Corporate Power Vertical Properties
In Yandex, the founding fathers are ideal for IT ... and what kind of positive book about them and about Yandex’s ideology did Sokolov-Mitrich write ... But what has developed in Yandex for several years “below”? In this post, the last link shows - complete darkness .
The second example - such a smart and correct Sergey Galitsky controls the Magnet (read his interview), but some kind of hell is happening “below”: “We are not slaves” his employees shout .
Why is that? What kind of evil rock is haunting big companies?
For simplicity, let us ignore the fact that far from the best climb up and consider the vertical of power in the Company from normal people.
Even in this ideal case, it has, and with time intensifies, the following negative properties:
1. Strengthening the severity of the movement of orders from top to bottom.
2. Positive feedback and distortion of reporting when moving information from the bottom up.
3. A decrease in mutual understanding with an increase in the number of intermediate links between employees.
Next, we consider them in more detail and formulate:
4. Tips for employees going to work in large companies.
5. His own humble opinion of why Yandex is still good compared to many others.
Top-down movement of orders and everything else. You did not expect to see another picture here?
1.1. Each manager, broadcasting the task of his boss to his subordinates, quite naturally wants to lay a temporary reserve for insurance.
Therefore, the more intermediate chiefs, those in the same time frame to become performers.
1.2. If there is a request for information from above, then each intermediate level asks a little more than what needs to be reported further up - to “own the full situation”, to believe in the completeness and correctness of the answer provided by your subordinates. As a result, the amount of work "in the trash" is growing as a geometric progression from the number of intermediate superiors.
1.3. The fact that “at the top” was meant as a recommendation, suitable only “in most cases”, “at the bottom” becomes strictly binding without options.
Thus, the vertical, when passing from top to bottom, works as a kind of “amplifier of evil”: there is a tightening of all requirements, an increase in the amount of extra work, and an increase in the wall of bureaucracy.
2.1. Nobody wants to create a negative impression on their boss, because any intermediate bosses embellish the existing situation. No, he doesn’t lie, but smooths corners - he is silent about unnecessary details of processes and results. Do not think that only for your own sake, of course, and for the sake of your subordinates: you will please the boss, form a positive impression on him, and he will fill both you and your subordinates with more benefits, more posts, and expand the area of responsibility and the zone of influence.
2.2. The higher the boss, the more salaries and bonuses his subordinates receive. Moreover, they are inclined to agree with him - they will go after him for everything in order to maintain their status, all the same, all the hardships of change will fall on the lower level, and not on them.
The intermediate links of the chiefs for the same reason will agree with the change (though the lower they are, the greater their internal rejection will be), and they will work out their part of the plan, i.e. will take on some of the responsibility.
Therefore, the reports on the results of the changes will try their best to give positive ones.
This is especially aggravated by the change of CEO - if the old deputies really want to stay in the new team, then they will fulfill any whim. At the expense of his subordinates, of course.
2.3. The higher the vertical, the more the boss is inflated by the approval of his decisions coming from below. As a result, over time, he begins to feel himself a holy benefactor (one that is more modest - half-holy).
Holy benefactor, halo available.
2.4. The messenger who brought the bad news is chopped off his head.
But this is in the IG, and in our humane country - they are not promoted, they are not promoted, they are fired.
Just imagine the situation - everyone loves and respects the boss (see clause 2.3.), Clever people in high positions gave positive feedback to all his decisions, everything is fine in reporting. And here comes the engineer, and says - you made idiotic decisions, and the arctic fox comes to you. Here's what answer to such impudence? The boss will answer: you’re a fool, you don’t see the whole battlefield from your basement, as I am from my mountain. Yes, you are also rude, inadequate.
Half-holy, I give you work, but you ... do not like it - the company’s doors are always open “to the exit”, we don’t need such brawlers, we have a friendly team, etc. etc.
Oh, scary.
Consequence: The hierarchy is not made up of children, so everyone at their level laughs at the stupidities of high authorities (option: curse), but there is no one to shout "the king is naked."
Comment. The tale of the naked kings of Yandex is not the worst option. For example, Dr. Mengele thought to himself that he was engaged in science. It is a pity that then he did not want to take the opportunity to defend his views at the Hague court - he hid and was not found. But about such figures later, now we have an abstract ideal case - the vertical of power from normal people.
3.1. Those who pay the mortgage and take up the salary, and those who think “how to get the second billion to protect themselves from losing the first” have different life problems, different tasks, opinions and principles.
