The Living Dilbert? 459
AirmanTux asks: "Next march I will be separating from the US Air Force, after six years wearing 'the uniform', working in the closest thing to IT that the military has. For certain reasons, I've come to the conclusion that I will be more effective in serving the US public out of uniform than in it. There seems to be a common belief that the civilian sector is just as disorganized and mismanaged as the uniformed services. Do you think this is true? Are there any 'honest' places to work any more (where promotions/awards are based on work preformed and bureaucracy, and politics aren't encouraged to supplant the 'mission), or has America become one big living Dilbert strip?"
usajobs.com (Score:5, Informative)
Air Force IT (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Air Force IT (Score:2, Interesting)
True and sad enough.
Pretty much anyone can enlist into a technical field and they're all put through the same relatively short, simple training.
Again, so true. Some people come thru it pretty knowledgeable though (those tend to be the ones that already had a good understanding, prior experience or the like), but there's a bunch of "not so good" ones too... (although it seems every job has its share of incompetent folks sti
Ex-Military IT staff described in a nutshell. (Score:5, Interesting)
First of all, my hat's off to all who have served our country in the military, but something is very, very strange and wrong going on with the way the AF and Army train their IT folks and what quality of actual usable knowledge, experience and attitudes those people have when they leave the service and apply for their first civilian IT jobs after leaving the service. I used to be a hiring manager for an organization that primarily did systems integration, installations and support for state and local government and we interviewed a lot of newly ex-mil IT applicants and the above statement generally hits the nail right on the head. Of course there were exceptions to the rule, but by and large it seemed like most of these applicants got very little broad-coverage training in the real IT world, but instead were all pidgeon-holed into little isolated sub-sections of IT training and knowledge without being able to be immediately competant at the "big picture" without substantial re-training and what I'd call "reverse brainwashing". Yet every one of them thought they knew it all better than everyone else, and one of the most common answers in the interview questions about where they saw themselves in 3 to five years of working for us was "to become the senior manager/director of the whole IT department"... in other words to run off the existing boss and take over. Wrong answer.
Amateurs on an unjustified power trip indeed.
We did hire a few of these over the years and they turned out to be some of the worst IT employees we ever had. A recurring theme was a lack of respect for proper software licensing. One particular worst offender would take a master copy of the full corporate MS Office Professional edition and install it on every desktop he touched regardless of whether the customer had purchased the full version for that machine or not. Of course the end-users loved it, but when the tech was confronted with what he was doing he said that he knew he would not be the one getting in trouble for it, but rather his boss would and the sooner he could get the boss in trouble or fired, the better chance he thought he'd have to move up, take over and "rule with an iron fist".
I'm posting A/C because now my company considers ex-military IT techs at the very bottom of the list when hiring due to too many problems we've had with them in the past. We actively discriminate against them due to getting burned too many times.
The best quality IT folks we've been hiring the past couple years now come from two radically different groups of people. The first group is the young Computer Science geeks right out of college who are still trainable/mouldable before they can pick up too many bad habits, and the second groups is older college degreed people (late 30's to early-mid 40's) who have had one non-IT professional career for a while (but were above-average proficient as technology users) and then have gone back to school to get their CompSci or MIS degrees and have changed careers to the IT field.
Re:Ex-Military IT staff described in a nutshell. (Score:3, Interesting)
Sounds like you've got an axe to grind.
You see, I agree with this part: "Yet every one of them thought they knew it all better than everyone else..."
In the military everyone yo
Re:Ex-Military IT staff described in a nutshell. (Score:3, Interesting)
But we are talking about ex-military personnel, who presumably didn't have the patience to advance by merit, or who simply didn't like the culture of army. They could have well left since they didn't like an environment where they couldn't backstab their superiors.
Besides, simply becau
Juat the opposite (Score:4, Informative)
My last company was just the opposite. About 1/2 our IT team was ex military (myself included). Navy and Air Force. No prima donnas, no ego trips.
Re:Ex-Military IT staff described in a nutshell. (Score:4, Insightful)
You really need to look at that board in your own eye.
Re:Ex-Military IT staff described in a nutshell. (Score:5, Interesting)
I made E-7 in 8 years, and left at 10 because it got political and I had Seniors that were lying weasels. I figured that they needed me more than I needed them, so... Hung up the uniform.
I'll have the last laugh as the morons who ruined my last year in the Navy will be retiring soon and will discover that they are indeed "unemployable". It's sad to think about how many honest, bright eyed, motivated Sailors these jerks hosed, but american business isn't much different.
The Navy is outsourcing any job where you might actually learn something and lowering standards at the same time. So there little reason to join the service to learn anything anymore. I tried to stay away from the Navy brand of IT. It was full of know it all contractors who got lame Microsoft Certs from cram schools. These folks are worse than clueless, they're dangerous.
