←back to thread

Understanding how bureaucracy develops

(dhruvmethi.substack.com)
192 points dhruvmethi | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
sevensor ◴[] No.41889622[source]
When you treat every negative outcome as a system failure, the answer is more systems. This is the cost of a blameless culture. There are places where that’s the right answer, especially where a skilled operator is required to operate in an environment beyond their control and deal with emergent problems in short order. Aviation, surgery. Different situations where the cost of failure is lower can afford to operate without the cost of bureaucratic compliance, but often they don’t even nudge the slider towards personal responsibility and it stays at “fully blameless.”
replies(13): >>41890119 #>>41890303 #>>41890339 #>>41890571 #>>41891032 #>>41891181 #>>41891213 #>>41891385 #>>41891417 #>>41893574 #>>41894181 #>>41897147 #>>41903458 #
hypeatei ◴[] No.41890119[source]
I've never seen it put so succinctly but this is the issue I have with blameless culture. We can design CI pipelines, linters, whatever it is to stop certain issues with our software from being released but if someone is incompetent, they don't care and will find a way to fuck something up and you can only automate so much.
replies(3): >>41891122 #>>41891907 #>>41894237 #
1. stoperaticless ◴[] No.41891907[source]
I guess we should not take blameless to the extreme.

Some feedback must exist. (calm, obective and possibly private) Eventually it is up to the manager or manager’s manager to be aware what is happening and take action if critically needed.