Pretending that identifying stakeholders' needs, communicating the solutions, and delivering them are the keys to succeeding in corporate politics is a joke. It's our parent's telling us that we need to be good for Santa Claus. Human politics is an enormously deep subject, and a newbie will get trampled every single time. If you are sitting at a poker table and don't know who the sucker is within five minutes, congratulations, you are that sucker.
The majority of marriages end in divorce. This doesn't mean that I should treat all prospective partners as someone I will eventually divorce. That is not healthy for me, the people I interact with, or my future.
But, it does mean that I forced [1] my 2nd wife to sign a pre-nuptual agreement, and I go around recommending others to do so as well.
[1] she initially refused to sign it, I told her the wedding's off if she doesn't, so she did; she's still unhappy about this and hates me for a day whenever she's reminded of it; this was 5 years ago, we're still married and not divorcing currently; while I know it doesn't sound romantic, it was the right thing to do because people and life circumstances change _a lot_; I hope we will stay together forever and get buried next to each other, but I had the same hope with my 1st wife and then she cheated on me when my then-startup was failing, so now, much wiser, I can see a 1000 ways for such hopes to fall apart
This unhappiness that your wife has will not go away and you will deal with situation at some point. These hard conversations have a way of finding you.
I won't tell you to tear up the pre-nup, but I highly recommend coming up with a compromise (over time) that meets both of your needs.
My man, all of us would. I talk to my wife often about this. We are just built differently and that is what makes the opposite sex so attractive tbh. That irrationality comes out in different positive ways I'm sure (or you wouldn't have married), you can't just turn it on and off (unfortunately)
Did you tell here beforehand (earlier in relationship) you wanted a prenup, or only after proposal?
You should be aware that it's a possibility and act accordingly. Pretending divorce is impossible is what's unhealthy; preparing for the possibility will make for a healthier marriage and a better future, whether you ultimately divorce or not.
This is pedantic, but if I understand correctly, this is not true anymore. Moreover, this number is inflated by a set of people getting divorced multiple times.
I don't think that's actually true. Identifying the stakeholders' needs is absolutely something that will lead to success in corporate politics. Just don't expect their needs to be about building decent products.
I work at a big company. There are parts that are nepotistic and there are parts less so. I just utilize the parts that work.
It’s like a restaurant that has bad food. Do I avoid the restaurant? No I still go and get the 1 good dish.
Why would I deprive myself because the restaurant doesn’t tick every box? On the other hand, why would I go in ever thinking it’s a good restaurant?
In this case that means being in that golf game or figuring out a way how you can use corruption to get good outcomes done.
Or, more likely if your moral compass is sound, quit and find an organisation that isn’t like this.
While I agree with you that random corporate world does behave this way, companies where founders are still around - don’t - because they’re mission driven.
A solid understanding of behavioral psychology may make it obvious, but like you mention, one could also just open a newspaper.
Nothing wrong with being good at golf above if you want to. However this is about politics and that just means good enough to play and talk about the game.
edit: over par not under...
1-2 over par is shooting 90-100 which is much more achievable :)
Who is going to do your job while you stroke egos?
Victim blaming as usual. The problem is you don't do the CTO's job in addition to your own....f-off with that hustle life nonsense.
the important point is to be known a few levels up. That will get you places.
i'm not good at this, but people who are have gone farther than me.
Non-technical skills matter. People and organizations have multi-faceted incentives. If you think the incentives of the people making decisions are leading to bad outcomes, then learn how to make that heard to them. Learn the situation as they see it, and use your own, better-aligned(?) incentives to improve the organization. And if it's not worth trying, so be it. But you need to accept that much of the world is you live in will continue to be shaped by the people who care enough to see "that hustle life nonsense" as a worthwhile trade.
Doing weird shit like learning & going golfing just to keep idiots from making bad decisions shouldn't be part of our jobs.
[1] I don't think "victim" is a good term; we can always go get other jobs or drive a school bus instead
Playing golf alone will not get you in the circle.
Even if you never played golf getting invited to play golf by someone from the circle gets you play the golf.
If you are not the type or not the material you won’t be invited.
I am senior devsecops and save company from crashing once a year - people like me. But business guys get to play golf I am just a worker bee for them.
You're arguing against a point they weren't making, I think
note that you need lots of other social skills to use this opportunity. They are playing a game and you are a side character - if you say too much you are out of line. However you can talk for 2 minutes (out of more than an hour long round) - use your minute well.
Another way to look at it is that your role isn't in the decision making circle, even if you are on a project that is supposed to help make a decision. I was in this role evaluating vendors solutions, in hindsight I can see how I conflated the involvement in the evaluation process with the decision making, those aren't the same.
Think of it like buying a car. You could be on the project to evaluate car companies, features, test drive them and document findings but just because you did all of that doesn't mean you're a decision maker and shouldn't have any emotional attachment to whatever the decision ends up being. Yes if they make a decision with bad trade-offs, like a car with a lot of issues, you may be dealing with those and it may suck but that's your role.
I think part of politics around technical decisions is recognizing if your role has any attributes of being involved with the decision making or if your input is just one of many, potentially minor, inputs.
It's like two people discussing how to handle difficult conversations in a romantic relationship, and a third guy comes in and says "this conversation is irrelevant because every time I date someone they cheat on me". I'm sorry you're dealing with that problem, but it is not really related to the topic at hand.