I'm making about 4 times as much money as when I was wearing green stuff, I have 8 people working for me now and manage an amazing operation. The whole place is about 125 people. Life is better.
Here's what I learned in the military:
1. Don't work for anybody who's dishonest or a mental case
2. IT is a terrible job (particularly if it's a windows house)
3. Avoid large organizations (especially government contractors)
4. If you're ethical and have a brain, American business will depress you and rot your soul. Companies (like the military) have no loyalty to you, regardless of whether you are loyal to them.
5. The military is full of good people and some "unemployables". I am always fascinated by what happens to people when they come in, and what they do ("for real") when they get out. ("Welcome to Home Depot" or "Would you like the combo?")
6. Most certifications (except perhaps Cisco) are meaningless, and many in the military seem to think that once they "have the ticket punched" they are experts. WRONG! You need some actual experience and an open mind before anybody should take you seriously. Can you solve REAL problems?
7. Avoid companies whose HR departments hire techies. These people have no idea what they're looking at. Degrees, certs and the like have little to do with actual performance or potential.
Many will argue against what I just said, but they likely "drank the Kool-Aid" and got the degrees or certs. The real question is "Can they count on you to consistantly make them money?"
Military people are probably better than the average slacker in this department, as they do bathe (in most cases) and will show up for work.
Best of luck to you! I miss the comaraderie, and it's annoying to have to choose and buy clothes, but hey... Air Force uniforms suck anyway, so... You're probably better off! Oh, and don't join the reserves. These days "Reserves" means "Active duty" (Can you say "recall?").
Re:Ex-Military IT staff described in a nutshell. (Score:3, Insightful)
Most certifications (except perhaps Cisco) are meaningless
Not meaningless, but definitely overinflated. From my (limited) experience, the importance/usefulness of Microsoft certifications are overinflated by a factor of 5-10, most Linux certifications by a factor of 3-5, and Cisco certifications by a factor of 1 to 3. Generally, when there are tiered certification levels, the higher certification levels are less overinflated.
Certification indicates they understand the theory. In theory, there is no g
Re:Ex-Military IT staff described in a nutshell. (Score:4, Interesting)
Your ideas about money are similar to what mine were. I ended up starting at $30k in '95 and ended up at $60k after 7 years at MCI. Yep, MCI, which went down the toilet and me along with it. MCI was Dilbertville, but my job after that was in the medical field. I work in the radiology department at a hospital as a PACS administrator. Slight cut in pay, but the work is way more rewarding, and it is as far from Dilbert as can be. If I was at a corporate hospital, it would still be Dilbert, as I have friends that work for one of those. But at the independent, non-corporate place I work, patient care comes ahead of politics or money.
You look for broad-coverage employees? (Score:3, Interesting)
Most of the job listings I have encountered seem to call for specialists. They read like this [monster.com]. The listing is obviously the resume of the guy who just left. So tell us, is this sort of listing a bluff? Do all managers really
Re:Ex-Military IT staff described in a nutshell. (Score:5, Funny)
All right, but who's gonna take advice from a guy who uses the phrase "get er done"?
Re:usajobs.com (Score:2, Funny)
Look, the guy already said he didn't want to wear a uniform anymore. Beside, what makes the Girl Scouts such a great place to work anyway?
Re:usajobs.com (Score:3, Funny)
Thin mints
Re:usajobs.com (Score:2, Insightful)
Then again, the opportunities to work with the latest technology are often missing, and there are many times that you will find yourself wanting to bang your head against your monitor screen over some particula
Re:usajobs.com (Score:5, Insightful)
"Job security" is just another insurance policy deducted from your wages. While you may not see the line-item on your pay stub, the cost is very real and very significant.
If getting paid what you are worth is important to you, accept that you can be replaced at whim. If you want job security, be prepared to work for half of your potential wages. "Job security" just means your employer is getting a great bargain and can afford to tolerate oversight and shiftlessness on your behalf.
Rephrase your question as "are there any high-yield, zero-risk investments left anywhere at all?" if you need a rational perspective. Globalization has nothing to do with what you seek.
Re:usajobs.com (Score:3, Informative)
After I saw my assistant (and others) get summarily laid off with no benefits, I joined in union organizing efforts. Our office successfully negotiated a union contract. For 1.15% of my gross pay (about the first five minutes of every work day) I can't be laid off unless the organization opens their financials and proves a fi
Security (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:usajobs.com (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:usajobs.com (Score:3, Insightful)
That's not to say that you can ignore it. As a contractor, it helps a lot to be canny about such things, to understand the hidden social network quickly.
But yes, it's a great way to isolate yourself from the effects of office politics.
Depends... (Score:2, Interesting)
It really depends on the place where you end up working (their size, what type of company they are, etc matters a lot).
Regardless, I *don't* ever want to be "promoted" to a management job. I like coding, not paperwork, meetings and managing people.
