Getting things “done” in large tech companies
Meaning of “done” in large companies
- Many see the article as accurately describing that “done” means satisfying decision‑makers, not perfecting systems.
- Some accept this as the pragmatic definition of done in big orgs; others find it bleak or even offensive, reducing engineering to “people pleasing.”
- Several argue that this mindset is a key reason products become bloated, buggy, and get repeatedly rewritten instead of maintained.
Career strategy: coasting, stagnation, and risk
- One camp views big tech as a place to coast: accept boring work, optimize for pay and work–life balance, and rely on the brand name later.
- Others warn this is fragile: layoffs, “up‑or‑out” cultures, and a tight market mean a decade of low‑value work can become a liability.
- There’s debate over whether long-term “doing nothing” is still possible; some insist it is, even in a world of Jira, others say that era is over.
Agency, alignment, and responsibility
- The article’s critique of “unagentic engineers” (those who just execute ticket streams) is contentious.
- Some agree that engineers must seek visibility, understand business goals, and market their work.
- Others insist that prioritization and alignment are core management duties; expecting ICs to divine org priorities is seen as broken management.
Role of Product/Project Managers
- Huge thread around PMs:
- Good PMs are described as “worth their weight in gold”: talking to customers, buffering engineers from chaos, aligning scope, negotiating cross‑team work.
- Bad PMs are viewed as ego-driven blockers who mis-specify work, shield themselves from accountability, and degrade outcomes; some engineers say they only felt effective when acting as their own PM.
- Several suggest senior engineers should own more product skills; others note many engineers explicitly want a PM buffer.
Quality, tech debt, and maintenance vs shipping
- Concern that a “just make bosses happy” definition of done structurally under-rewards tests, refactoring, security, and long-term maintenance.
- Some say this predictably leads to compounding tech debt and cycles of “declare victory, disband team, rebuild from scratch.”
- Others argue craftsmanship must be calibrated: sometimes overengineering is waste; sometimes underengineering creates far worse future costs.
Status, politics, and long-term reputation
- Multiple comments frame big orgs as status‑centred rather than reality‑centred: visibility, metrics, and narratives often trump actual product quality.
- Short‑term, playing this game can boost promotions; long‑term, several argue your real career capital comes from being a trusted technical peer, not from pleasing interchangeable middle managers.