They have different problems and tasks
3.2. Different levels of the hierarchy have different plans for the future of the Company - someone is already preparing for the conclusion of assets, bankruptcy and resale, while someone has dreamed of working there and further, naively thinks that the larger the office, the more stable the work in it.
3.3. At the top, the organization seems flexible and adaptive, and below it is bureaucratic to insanity.
Both views are partially true - at the top, the “strategists” change everything flexibly, without delving into the “little things”, stepping over layers of their own rules and orders — they are the owners of their rules and know how to interpret them correctly. In addition, many of the restrictions at the top are advisory in nature (for most cases - remember?). At the bottom, these little things wedge together all the movement, because already binding. Strict adherence to all regulations is known to science as the “ Italian strike ” - a stoppage of work for formal reasons. In order for the Company to continue to work, “below” it is often necessary not to follow the rules, but to get out, beg to turn on the head and find common sense in it.
3.4. Direct bosses, in conversation with subordinates, attribute authorship of all negative changes to higher bosses. They are silent about their contribution. On the contrary, they took all measures to soften the blow to their team.
3.5. Ignorance of the context of decision-making, the true tasks assigned to the top management, the “strengthening of evil” when descending vertically down, lead to the fact that the decisions of the boss seem all the less adequate, the higher this boss is from you in the hierarchy.
4.1. Better get to work in the head offices - fewer levels of hierarchy from the main boss to you, more positive around, less bureaucracy. Abbreviations of both posts and the social package will affect you last. And let the horrors of such centralization now popular with you (more precisely, “Moscowization”) pass you by.
4.2. If there are no options and you are going to work in a branch, then make sure at least that the top operational management of the Company is able to work adequately with the branch structure and is not going to centralize it.
Ask what consulting firms are currently serving the company, what these consultants have done to other companies before.
What did the director do in his previous job? Maybe he is a universal “effective” manager, who previously worked in a garbage company, and now manages IT? (This is not a joke, this is a harsh past).
Find out what processes of transformation of the power vertical are going on in the office / were recently / are planned further.
4.3. Bear in mind that IT is an unstable area where you need to quickly run forward to stay in place. Therefore, IT in the company can either develop or degrade.
During the changes and experiments undertaken by the top management, IT will most likely be “optimized”, i.e. in fact - to shrink and degrade.
If you see complete hell, chaos, insanity and idiocy around, then you are an engineer.
But I tried to explain to you that the idiocy around you doesn’t always hide something bad like “dumping” a company, cheapening it before selling it, taking assets out of bankruptcy.
Often the actions of a certain set of top managers that contradict the interests of the main team are explained either by good intentions (to earn more, including for your salary), or even for personal purposes, but without the intention to drink all the company's blood (just a little sip )
All our people are good and want good, but the vertical worked for you as an amplifier of evil, and they were given positive feedback ... and a bonus.
And so it will be until the arrival of a full Arctic fox, which they can no longer ignore.
And then they will fly away with their golden parachutes , and you will remain in ...
Hm, stop, I’m writing a positive post.
Returning to Yandex.
Yandex employees - rejoice, your leaders noticed that the arctic fox has arrived.
Rejoice, your leaders are so good that they are able to admit their mistakes and give the command "return everything back." Alas, not everyone hassuch a steel such determination.
You have a hope that they are smart enough to compensate for the shortcomings of their company - to patch not only software, but also put props under the power vertical.
Believe me, not everyone is so lucky with the leaders.
And what is your arctic fox? Do not exaggerate, this is the maximum undershot .
1. How new leaders destroy the companies entrusted to them.
2. Our benefactors. The advice of Western consulting companies.
3. What should the new director do to correct the consequences of the board of the previous pseudo-efficient manager and his team.
The second example - such a smart and correct Sergey Galitsky controls the Magnet (read his interview), but some kind of hell is happening “below”: “We are not slaves” his employees shout .
Why is that? What kind of evil rock is haunting big companies?
For simplicity, let us ignore the fact that far from the best climb up and consider the vertical of power in the Company from normal people.
Even in this ideal case, it has, and with time intensifies, the following negative properties:
1. Strengthening the severity of the movement of orders from top to bottom.
2. Positive feedback and distortion of reporting when moving information from the bottom up.
3. A decrease in mutual understanding with an increase in the number of intermediate links between employees.
Next, we consider them in more detail and formulate:
4. Tips for employees going to work in large companies.
5. His own humble opinion of why Yandex is still good compared to many others.
Top-down movement of orders and everything else. You did not expect to see another picture here?