It's not as bad as Dilbert. (Score:5, Informative)
But, people are people. I might make a vague generalization about the personality types that join the military, but that probably won't be productive.
Re:It's not as bad as Dilbert. (Score:3, Informative)
If your company isn't that way, consider yourself lucky.
Re:It's not as bad as Dilbert. (Score:5, Interesting)
In job interviews I tell the questioner they're being interviewed just as much as I am - the ones who get offended are likely to be idiots about other things, whereas the folks who understand it's about matching styles have a good chance of understanding my approach to the job.
You can smell someplace will be a losing proposition. Here's an example. I was called into one office to speak with the hiring manager, but when HR heard about it, they came over with a six page form to fill out before I could talk with the guy. Didn't make a damned bit of difference whether all the data was already on my resume, paperwork had to be filled out, and at the bottom it even said "See resume not acceptable response". I scratched that in anyway since I had other things to do, the interview went swimmingly well, the engineering manager was ready to make me an offer, but after that nothing. Nada. Not hello, not goodbye, merry christmas, fuck you, nothing. I can only suspect HR scotched the followup, and if HR can override an engineering hire I wouldn't care to work there anyway because the priorities are FUBAR. Turns out my gut check was right: they went tits-up eighteen months later because of inept management.
There are other cases, like the hostile HR guy who smelled of liquor at 11 am, the place which desperately solicited resumes then couldn't be arsed to answer email when I followed up a week later, or the guy who wasn't at his desk because there was no way he would say yes so he passive-aggressivated his way out of the problem. Each one of these was a huge warning sign, and in retrospect I'm way better off for avoiding these gigs. See, in civilian life, you can somewhat choose your CO, so reading the organisation before you get involved is a useful way to minimise potential asshattery.
Re:It's not as bad as Dilbert. (Score:5, Interesting)
As to the high maintenance bit, for the job I did end up taking I not only coded my ass off but near the end took on a few tricky hardware problems, even though they weren't anywhere near my job description, because my work was done and I wanted to move the project over the goal line. Doesn't sound too prima-donna to me, pal.
Re:It's not as bad as Dilbert. (Score:2)
Re:It's not as bad as Dilbert. (Score:2)
Re:It's not as bad as Dilbert. (Score:2)
Re:It's not as bad as Dilbert. (Score:2)
I wonder how one would go about contacting the people who work in IT in a company you're checking out. That seems like the best place to go for information. Does anybody have any ideas on the best way to do this? Just emailing webmaster@company.com? Callin
No. (Score:5, Insightful)
Longer answer: Not really...there are places where performance and ability advance, but they are few and far between indeed, and primarily in small establishments. To most employers, employees are disposable commodity, a necessary evil that is to be pruned or removed at the earliest possible convenience. Management has become the science of keeping up appearances, with many managers being completely ignorant of the trade they are in, or the tasks of the workers they supposedly manage. Color me a pessimist, but the way I see it, Dilbert has gone from a sarcastic parody to a photorealistic portrait of the American workforce.
the real No (Score:3, Insightful)
long answer: hell, no
Re:No. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:No. (Score:3, Interesting)
Pray tell, what a fascinating point of view. All this time, I thought my right to bitch and complain about things was enumerated under the constitution (first amendment.)
So you are also telling me that someone who is politically active, does things to promote their cause, but doesn't vote because he can't conscientously a hand in picking one of the two
Not voting is no good. (Score:5, Insightful)
I will happily grant you that both major candidates may suck in any given election and that you might well want to protest by not voting for either one. (I do not agree with your idealistic "sullying my hands" position - I think if one of those candidates is less bad to you you should vote for them, and I think in most real cases one candidate is less bad to you if you bother to check. But that's not my major point, so I'll assume they're exactly even for now.)
But the _biggest_ consistent problem we have which makes the two candidates both suck is that the two incumbent parties have a strangehold on who we get to choose from. Voting for a third party candidates drives up the visibility of third parties existing and drives up the likelihood that OTHER people will vote for third parties.
As a bonus, if enough people do it for a presidental campaign then they get federal election money.
Re:No. (Score:3, Insightful)
Go where the money is
The military doesn't even hold a candle to the messed-upedness that is the private sector at some points, regardless of the disparaging comments that contractors (myself included) might sometimes make about government. It's all equally fucked.
Re:No. (Score:3, Informative)
Ex-Marines's Opinion (Score:5, Interesting)
After 4 years in the Marines I was ready to get out to the "real" world... a world free of BS and well paying cool jobs. Well I got my degree in Comp Sci and was ready to face the world. Upon getting a job with a large corporation, I was amazed at the amount of BS there. It made the military look like an efficient & well-oiled machine. After 5.5 years now in the corporate world I ahve come to one conclusion... you alone can't make a damn difference. Either you will like it or you won't. I have finally realized that being my own boss is the way to go and thus I am pursuing that vigorously.
