
What I Learned from Having Steve Jobs Swear at Me - yarapavan
https://www.wsj.com/articles/what-i-learned-from-having-steve-jobs-swear-at-me-1538054700
======
leoh
Weird take. But here goes. Jobs was a jerk. But -- speaking for myself here
and many of my colleagues -- we engineers are, ourselves, a pretty egotistical
bunch. And when operating from a place of ego, it's just a lot harder to get
great work done. If someone can simultaneously (a) crush your ego while (b)
implicitly telling you that you are, in spite of your errors, capable of great
work... well, some great things can happen. It no longer becomes an issue
about impressing someone (Jobs was notoriously difficult to please) -- it
instead becomes a matter of producing excellent work.

But what do I know. I have several friends that worked for jobs directly. And
he could in fact be a jerk. I have heard him privately described as needing to
piss on things. But as a friend of mine said -- "he almost always was right."

Incidentally, this position I am taking is to some degree a somewhat Zen /
Tibetan Buddhist position. That is, that dissolution of the ego is the most
important thing for our well-being. And that teachers, but also anyone,
really, that challenges us could actually -- if seen from a pretty advanced
perspective -- be seen to help us wake up. To quote a zen master, Torei Enji:

"If by any chance such a person should turn against us, become a sworn enemy
and abuse and persecute us, we should sincerely bow down with humble language,
in reverent belief that he or she is the merciful avatar of Buddha, who uses
devices to emancipate us from sinful karma that has been produced and
accumulated upon ourselves by our own egoistic delusion and attachment through
countless cycles of kalpas."

This is not to say that Jobs was a "Buddha"... but that, perhaps, anyone who
challenges us in a tremendous way... may be in a way helping direct us to
waking up, being our best "self."

~~~
glogla
> "he almost always was right."

Except when he died of treatable cancer because of his own arrogance and
stupidity. Or when he denied paternity of his child.

~~~
tomhoward
Comments like this can really spoil discussion threads. There's nothing for
anyone to learn here, it just panders to people's pre-established positions.

Whether or not his cancer was so easily treatable (experts have written
articles disputing this), "arrogance and stupidity" is a rough thing to say
about someone facing a life-threatening diagnosis, dealing with all the fear
and uncertainty that goes with that, and having to make a call on how best to
confront it.

The paternity thing was of course a black mark on his legacy, but he was
young, and we just don't know what kind of fears and unresolved issues might
have been influencing his behaviour at that stage. Whatever the case, it's
irrelevant to the topic at hand.

The whole point of this discussion topic is to take a nuanced view of Jobs'
conduct in a particular context. It could do without rage-bait comments like
this.

~~~
glogla
I am replying to a comment is basically saying "hey he was a fucked up abuser,
but he was right some of the time, and he was rich, so he must have been doing
something right, right? "

If we, as a humanity, are to stay on this world long-term, we have to create a
society where humanity is more important than success and money. We can't
idolize abusers, manipulators and psychopaths because they are successful
CEOs.

~~~
tomhoward
> "basically saying"

Your summary is a gross oversimplification of what was a very thoughtful
comment.

Like I said, the comment you replied to, and the original article, are
valuable for their nuance. Your replies are deliberately lacking in nuance and
therefore derail the discussion.

Nobody is focusing on how "rich" or "successful" he was; in this discussion
people are only talking about how he led his company to build many different
products that many people care about and find extremely useful.

As you point out, humanity has many important challenges to solve, and in
order to solve them we need leaders who can get results.

I can agree with you that it would be ideal if those leaders were good-natured
people who treat others well.

Finding the right balance between getting results and treating people well is
an important, complex topic that needs to be discussed with care, not drowned
in rage.

Edit: For what it's worth, in the past 24 hours I've posted another comment
defending people's right to criticise Elon Musk and invoking The Emperor's New
Clothes as a demonstration of why it's important to be free to criticise
powerful people, no matter how much they claim to be on a mission to "save the
world".

So I'm not against criticism of successful people. I just like it to be
substantive, and of the kind that promotes interesting discussions and
generates valuable new insights.

------
acjohnson55
It frustrates me to no end to see people apologize for the abusive behavior of
powerful people. If this engineer can be expected to find a better font, his
boss can be expected to express what he found so unacceptable in an actual
critique.

~~~
aikah
Yep, apparently harassment, verbal assault and abuse is just seen as yet
another management technique these days and engineers will apologize for it,
which is a paradox in the era of "safe spaces" and "code of conducts".

~~~
acjohnson55
I really don't think it's a new thing. If anything, it's less acceptable than
ever. Even in the military, I think they've toned it down from the Full Metal
Jacket-style abuse.

------
jballanc
When I was at Apple, I once heard Steve describe his roll within the company
as "hire the best people and say 'no' a lot". Also, behind closed doors, Steve
swore _a LOT_. In other words, him calling something "dog shit" was not at all
an unusual or unexpected utterance. I think if your only experience of him is
the "Steve"-notes and press interviews, then this story probably comes across
a bit differently than it did in reality for Ken.

------
neonate
[http://archive.is/Ppep1](http://archive.is/Ppep1)

------
alex_young
This article is a little incoherent TBH.

How is debasing someone's work a more effective way of motivating better
future work than simply explaining clearly what you need improved?

Angry words are necessarily going to come across as personal no matter how
much you want them to mean something else.

~~~
everdev
In my opinion, anger is an excellent short-term motivator. Jobs probably
wanted something done that day or that week and had to get pissed to motivate
everyone to work extra hours to get it done. It certainly does come with a
long-term price though of people thinking you're a jerk and burning out on
your anger.

So, it depends on what your goals are. But, if you don't mind burning through
staff and relationships, getting pissed will probably get you more short-term
bang for your buck than being kind and calm.