1. Strengthening the severity of the movement of tasks / orders / requests from top to bottom
1.1. Each manager, broadcasting the task of his boss to his subordinates, quite naturally wants to lay a temporary reserve for insurance.
Therefore, the more intermediate chiefs, those in the same time frame to become performers.
1.2. If there is a request for information from above, then each intermediate level asks a little more than what needs to be reported further up - to “own the full situation”, to believe in the completeness and correctness of the answer provided by your subordinates. As a result, the amount of work "in the trash" is growing as a geometric progression from the number of intermediate superiors.
1.3. The fact that “at the top” was meant as a recommendation, suitable only “in most cases”, “at the bottom” becomes strictly binding without options.
Thus, the vertical, when passing from top to bottom, works as a kind of “amplifier of evil”: there is a tightening of all requirements, an increase in the amount of extra work, and an increase in the wall of bureaucracy.
2. Positive feedback to the boss
2.1. Nobody wants to create a negative impression on their boss, because any intermediate bosses embellish the existing situation. No, he doesn’t lie, but smooths corners - he is silent about unnecessary details of processes and results. Do not think that only for your own sake, of course, and for the sake of your subordinates: you will please the boss, form a positive impression on him, and he will fill both you and your subordinates with more benefits, more posts, and expand the area of responsibility and the zone of influence.
Consequence: Both “manual” reporting, and even obtained with the help of “objective” automated control systems, can be significantly shifted from the true situation in a positive direction.
2.2. The higher the boss, the more salaries and bonuses his subordinates receive. Moreover, they are inclined to agree with him - they will go after him for everything in order to maintain their status, all the same, all the hardships of change will fall on the lower level, and not on them.
The intermediate links of the chiefs for the same reason will agree with the change (though the lower they are, the greater their internal rejection will be), and they will work out their part of the plan, i.e. will take on some of the responsibility.
Therefore, the reports on the results of the changes will try their best to give positive ones.
This is especially aggravated by the change of CEO - if the old deputies really want to stay in the new team, then they will fulfill any whim. At the expense of his subordinates, of course.
2.3. The higher the vertical, the more the boss is inflated by the approval of his decisions coming from below. As a result, over time, he begins to feel himself a holy benefactor (one that is more modest - half-holy).
Holy benefactor, halo available.
2.4. The messenger who brought the bad news is chopped off his head.
But this is in the IG, and in our humane country - they are not promoted, they are not promoted, they are fired.
Just imagine the situation - everyone loves and respects the boss (see clause 2.3.), Clever people in high positions gave positive feedback to all his decisions, everything is fine in reporting. And here comes the engineer, and says - you made idiotic decisions, and the arctic fox comes to you. Here's what answer to such impudence? The boss will answer: you’re a fool, you don’t see the whole battlefield from your basement, as I am from my mountain. Yes, you are also rude, inadequate.
Half-holy, I give you work, but you ... do not like it - the company’s doors are always open “to the exit”, we don’t need such brawlers, we have a friendly team, etc. etc.
Oh, scary.
Consequence: The hierarchy is not made up of children, so everyone at their level laughs at the stupidities of high authorities (option: curse), but there is no one to shout "the king is naked."
Yandex example. I can assume that some time ago Yandex introduced “changes” in the field of quality control. Maybe not at once, maybe it was a long process of degradation - it doesn’t matter. It is important that client users learned that everything is bad, before top management. And no one from within stopped these changes in time - those who could have stopped occupying too low positions (Section 2.4).
And if the voice from the lower floors reaches the top and flies, then along the way the vocabulary is so softened that the original message can no longer be understood. (paragraph 2.1)
Comment. The tale of the naked kings of Yandex is not the worst option. For example, Dr. Mengele thought to himself that he was engaged in science. It is a pity that then he did not want to take the opportunity to defend his views at the Hague court - he hid and was not found. But about such figures later, now we have an abstract ideal case - the vertical of power from normal people.
3. Decrease in mutual understanding with the increase in the number of intermediate links between employees
3.1. Those who pay the mortgage and take up the salary, and those who think “how to get the second billion to protect themselves from losing the first” have different life problems, different tasks, opinions and principles.
They have different problems and tasks
3.2. Different levels of the hierarchy have different plans for the future of the Company - someone is already preparing for the conclusion of assets, bankruptcy and resale, while someone has dreamed of working there and further, naively thinks that the larger the office, the more stable the work in it.