As for you my friend, take a walk through the corporate jungle and see if its your kinda thing. You can always do your own thing!
http://psychicfreaks.com/ [psychicfreaks.com]Re:Ex-Marines's Opinion (Score:2)
Re:Ex-Marines's Opinion (Score:2)
As soon as they start making those huge amounts of money, the parasites will attach. There's always going to be a great deal of BS in any mid-sized and up company.
The best way to do things is find a manager who effectively shields you from most of it. I got lucky three times in a row, but I haven't got a clue how to make sure it happens. I don't think there is a way.
The leadership factor (Score:5, Insightful)
Upon getting a job with a large corporation, I was amazed at the amount of BS there. It made the military look like an efficient & well-oiled machine.
I agree. After leaving the Army, I moved through several jobs. The nonprofit world was amazing. Determining accountability for anything was like trying to nail jello to a wall. Government contracting made me realize that people who create small contracting companies and latch onto a contract or two are on the gravy train. The way government spending works, you pretty much *must* spend the money your contracting agency has allocated for you. If I had the stomach to put up with Inside-the-Beltway bullshit, I would have gone into government contracting. Big businesses (I speak only from experience with the Silicon Valley kind) are often full of energy, but the biggest problem, as with the rest of the civilian world, is that organizational leaders simply do not have much leadership training.
I don't know how it was for you in the Air Force, but I was in general impressed with the leaders I worked for in the Army. I'm sure to some degree it's a matter of your specialty, plus luck of the draw. But when you find a set of good leaders in the civilian world, in my experience it is a rare treat. Even the juggernauts of the Information Age have a great deal of employee churn, and they seldom devote necessary resources to adequately training leaders (mid-level managers in particular). That's where the Dilbert Factor is nurtured and brought to full bloom.
Others have mentioned this, but you may truly find that going small and/or going it alone may work for you. If you can maintain the military work ethic, you'll probably have an advantage over most of your competitors, at least in the areas of initiative, attention to detail, knowledge of the importance of planning, and ability to prioritize.
Meh... Dilbert moments always occur no matter what (Score:2)
Re:Meh... Dilbert moments always occur no matter w (Score:2, Funny)
No. In Dilbert it would have been done intentionally at the behest of a consultant in order to increase your productivity with "(Per)cussive (T)eam B(u)ilding The(r)aputic Vi(b)ration mass(age).
KFG
Consider some specialization (Score:3, Interesting)
Consider focusing on specific areas, like perhaps IT security work or perhaps programming related to military applications. It seems like you should be able to use your time in the services to your advantage.
Re:Consider some specialization (Score:2)
-Kurt
Re:Consider some specialization (Score:4, Insightful)
While I agree that focussing on an area that is somewhat related to the poster's military career is good advice, don't be fooled that IT security is less BS prone than any other area. Having done security for a Fortune 100 company for ten years, I can say emphatically that Dilbertesque moments abound. I've gone into meetings on my management's behalf and given the message I was told to give only to be censured afterwards because the other people in the meeting didn't like the message. I've been told by a man who received all his promotions from his uncle that political harmony is frequently more important than security ideals. I've had to spend MONTHS collecting data and statistics from external sources to convince a division that Internet email is not an appropriate delivery platform for mission critical communications that absolutely MUST be received, unaltered and unread, within 2 minutes of sending.
If you can make the intellectual leap that a paycheck is its own reward and that, as long as you are receiving one, it doesn't really matter much what the company does, then working in the private sector can be both rewarding and relaxing. If, on the other hand, you truly belive that you can make a difference and/or save the company from itself, then perhaps you ought to consider a career with a greater chance of success, such as carrying ice cubes on the palm of your hand across the Sahara before they melt.
At least in the military, "I was just following orders" is still a plausible excuse.
Re:Consider some specialization (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Consider some specialization (Score:2)
Keep it small (Score:4, Insightful)
I value nothing more than being the master of my own destiny - which should explain why I live in the South Pacific and am more or less retired from corporate life at 42. Here, in a nutshell is the modus vivendi I've developed:
Any organisation beyond a certain size inevitably becomes pathological in its behaviour. It sometimes reverts to normalcy for periods of time, but it will swing, and you will swing with it. Avoid long term commercial commitments to any large organisation. Working with groups or individuals within them for finite terms is fine, and sometimes really enjoyable, though.
Find a niche where you can work with a number of trusted individuals (perhaps as a consultant or contractor) and either work for yourself or work in a small company of less than 50 staff. The material benefits won't be as easily accessible, but your life will be infinitely more enjoyable, because you'll actually have some control over it.
Re:Keep it small (Score:2)
Re:Keep it small (Score:5, Informative)
Agreed... when the company is below a certain size, everybody can exist within the same monkeysphere [pointlesswasteoftime.com], and several hundred thousand years of social evolution help things along. In much larger organizations, multiple monkeyspheres form, leading to indifference and inefficiency at best, or low-level tribal warfare at worst.
