
Ask HN: Company is growing and the culture shift is uncomfortable. What do I do? - klunger
We were a small consulting shop, with quirky and close coworkers. Suddenly (last 3 months) we have brought on an HR manager, a PR manager, a project manager manager, and many more developers.<p>Everything feels much more... corporate? Overly professional? I am struggling to think of how to describe it. The HR manager scares me, although I am not sure why.<p>I realize that all of this is <i>my</i> problem, that the issue is how I am reacting to things, not the things themselves. It is not something that anyone is doing wrong, it is just the nature of growth. Several people have quit because they do not like the changes, but I don&#x27;t really want to quit.<p>So... does anyone have any experience with this? I guess I just want some advice on how to reframe the situation, so it is acceptable to my preference for casual&#x2F;personal environments. Or maybe, I just want advice on how to keep things weird while growing.
======
Bar_Code
I know what you are going through. My last job was at Shutterstock, which went
from 50 people to 700 in 5 years. I'm doing it again now, we went from 60 to
90 people in 6 months.

I have found that there are inflection points whenever things double. That
could be people, revenue, office space, customers, etc. When this happens,
"debt" affects the company. You're probably much more familiar with tech debt,
and probably architectural debt. Maybe less familiar with organizational and
cultural debt. You simply can't do things the way you always have, they don't
scale. [http://steveblank.com/2015/05/19/organizational-debt-is-
like...](http://steveblank.com/2015/05/19/organizational-debt-is-like-
technical-debt-but-worse/)

Change is inevitable and required. If not managed, it could sink you. Some
people will quit regardless, they were probably not the right people for the
next phase. At first you don't need teams (you have 1 team), then you need to
have 2 teams, them more. This change is disruptive and affects productivity
and morale. Read up on team maturity models (not CMM), it will help knowing
what phases you will be going through.
[http://www.businessballs.com/tuckmanformingstormingnormingpe...](http://www.businessballs.com/tuckmanformingstormingnormingperforming.htm)

I presented the team maturity models too my devs the last time we restructured
the teams. Multiple people came to me proudly stating they were in the
"storming" phase, which essentially is when you argue a lot. They knew it was
a phase, and frustration was reduced.

You do need leadership as you grow. A leader is not your best developer. The
HR manager may scare you because they are a "manager", not a "leader". Good
managers and leader can toggle between both roles. Too many people are great
managers and not leaders. Know the difference between a manager and leader,
know which ones you are missing.
[http://changingminds.org/disciplines/leadership/articles/man...](http://changingminds.org/disciplines/leadership/articles/manager_leader.htm)

~~~
bjelkeman-again
How is it different for you this time, going through this a second time?

~~~
Bar_Code
The first time I started as a developer on 1 team and evolved into a director
of 6 teams, each one a new business unit. I contributed code to most of the
teams I managed. I was not the one primarily responsible. I learned a lot as I
went, I was very inexperienced for what was required. I learned a lot of ways
NOT to do things. If I had to sum things up, I would say before I was helping
"connect the dots", now I am connecting all the dots.

This time around I am purely a leader and the one primarily in charge of tech.
My almost exclusive focus from the start is the people. I have to start over
on most things that I evolved through previously. \- I've taken on the
responsibility to create and define our culture. My last job I assisted in
this area. \- Make sure developers have the tools to be productive. This
includes reliable wifi, internet, good coffee, software, furniture, TVs for
monitoring, AV system for presenting, conference rooms. \- I've had to earn
the trust of the existing people. Previously almost everyone was new on my
teams and I hired them, so there was largely trust from the beginning. \-
there is churn, like you are going through. I had almost no churn on my teams
previously that was not purposeful. I have to explain why the churn is ok and
expected. \- I have to teach developers to focus first on "why" they are
building a feature, rather than "what" they are building and "how". This helps
dev and product see eye to eye. \- I have to teach how to interview, run
meetings, do agile right, communicate. Focus on building the right things over
building things right. Teach people when to be tactical and when to be
strategic.

