Currently exactly there. Was hired to fill a real and actual 'gap between engineering and business'. As senior with decades of experience.

Turns out the team I'm working in (not above) really does not like change (i.e does not accept been-there-done-that-failed, as valid argument to do things different), looks down on 'business', often even on 'users' (technical pureness above everything else, above working software even) and most of all hates me for pointing out problems.

I'm still trying to find ways to fill my original 'problem' for which I came on board, but am also close to giving up, due to the negative energy all this is costing me.

So: good advice. But be certain the 'problem' you're hired for, is actually something that people want to solve.

I've been where you are and on this guys exact team. Give up and move on. Saw everyone who came in like you as a crafter leave or be fired after around a year.

This happened to me on my last hire, I asked what I should work on and didn't get much direction at all. I think I wasted like a year doing the wrong things and strongly considered quitting during that period.

Then I figured that just as I got rather vague direction on what I should do, there also wasn't anyone telling me what I should not do. So I started doing things in the intersection of being interesting and beneficial for the product.

So my advice would be: If there's no concrete problem to solve, find one that you like and be glad that you were given the freedom to do so.

disagree. When there's more to do and less direction, I think there's more opportunity to play a bigger part

Horseshoe instance. These are two very different situations with similar hiring criteria.

Interesting. What does horseshoe instance mean?

I think they meant this https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory

But tbh I don't entirely see how it applies here