How? (Score:2)
Just curious, how does one retire at 42 working in a small company?
The world is not a Dilbert strip... (Score:5, Insightful)
But that can be avoided! If, instead of working at a large company, you seek out a small fledgling business to work at, you will find that the benefits are proportional to the results and not to politics. A small business, especially one with 20 employees at the most, cannot afford to play these political games. These businesses are usually owner-operated, and the owner cares about moving forward in life. That's why he is taking the tremendous risk and creating jobs for his employees. These organizations usually have one boss, around whom the whole business revolves. There might be one other manager, but usually, everyone runs around the boss asking questions and finding out what he wants them to do. This is the perfect business to work in, if you're a people-person. You go over there, and start at whatever level you can get. Since there aren't thousands of employees, the owner of the business will quickly see how you learn and operate. If you do a good job, you'll find yourself earning a lot of trust and capability in the company. Your opinions will be heard. And if you can be a team member, not just by doing your job, but by learning a bit about everyone's job, learning how the owner thinks, what he wants to accomplish, etc., you can take a lot of that pressure off the owner.
By doing all of this, you can help the business grow in terms of profit, which will make it grow into a larger company. Eventually, that means the office will become a Dilbert strip, or something out of Office Space. You'll have a Lumberg working under you a few levels down. But who cares? At this point, you will have helped the U.S. economy, you will have created jobs, you will have grown the company into something successful and long lasting, and you will be at a high position at the top, earning a high salary, and no doubt owning a good portion of the stock. You'll be laughing all the way to the bank.
Re:The world is not a Dilbert strip... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:The world is not a Dilbert strip... (Score:3, Insightful)
Hehe, before I did the Fortune 100 thing, I worked for a company of 20 people. Believe me, the grass is not greener over there. The president of the company had no clue how to run a startup (his background was head of a major international bank), his operations manager was a power hungry, self absorbed geek wannabe that mandated, amongst other things, that the whole business system that delivered our system must be rewritten in Pascal, since that was the only language he knew. The president hired craploa
Re:The world is not a Dilbert strip... (Score:2)
I don't understand the adversion to office politics. Politics are just something else that smart people can hack.
Re:The world is not a Dilbert strip... (Score:2)
If you honestly don't understand how some people can be repulsed by office politics, then perhaps you don't really have the "people skills" that you imply you have.
OTOH, if you meant that you believe that people's ethics and morals shouldn't interfere in their ability to "hack" the office politics then I see your point. I disagree with it, because when people behave in a way that violat
Re:The world is not a Dilbert strip... (Score:5, Insightful)
Political and social structures have rules, just like a programming language or operating system. Understand them, and their limitations, and underlying structure, and you can do a lot. Morals don't figure into it, until you start to use them maliciously. But there are people who are going to use those same sets of rules for personal gain without really even understanding the full extent of how they work, and deciding that you're going to try to "be a nice guy" isn't going to mean anything other than that you're going to get run over: over and over again.
The world doesn't like "nice" people. The world likes effective people, and people who make other people like them. Being nice for the sake of being nice is optional, and generally overrated.
Re:The world is not a Dilbert strip... (Score:3, Informative)
Work for the smart people (Score:4, Insightful)
The goal is to work for people who appreciate your skills and talents so that when you apply for work elsewhere, you have a cool resume and a bunch of people who really like the work you do.
Similarly, there are also wastelands filled with disillusioned people who spend 12 hours each day stressing over pointless management failures. If you end up in one of those, consider it a platform from which to find something less awful.
Xix.
Start-Up vs. Big Corporation (Score:4, Interesting)
Or you can work at Big Corporation. All of them are the same, with varying degrees of B.S. Some have very little office politics and your hard work is noted and rewarded. Others are just one big C.Y.A. environment. Even worse, even if you do work hard in your local I.T. area, upper management may decide to oursource your job, so you get screwed anyways.
Remember, the goal is not to work hard. The goal is to work smart. Put in a lot padding on your estimates so you can slack off and still meet the deadline. If your co-workers in other areas / departments ask you to do things for them, pretend you don't know so they won't bother you anymore. (After all, you only answer to your boss.) Be sure to take the credit when something works and pass the blame when it doesn't. Don't complain about new projects or moved up timelines. You'll still have to complete them anyways if you still want to keep your job. Instead, agree with management and discuss how much more revenue the company will make once the project is finished. It gives the impression you actually give a shit about your clients and you'll be remembered as the "can do" person instead of the "can't do" complainer. I do all of these and have steadily advanced in position & salary.