Ultimately, I have to step up and fill the gaps until I can hire and/or train
people to assist in that area. Before I had help all along. For example, I've
interviewed about 200 candidates in 6 months for many different roles
(developer, DBA, sysadmin, product, data). Mainly because interviewing was
probably the most important thing I could be doing for the company and the
developers. I'd be happy to go into more detail offline.

------
ThomPete
I took a company from 2 people to 80 when we were at the height.

There have been a lot of attempts to crack that nut and most have been
unsuccessful.

First you need to realize what is going on when you grow.

1) The more people you hire the more you erode the culture you had. Therefore
be very mindful of what kind of people you hire and be quick to realize if
they don't fit the culture (even though they might be good). I.e. hire slow,
fire fast.

2) Have a set of principles that make you comfortable. If you don't like
bullshit have a no bullshit rule, if you don't like agression have a be polite
rule. The point is that you will need to be able to see yourself in those
principles.

3) Always make it your failure that people are leaving and lear what you can
do better next time. Even if it's a person who were really bad for the culture
it's your failure. Even if they leave for a better job it's your failure that
there is a better job. Find ways within your capabilities to deal with these
failures.

4) Most importantly. Make sure people know they are there because they are
good enough. I cannot tell you how important this and how many great cultures
it has destroyed. Doubting leads to sub-optimale work. Instead of creating a
competitive environment create an environment where people feel safe and
cherished, that way they will perform much better, at least in my experience.

Last but no least. I rarely make book recommendations but Ed Catmulls (from
Pixar) book "Creativity Inc" deals with this exact problem. I can't recommend
this book enough. It's so filled with wisdom and perspective and as a bonus a
surprisingly good mini Steve Jobs biography.

To give you some of the insights from the book I can recommend you listen to
this talk he did
[http://ecorner.stanford.edu/authorMaterialInfo.html?mid=3299](http://ecorner.stanford.edu/authorMaterialInfo.html?mid=3299)

That might give you some things to look for and see if you can find ways to
address them whether you run the company or you work for it.

~~~
jordanlev
Good advice, but I think the OP is an employee at the company, not in charge
of the growth himself (which your advice seems to be aimed at).

~~~
calinet6
Individuals can make a huge difference from the bottom up. It's way more
difficult, but it's possible. At the very least, make a lot of noise until
someone savvy and powerful starts listening.

------
gaius
_The HR manager scares me, although I am not sure why._

Job #1 of HR is to protect the company from its employees. The reason for
hiring a HR professional (weirdly they never refer to _themselves_ as
"resources") is that the owners or managers now feel that they need that
protection. There's a gulf now between management and workers, that perhaps
was a narrow stream before. You've instinctively grasped this, that's where
your apprehension comes from.

~~~
mirkoadari
I entirely disagree with this view. If you look at the period of employment,
the need for protection takes up a minute moment.

It is more likely that the owners wanted to recruit great talent, have someone
whos mission is to create a nice everyday environment, help spot and train
leadership or any other number of things that the HR professionals, I've had
the pleasure of meeting in my career, are great at and care about.

Between large evil corporations and tiny lean teams, there are variety of
companies where a HR professional can help you make it or break it.

