer productivity has been making the rounds lately, and not much about the external constraints responsible for >90% of overall delay in a given software project.

In our anonymous supply chain technology organization, the primary cause of delay was a crippling web of dependencies. Inventory and retail management systems are a crucial part of a supply chain, but those organizations were siloed from supply chain tech. Mitigating or eliminating those unnecessary handoffs and misaligned priorities would have addressed >90% of the most expensive delay. The highest cost of delay isn't the waste of operational overhead of lazy programmers; it’s queues, queues caused by crippling webs of dependency and misaligned priorities.

The problem is that these interdependent organizations prop up a lotta VPs, and if you start integrating them, you start to need fewer VPs. While we’re very careful about the labor costs of developers, we can’t do anything to displace VPs for operational purposes.

Don’t get me wrong, if you hired, say, a new CTO who has a history with and dislikes some of the existing VPs they suddenly “resign” to “spend more time with family,” but they’re always replaced by n++ VPs their new CTO enjoys getting beers and bro-ing down with. Or just VPs who are terrified of him (it’s almost always a ‘him’) and will do his bidding without pushback.

One time, the VP (with no VP experience and no domain expertise who was hand-selected by his bro SVP) asked me in passing.

VP: How do you think our bar is for hiring engineers?

Me: How do you mean?

VP: Well, do we currently have a high or a low bar when hiring engineers?

Me: I’d say our bar is too high.

VP<shocked face>: What?! How can that be possible?

Me: Well, we fell short of our hiring goals by a double-digit percentage last year, and we’re similarly trending behind this year. I believe this is because our hiring managers know we do not invest in developing talent, and anyone they hire is unlikely to improve much once they start.

(DIsclaimer: I was specifically asked by this guy’s best bro, who literally handed him the job, “please help him, be candid; he’s a really good guy who will be straight with you.”

Consequently, they’re all looking for unicorns, and even if they existed, our reputation as an employer doesn’t currently make us an appealing choice for them. If we invested in hiring more E1s and had a system for upskilling those people once they worked here in a focused and intentional manner aligned with the skills we need to deliver; we’d likely meet our hiring goals, and our ‘bar’ for talent would rise considerably.

/goes back to his desk without another word.

Big fail for me.

Then I ask him to please try not to send emails at 3 AM.

VP: Why not?

Me: Because it gives people the idea they need to work at 3 AM.

VP: What’s wrong with that?

Me: A lot; it’s ineffective for people to work too many hours. Also, it will cause effort theater as people who cannot work at 3 AM, people with children and personal lives, and usually older people start scheduling emails for 3 AM to protect themselves.

VP: But, more people working more hours get more work done.

Me: There’s a lot to unpack in that statement, and I’d love to dive into it with you if you have time to engage. You seem preoccupied with something at your desk, though, so I understand if now isn’t a good time.

VP muttered, went back to his desk, and resumed ignoring me.

No such future conversation was requested.

I was asked personally by the SVP bro, who nepotismed him into his first VP job, to help him.

SVP: He’s a real straight shooter, be candid with him. He’s a good guy. He’s new to this executive leadership thing, so your strategy and organizational design background will be useful to him.

When I met the new VP for the first time, he didn’t say “hello,” he didn’t say “tell me about yourself,” or even “What do you think we can do to improve things here?”

<I walk into the room>

VP: <SVP> told me you would tell me things. How good are our developers?

Me: I don’t understand the question.

VP: Are they average, above average, or below average?

<remember, no effort to establish rapport has been made; I am, apparently, an inanimate spy sent here to shit on my co-workers to the new axe man>

Me: Compared to what?

VP: Generally speaking, how good are they?

Me: Well as a population of over 160 developers, a third of them are average, a third are above, and a third are below because of bell curves and populations. However, our constraints aren’t due to a lack of developer skills. Our current constraints primarily stem from incoherent or absent strategy, lack of openness to ideas from the staff, and organizational political hurdles.

VP <looking confused>: It sounds like you’re talking about culture?!

Me: Indeed, I am, specifically, the systemic impediments to developing a great and highly effective engineering culture.

He didn’t enjoy our chat. But he still asked for another one.

After 5, we met again.

To my shock he said

VP: You can’t tell anyone what I’m about to tell you. I’m going to demote <your current boss> and fire this other director. Do you think your current boss is a flight risk if I demote him?

Me: I mean, I might be if you demoted me. It’s not reasonable to demote somebody and expect they’ll stay, but I suppose there’s a chance he’ll stick it out. He’s a trooper like that. He’s an asset who understands the domain a lot, and it would be unfortunate to lose his expertise.

Protip: If you have an awkward first interaction with someone and don’t treat them like human beings, keep any secrets you might have to yourself.

After a few weeks with this fellow I had another chat with the SVP

Me: This isn’t going great. I don’t know how to help him if he doesn’t seek help and rejects my suggestions. It doesn’t seem like he’s shooting real straight, either. What can I do differently to be of service?

SVP: Keep at it; what you offer here is valuable; we need people with your leadership expertise. He’s a really good guy, and he’s new to this strategic leadership VP role thing. Still, he’s a spectacular developer <he quickly proved himself to be anything but, but that’s another tale for another time> and if, for some reason, things don’t work out with you two, I’ll make sure you land somewhere else here. We can’t afford to lose your expertise, so don’t worry, keep doing what you’re doing.

Within a few months, SVP wasn’t responding to my requests to chat, and his buddy fired me “without cause” because “I tried unsuccessfully to promote you into a role with the agency and authority you need to bring maximum effectiveness and having failed to find you a role, I’m terminating your employment immediately.” SVP was nowhere to be found.

To be clear, I never believed the SVP when he said he had my back, so I wasn’t surprised (not at all my first rodeo) when he didn’t, and I kept my most candid thoughts to myself when dealing with his nepo bro. Ooh, a new word… “nepbro” I have coined the best term to describe these executives who carry each other up. I’ll forever refer to them as “nepbros”.

Anyway, I have so much more to say about the many things I learned from this truly incredible (really, look up the meaning of that word) group of nepbro executives, and I can’t wait to share it all.