Mod parent up Funny or Insightful (Score:2)
Go small company? (Score:3, Informative)
Stay away from... (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm working for a very wealthy private univesity and it's much better than the state one where I worked before. It's easier to get fired at a private place so do you work and obey the rules. If you like total job security despite the BS factor, you might enjoy working for the state--here in Texas, it took an act of God to get fired because the managers (at least where I worked) never kept enough of the right paper work to do the necessary documentation to terminate an employee.
However, universities have a bad habit of higher their own graduates and favoring them in promotions--they've never been anywhere else so changes come slow if not 10 years behind everyone else. The management types are usually not as sharp as the managers in the corporate world--mostly because they wouldn't survive out there so they're also playing the job security card.
There's also little upward mobility. But, in the right position, you're an 8-5, weekends off, extra week off between Xmas and New Years Day kind of cush job.
Oh, at the pay scale is usually lower than the corporate market bears--but you won't get laid off.
There's lots of trade-offs but you have to decide what you want.
Good luck--having "USMC" on my resume qualified me for prison guard, police work, or mall security. Hope USAF is more helpful to you.
Large Company (Score:3, Insightful)
The biggest difference? You can actually get fired from a civilian company.
Being in the military sucks sometimes. But it sure beats working for a living.
Depends on what you want. (Score:2)
Practical experience (Score:2)
Big Companies Do Things Worse. (Score:3, Insightful)
In my experience, a small company is the best place to focus on the work at hand, rather than the overhead. It's also easier to get permission to do things, because there aren't as many people to have turf wars. Plus, at smaller companies, you'll see more of the mechanitions of real business decisions, rather than the fodder of low-competence managers and colleagues.
Try this: (Score:2)
Big companies
First, take a look at why Dilbert is funny... (Score:5, Insightful)
Get a highly technical position and technical boss (Score:2)
The best I can suggest, to avoid the politics and bureaucracy, is to have a specialised technical job and to work for a manager who is also technical and will understand your contribution. Hopefully, your relationship with him ca
Last refuge for the honest... (Score:4, Informative)
There is one place that is as honest as you
want it to be... working for yourself.
It's a shitty thing to say, because starting your
own business (or more realistically a partnership with
others you know) is not easy. Maybe you have to slog through
some soul crushing bullshit at a large corporate job to get the
money and contacts you need to do it.
But once you do it (success of failure), you will know what
it is to work for an honest organization where true merit counts.
Once you do, you never want to go back.
Re:Last refuge for the honest... (Score:4, Funny)
Being your own boss doesn't necessarily guarentee you won't be working for an incompetent slave driver
can't fire dilbert (Score:2, Informative)
Motorola (Score:2)
I work for Motorola (in Australia, but I've work in MOT offices around the world on assignment).
It is *exactly* like Dilbert.
Re:Motorola (Score:2)
I started in ADL in 2000, then moved to the Perth centre in 2004.
A story I heard... (Score:3, Insightful)
An old man sat sipping iced tea on a bench in front of the little drug store in a small town. After a while a young man pulled up in his car and got out, and stopped to chat with the old man before going into the store. The younger man said he had just moved to town, and he was curious about how this new town would compare. "I hope it's like the place I just left. The people were friendly, and everyone looked out for each other."
"I've got good news," the old man said, "You will find that this town is just the same as the one you left!"
After a while another young man came along, and stopped to chat with the old man. He too was curious about what this town was like. "I hope it's better than the place I just left. The people were petty and self-centered, and everyone was out for himself."
I've got bad news," the old man said, "You will find that this town is just the same as the one you left!"
Re:A story I heard... (Score:2)
Competition is the difference (Score:3, Interesting)
No competition in govt. means the quality of output is not compared to a competitor. There are no standards nor metrics that have any independant oversight. The result is obvious. Poeple in govt. tend to get lazy and do less and less for more and more pay because they can. What standards can they be compared to? Who holds them accountable? The govt. is too big to have any real accountability.
In the civilian sector you have to make money. Yeah there is plenty of fat/red tape/ incompetance in large corporations. But it doesn't last forever. Any company that gets fat, happy and lazy will eventually lose in the marketplace. Just look at any large tech company in the last 10 years to see what a difference competition makes. When was the last time the military or fed govt. laid off a _large_ portion of it's workforce because they stopped bringing in enough income? The last time I checked, the govt just borrows more and more money when income goes down. It'd be nice in the civilain sector if companies could just borrow their way out of financial woes but unfortunately the civlian sector has to budget and follow normal economics.
Therefore no waste, incompetance and lazy tenured people who are mean, lazy and disfunctional (been to get a drivers license lately? Imagine millions of poeple in one organization just like that. Now think of the fed. govt.).
Hopefully getting into the civilian sector is not too much of a shock since you will now have to justify your value by production and not by how much "time" you have put in (unless you go union - that has the same problems fed govt has).
My $.02.
