Otherwise I don't see why you couldn't do lower value tasks with flexibility to abandon them if something higher value comes up
One that is very important: Do you have another opportunity to accept? There is nothing better to get a job than being employed.
If you do have a offer, consider if you take; but if you don't, try to get one while you are employed and jump ship when it's a better one; repeat.
For the first 10 years or so, this is relevant. After that you can figure out what you really want to do.
Early career pick learning and exposure to different technologies, processes, and company organizations.
That being said, this job market is pretty bad for the youngins so unless you are top 1% of noobs I would say focusing on stability and learning would be my north stars in the next 3 years.
Most people either want hypergrowth idiocy or to be bought by the people doing hypergrowth idiocy.
Setting consistent expectations means you can plan, you can actually reasonably budget, you can have predictability in your business dealings - if you are trying to run a good business these are all real features instead of "puts out more code that might or might not make us money, but at least we were pulling all nighters and adding perceived meaning to our lives!"
Doing a little bit of "glue work" can make you indispensable and also a hero to your team if it makes everyone's work life a whole lot better and no one else knows how to do it.
Not to be sarcastic but just to offer an observation: in a sufficiently large or bureaucratic organization, preventing an incident from happening can rarely get you any credit or visibility. Such achievement falls into the bucket of "what you're supposed to do". So, those who navigate company dynamics well would rather let the incident happen and then be loud on the follow-up action items. The trick is not to turn an incident into a diaster, so it's a dedicate act.
If you save a sales deal, they'll cheer the sales staff. And pay them a commission, which you will receive no part of.
jazz9k•3d ago
tonyedgecombe•3d ago
whattheheckheck•3d ago
But understand the ecosystem. People make promises that arent entirely dependent on them to be able to deliver
tonyedgecombe•3d ago
whattheheckheck•1d ago
holografix•3d ago
galleywest200•3d ago
zamadatix•3d ago
harimau777•3d ago
Definitely! It's been that way everywhere I've ever worked. Unless you are churning out code at maximum speed then it's only a matter of time before you get fired.
Schiendelman•3d ago
SpicyLemonZest•3d ago
One common misconception the article touches on, for example, is that Jira tickets represent latent task assignments, such that you should always be working on some specific Jira ticket and immediately pick up a new one when you finish or are awaiting review on the last one. That's not how the most successful engineers work, and often it's not even really what management wants.
projektfu•3d ago
gorjusborg•3d ago
I've found that most of that autonomy comes with trust, and that trust gets unlocked via good relationships, and good relationships get unlocked by a history of good communication.
You are 100% correct that every person has agency, the trick is to get yourself into a social dynamic where it is acceptable to assert it.
hilariously•1h ago
qazxcvbnmlp•3d ago
QuantumNoodle•2d ago
patmcc•15m ago