~~~
fenomas
> Jobs probably wanted something done that day or that week and had to get
> pissed to motivate everyone..

That's possible, but I think "Jobs got angry because he angered easily,
regardless of whether it was necessary to motivate people" would be the more
parsimonious explanation.

------
whitepoplar
For anyone who's curious, here's the best video I've found that breaks apart
the idea of an "asshole":
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRRvjZ_XNog](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRRvjZ_XNog)

Essentially, people can be dicks and non-dicks, while simultaneously being
givers or takers. Nobody likes a taker, even if they're nice, because that
person doesn't help one grow. On the other hand, someone can be a real dick,
but in a "giving" way that helps achieve a better outcome for both
individuals.

In the case of Jobs, one could argue that his personality was justified not
only because great work came out of it, but also because the people doing that
work became the best version of themselves in the process. If someone is
capable of great work and they produce good work, there's a certain kindness
to telling them that's not acceptable. But saying the exact same thing to
someone who's less capable can be mean.

------
KKKKkkkk1
_Imagine that your boss told you straight to your face that your project is
“dog shit.” Next, imagine that this boss is Steve Jobs. That’s what happened
to me when I was working as the principal engineer of iPhone software during
Apple’s golden years.

What was the right way for me to react? It would have been a bad idea for me
to agree with Steve, raising the question of why I would offer him inferior
work. But it would have done no good to disagree either, unless I was willing
to enter into an on-the-spot debate with a famously mercurial CEO—and at that
moment, I wasn’t._

The answer is easy. Immediately tell your boss that he is using inappropriate
language, stop the conversation, and report him to HR. I'm pretty sure this is
what Apple's official policy for this sort of situations tells you to do.

~~~
the-dude
You seem to assume HR is there for you ( it is not ).

~~~
im3w1l
If you fear that HR will not take your side than bring it up with your union.

~~~
kosei
What union?

------
sambroner
These stories about Jobs often describe him as an oracle. He clearly helped
produced uniquely excellent products (just by virtue of their success), but
was he ever the ideator? Or was his main gift sifting great work from
everything else?

~~~
TheOtherHobbes
He copied, refined, and simplified, with a rare sense of taste that was often
missing in the original projects. (E.g. Xerox Star vs Mac. The Star was a much
better computer, the Mac was a much better consumer product.)

He was also an abusive narcissist. The narcissistic drive to be visibly
superior to other people was a core motivation for him.

Someone less driven - or possibly damaged - wouldn't have been nearly as
passionate about the end result.

It's an open question if it's possible to do insanely great work without any
dysfunction at all. Narcissistic abuse and management-as-ego-boost is such a
common thing in US (and US influenced) business culture that it's almost
impossible to imagine a corporate culture with no trace of it.

I have a suspicion that a more easy-going culture would be better in some
ways, especially with humane long-term strategy, but might lack some colour.

It would be good to find out one day if the trade-off is acceptable. (It might
well be, depending on your strategy horizon.)

------
SomewhatLikely
There's an important difference between criticizing a person and criticizing
someone's work. The work can be iterated on and improved through additional
effort. If your criticism comes off as being directed at the person it can
have very demotivational effects. Also, not everyone is looking out for the
subtlety of where the criticism is directed. So it's best to make the
distinction clear.

------
th0ma5
I wonder if Steve was still around if he'd be softening up some?

~~~
mrhackerpoland
His style of management got him success which he envisioned, why would he
change it?

------
liquid153
“What I Learned From Having Steve Jobs Sh!tting on Me”

Another apple employee

------
sandebert
[https://outline.com/jaDXPP](https://outline.com/jaDXPP)

------
RickJWagner
Bad spin.

By saying "Jobs did it, but it's kind of ok", the author is giving license to
every self-styled Jobs wannabe that thinks they are headed for greatness.

Jerks should be called out as jerks, no matter how much success or failure
they have had. Success and decency as a human being are orthogonal.

------
aaronbrethorst
Trauma bonding:

 _A psychologically abusive relationship is a rollercoaster, with punishment
and then intermittent reinforcement of kindness when you “behave.” This means
the body is going through its own turmoil, with high levels of the stress
hormone cortisol, paired with dopamine when given affection as a reward._

[https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/trauma-bonding-
abus...](https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/trauma-bonding-abusive-
relationships-why-people-stay-domestic-violence-addiction-
partners-a7940686.html)

------
mrhackerpoland
When i first worked in Finland for a very successful mobile game development
company, the project manager told me, whatever you are working on is complete
shit, we can't afford you to be wasting our money on this. Every single minute
you spend in arguing for your idea is paid by us which is true.

After that i got a blow to my ego and started doing what manager told me to.
Looking back, i was really wasting their money and once i got blow to my ego,
my productivity drastically increased.

I used to be fast learning workholic and yes, i need constant blows to my ego
to prevent me from derailing myself into oblivion. So, i would have respect
Steve jobs, if he would have been asshole to me.

Edit: I simply detailed my personal experience, so I don't understand your
downvotes.

~~~
kweks
Rovio was/is a special case for bizarre management.

------
mrhackerpoland
I am a masocist, i wouldn't be in development getting insulted by a lifeless
computer everyday if i was normal.

Anyone who insults me and motivates to offer my best, gets my respect and best
work. Heck, i would work for more hours if you can offer me such
cortisol+dopamine effect which comes from such treatment.

Think about this. Who struggles with a lifeless computer when they only get
the sufferings and frustration which comes with it?

Swearing at me is the least you could do to provoke any response.

I like Steve Jobs and I've yet to find the CEOs who are like him. This is
probably why there is no other apple.