Start your own company (Score:2)
Re:Start your own company (Score:3, Insightful)
Thing is, everyone is somebody else's "bozo", had you been sucessfull in your start-up the "bozo's" would be working for you. The only way to avoid "bozo's" is to live like a hermit and even a hermit does stupid shit to themselves every now and then.
Military or corporate (Score:2)
Company size etc. (Score:2)
Sm
The military works best when it's being a military (Score:2)
And I think it's a pretty universal rule that when your organization, whether it's military or civilian, will work best when they are focused on some kind of mission. This is especially true for the military because so many of our rul
Not in the slightest... (Score:2, Interesting)
A project that the private sector will complete inside of 9 months will take 2 years inside the government. The reasons for this are fairly straightforward.
1. Contractors (the big boys, not my company necessarily) have NO i
Not 20? (Score:2)
20 is a very, very long time but 30+ years of retirement pay (plus they still do COLAs to
Military promotion is *very* clear cut. (Score:4, Informative)
The United States Military is many ways a highly inefficent organization in the micro, and lord knows it is filled with bureaucracy that is phenomonal. That said, one of the strong points of the military is the promotion structure.
I have worked at a lot of different jobs in the 17 years since I have been out of the military, from very small shops to enterprise situations, and have never seen anywhere that the promotion situation is as clear-cut as the military. The rules for promotion in the military are phenomonally well definied. There is no guessing and the need for promotion politicing is *by far* the lowest of any organization I have ever been in or even heard of.
It is also completely color and gender blind, which is getting to be the standard in the US, but sure isn't in every shop I have seen.
That said, to be fair to the poster, in the critera for promotion, work performed tends to come about the middle of the list of things that determine your promotion status. Military bearing (a catchall for how well you meet the basic military requirements for behavior and action) for example, is often at least if not more important than your actual job performance at the lower ranks (which the poster is if he served 6 years). But if you are joining the military in the first place, you pretty much know that unless you aren't too bright. At least I sure did.
I am not pushing the military here, nor disagreeing with the poster's basic tenent that the military can be a phenomonally frustrating work envrionment. My decision to get out was definitely the correct one for me and I haven't looked back. But once I got a good taste of civilian experience, the one thing that kept impressing me about the military was the promotion system. Of course, that said, I have gotten a *lot* further in civilian life than I ever would have in the military rank structure. I sucked with the military bearing stuff, but that wasn't the fault of the military, I am the one who signed up to wear the green suit.
Go to School (Score:2)
Military, Inc. (Score:3, Interesting)
And he was serious, he went into details on the similarities of his training and an MBA program, though I suppose the MBA didn't involve automatic weapons.
There's red tape in any large organization. I've you've developed an allergy to it, go into business for yourself, or a small company with good people.
Kinda depressing... (Score:2, Insightful)
Grin and Bear IT (Score:3, Insightful)
Which is good news. Many thousands of people have found careers doing interesting, lucrative work among the sea of nonsense that is the business world. It just takes a sense of humor. If you still want more after a military IT career, you're probably qualified.
Of course we're a living Dilbert strip... (Score:2)
The only loyalty corporations are required to maintain is loyalty to the almighty dollar.
One reason the military is more snafu'd than usual is because they began importing modern corporate management techniques several decades ago. If you don't believe me, re-read Colin Powell's autobiography sometime...
The TAO of Dilbert (Score:5, Insightful)
On the other side, I am the owner of a 15 person IT consulting firm which services only companies of 10 to 200, and so I have worked with over 50 companies of this size - in addition to owning one.
Here is the simple truth of the matter:
If a small company runs on politics, rather than business sense, it goes out of business. Yes there are exceptions - owner has a huge chunk of cash to burn - but this is very largely true. So there is very little b.s. in small business.
In large businesses, sad but true, it becomes very very hard to distinguish the true business contribution of one person from another. Also, the consequence of a good / bad decision may take years to come to light. So, whether people say so or not, you are judged on how well you fit into the culture. If you know this, understand it and accept it, you will do fine. If you act like a typical engineer and say "but my idea was better", you will be miserable. Instead of being upset at the fact that the MBA's are running the show, sit back and ask yourself why that is. If you are as smart as you think you are - you will figure it out.
The fact is that the success of big business depends on people working together. And this quality, one of fitting in, is easier to pick out than what the true ROI of converting all those Windows servers to Linux is.
Think really, really hard on this. Don't reject reality and say "it stinks" - use a bit of ju jitsu - accept reality, understand why this reality exists, and use that understanding in an effective way to achieve your personal vision of success.
A way of thinking
This reality stinks
It shouldn't be this way
I can't affect what happens
A better way of thinking
What is really going on here?
It is this way, why is that so?
I can affect how I react to what happens.
Do this and you may be very happy at a big business since you will learn how to rise within it to the point that you have real influence. If you don't understand this you will be frustrated regardless of where you work.