3.3. At the top, the organization seems flexible and adaptive, and below it is bureaucratic to insanity.
Both views are partially true - at the top, the “strategists” change everything flexibly, without delving into the “little things”, stepping over layers of their own rules and orders — they are the owners of their rules and know how to interpret them correctly. In addition, many of the restrictions at the top are advisory in nature (for most cases - remember?). At the bottom, these little things wedge together all the movement, because already binding. Strict adherence to all regulations is known to science as the “ Italian strike ” - a stoppage of work for formal reasons. In order for the Company to continue to work, “below” it is often necessary not to follow the rules, but to get out, beg to turn on the head and find common sense in it.
I am watching with interest now the attempt of one company to write down all its business processes in the form of regulations. Probably, top management thinks that in this way they will get rid of dependence on specific people. With the regulations, they say, and the monkeys will cope, and we will recruit them. Oh, you are my little ones ... Starting from a certain level, the more regulations there are, the more processes are slowed down, and the regulations tend to become obsolete. In addition, they are still waiting for the discovery of the existence, say, of a configuration space in IT systems, and that of shoving it entirely into UCMDB / NRI /, etc. and nobody in the world has managed to maintain relevance.
We fix: At different levels of the hierarchy - different ideas about their own organization.
3.4. Direct bosses, in conversation with subordinates, attribute authorship of all negative changes to higher bosses. They are silent about their contribution. On the contrary, they took all measures to soften the blow to their team.
Consequence: In the eyes of subordinates of the lower level, top managers are somewhere on the right hand of Satan.
Here, for example, it is in the eyes of techies - a feast during the plague: Feast-1, (sorry, lost the link where there were comments from techies) Feast-2
3.5. Ignorance of the context of decision-making, the true tasks assigned to the top management, the “strengthening of evil” when descending vertically down, lead to the fact that the decisions of the boss seem all the less adequate, the higher this boss is from you in the hierarchy.
4. Tips for employees
4.1. Better get to work in the head offices - fewer levels of hierarchy from the main boss to you, more positive around, less bureaucracy. Abbreviations of both posts and the social package will affect you last. And let the horrors of such centralization now popular with you (more precisely, “Moscowization”) pass you by.
4.2. If there are no options and you are going to work in a branch, then make sure at least that the top operational management of the Company is able to work adequately with the branch structure and is not going to centralize it.
Ask what consulting firms are currently serving the company, what these consultants have done to other companies before.
What did the director do in his previous job? Maybe he is a universal “effective” manager, who previously worked in a garbage company, and now manages IT? (This is not a joke, this is a harsh past).
Find out what processes of transformation of the power vertical are going on in the office / were recently / are planned further.
4.3. Bear in mind that IT is an unstable area where you need to quickly run forward to stay in place. Therefore, IT in the company can either develop or degrade.
During the changes and experiments undertaken by the top management, IT will most likely be “optimized”, i.e. in fact - to shrink and degrade.
5. Why is Yandex still good
If you see complete hell, chaos, insanity and idiocy around, then you are an engineer.
But I tried to explain to you that the idiocy around you doesn’t always hide something bad like “dumping” a company, cheapening it before selling it, taking assets out of bankruptcy.
Often the actions of a certain set of top managers that contradict the interests of the main team are explained either by good intentions (to earn more, including for your salary), or even for personal purposes, but without the intention to drink all the company's blood (just a little sip )
All our people are good and want good, but the vertical worked for you as an amplifier of evil, and they were given positive feedback ... and a bonus.
And so it will be until the arrival of a full Arctic fox, which they can no longer ignore.
And then they will fly away with their golden parachutes , and you will remain in ...
Hm, stop, I’m writing a positive post.
Returning to Yandex.
Yandex employees - rejoice, your leaders noticed that the arctic fox has arrived.
Rejoice, your leaders are so good that they are able to admit their mistakes and give the command "return everything back." Alas, not everyone has
You have a hope that they are smart enough to compensate for the shortcomings of their company - to patch not only software, but also put props under the power vertical.
Believe me, not everyone is so lucky with the leaders.
And what is your arctic fox? Do not exaggerate, this is the maximum undershot .
Further in the program:
1. How new leaders destroy the companies entrusted to them.
2. Our benefactors. The advice of Western consulting companies.
3. What should the new director do to correct the consequences of the board of the previous pseudo-efficient manager and his team.