The Grass Is Always Greener (Score:3, Insightful)
I did 4.5 yrs active and another 3 with the guard. I've worked in the private sector and for state and local government. Here's how I see it:
When I was "in" there was one thing I knew for certain, the USAF was the most disorganized Mickey Mouse operation in the world. Not a doubt in my mind. It's amazing how I knew everything when I was between 19 and 24.
After working for all these other places and governments I am now certain that the USAF is one of the most organized teams anywhere in the world. They have a plan, they train for the plan and they execute the plan. Nobody anywhere else does it as well as they do.
If you want organization and logic, it doesn't get any better.
No, I'm not joking.
Don't Knock "Soft Skills" (Score:5, Insightful)
When Bob got his project greenlighted when my supervisor did not, because Bob was capable of making a business case for it at a meeting chaired by the guy he'd been grooming for months, was that B.S? Seems to me like thats "creative use of resources". You can either continue to laugh ruefully at the world and scorn "small talk" and "politics" and "useless meetings and reports and that bureacratic "#$"%" or you can be like Bob.
Your question -- and an answer (Score:3, Interesting)
The answer, sadly, is a resounding no.
Your individual skills (troubleshooting, coding, organising, selling, whatever) are the stuff that you _do_. The "work" part of work IS the politics. The "work" part of work is dealing with 9-5, 5 days a week on the books, and 8-7 and sometimes on weekends in reality.
That's why it's called "work" and not "play". That's why you get paid money -- because while we would probably all continue to code, mess with hardware, organise, conceptualise in our free time should we not be working -- we expect a big pay packet to deal with the bullshit.
It's the difference between micro-evolution and macro-evolution. You can micro-evolve in any company -- go from Programmer 3rd Class to Programmer 2nd Class, for example -- but to completely move up or even across the ladder is rare, precisely because if you're actually good at what you do, you won't be good at the things that guarantee promotion.
Google the "Peter Principle [google.com]". Look up the "60% rule" (60% of your time inside any company bigger than 10 people will be spent on servicing "how things are done around here" -- not actually your "job description" stuff).
Work is work, and if you're lucky the stuff you're actually good at will align slightly with it.
An Honest Answer (Score:3, Insightful)
No. Given your concerns - disorganization and mismanagement, merit-rewards and bureaucracy - non-military employers are, in my experience, always worse in every category.
This is simply the nature of the beast. The military loves to plan, and is allowed to. Its budgets are set ahead of time, its goals and standards are relatively well-defined and stable, its policies and merit system relatively clear cut.
The closer you get to a purely commercial venture, the farther away you get from all of those things. An aggressively company in a competitive market is much more reactive than pre-planned. Budget and goals can change instantly as management's perception of the market changes. One twitchy exec can wipe out a whole division in a heartbeat. Even when the business is stable, standards and policies tend to be ad hoc. Such standards and policies that do exist, exist only to make your life harder. If you try to do something new, you have to convince the bureaucracy first; but if something non-standard and anti-policy does get done, you will have to accomodate it: nobody is going to pay the replace a working dohicky with a compliant dohicky that does the same thing.
As for merits and rewards: while your supervisor may try to be fair (or may not), the bigger issue is that he can only split the pot he is given. If you do brilliant, excellent work for a company, (or division of a company, or product line within the division) which is not profitable "enough", you get nada. Conversely, if you are a lucky screw-off who works for a group that fell into and owns a particularly profitable niche, you can do pretty well even though you and everybody else are almost worthless. Whether that is good or bad, it's hard to argue that it's fair.
In my opinion, having worked for a range of employers, you will find the easiest transition at defense contractors or well-heeled acedemic institutions. They tend to plan and have stable budgets, and don't worry to much about competively pressures. If you are spectacularly brilliant, you might find that one of the big, successful high-tech companies you. They can be horrible places, but if they are big enough, rich enough, and you are good enough, you can be insulated against much of that horribleness. But, most important of all, stay away from startups - especially privately-held startups - double especially family-owned startups. The unfairness and disorder found there would leave you absolutely breathless.
Note to
bad attitude (Score:3, Insightful)
Being aware of politics doesn't mean that you need to turn into a Machiavellian maniac, it means that you recognize how things work, try to improve things where you can, and still have the smarts to survive when other people screw up or conspire against you (and always keep in mind that screw-ups are far more frequent than deception).
Having said that, there are some bad organizations out there that really don't function well; you can try to spot them before you get into them, but if you find yourself in a bad situation, just start looking for a new job.
what about retirement? (Score:3, Insightful)
If you don't want to stay military, consider a government job and work yourself toward retirement.
No corporate jobs have pension or retirement any more, and the US government benefits have got to be better than most big corporations.
This is a good time to look at the long view.
Re:by honest (Score:2, Funny)
If Al Gore is right, that could be possible in the near future.
Then again, he's been wrong before. Remember Manbearpig?