~~~
jacquesm
The actual situation may differ from company to company but from the
perspective of an employee it is probably wise to assume that the HR people
are not 'on your side'. This also differs (strongly) from one country to
another.

~~~
riskneural
This especially goes for complaints about bullying or discrimination. Get a
lawyer and a recruiter if it comes to that, but stay well away from HR. Your
expenses might be investigated for anomalies.

Workers' unions can also be risky. They have their own agenda, leverage over
management, and will encourage you to speak up often without considering your
own best interests.

------
jacquesm
Talk to your management, ask them what their view of the future of the company
is. If you've been there since the beginning those lines should still be open.
If you get concrete answers and you like the future view, relax, it'll be ok.

If you're being pushed away, if you don't like the future view, if you're
being told to talk to someone else or that this is none of your business I'd
weigh carefully if you still want to be a part of this company in the longer
term and if you decide not to to start looking for an opportunity to jump ship
on your terms with your current job as your fall-back plan in case nothing
really interesting comes by soon enough.

Lastly, I'm not sure if it is 100% your problem. Some of it obviously is, the
need to professionalize will be felt in any growing company, it's hard to take
a company from 3 to 30 people without losing something in the process. But not
all needs to be lost and to have buy-in of the old-timers and to communicate
openly with them is super important in managing that transition gracefully and
effectively and this may be where your management is currently not doing the
best job they could (but there is too little information in your message to
determine that with any accuracy).

Best of luck!

------
ap22213
Unfortunately, you are not going to be able to keep things weird (in this
case). The only person who has complete control over the corporate culture is
the CEO. And, even then, the CEO takes orders from the board and owners.

From your description of the recent changes, it appears that the CEO, board,
and owners do not view unconventional culture as being important to the
company's success. So, unless you or someone like you has great influence over
the CEO (either directly or indirectly), this is not going to change. Trust
me: there's no point in fighting it.

If an unconventional company culture is important to you, it's time to find a
new workplace. If you have some time and patience, you can find a company that
aims for the same goals as you.

1) corporations are the opposite of democracies,

2) those in leadership are not your friends (though they may be paid a lot to
act that way),

3) things that appear to be 'for you' are always 'for the owners', first.

~~~
RickS
"The CEO is the only one who will change it, and clearly doesn't have interest
in that, so give up or move on" feels at first like a bleak and defeatist
answer.

I have found that it is entirely true.

A company I worked at before went through this. We spoke to one of our more
seasoned investors, who had the same thing as the parent comment to say.

I spent a lot of time trying to find ways for this not to be true, but it is.

At a company, the CEO owns the culture. Even if they don't know they do. There
are a lot of variables you can change, but that one's a constant.

------
sameers
Ask yourself why these new people have been hired - what was the (perceived)
gap, what role do they play and why did this role become necessary to the
company? Ask them if you can't figure it out - no better way to get to know
these new people.

Then, ask yourself and them how you can help. A larger organization has more
room for responsibilities and career growth. Others among the original 30
probably feel like you do; see if you can demonstrate leadership by
identifying and resolving the conflicts that may arise.

If you don't already do this, start a brown bag series where old and new devs
can talk about their work; or just do hack sessions together. It'll help
identify mutual strengths and weaknesses. And when the CEO sees your name on
the emails going out on this, I guarantee it'll go well for you.

If after your best efforts to evolve, you find that your CEO and exec team is
among the 90% who can't manage and execute growth and life becomes hell, all
of which will become obvious soon enough, then you quit. But make sure as many
as possible of those new employees have good memories of you before you do
that.

------
ochronus
It's not only your problem. Growth is almost always painful. I'd suggest you
view this as an opportunity on several levels and give it your best! You can
help your company a _lot_. Try driving the change! Sit down and have
discussions with the leadership team, start reading about organizational
models (from classical ones to modern ones) - a good book:
[http://www.reinventingorganizations.com/](http://www.reinventingorganizations.com/)
\- the most important point is to get everyone conscious about the changes and
acknowledge that it takes both time and deliberate effort! Handle it as you'd
handle any longer project. Have milestones, action items, retrospectives about
it! Phrase your goals (e.g. keeping or working out culture can be one of
them). I also find that sitting down together and finding out what's important
to you helps a lot - e.g. explicitly stating company-wide values or writing a
manifesto. Don't panic :) Realize the power is in your hands also.

------
kleer001
>I realize that all of this is my problem

Congrats! This is true wisdom and maturity.

Dive into what you find uncomfortable, try to adopt (or at least foster) new
perspectives. Maybe even talk to these new people and share your feelings with
them. Luckily for you they're in the soft-skills craft and may have the tools
you're looking for at this uncomfortable time.

Your best bet for harmony and comfort is to adapt to the change rather than
adhere to old ways. Because, in the end, flexibility is life skill we all
need.

------
jimduk
This is not just your problem. Every company that you work in has an implicit
social contract (e.g. we're quirky, we're obsessed ..). Often over time the
culture changes, and at some point you re-examine the social contract, realise
it has changed and then underperform/ quit. [this was a massive issue in big
outsourcing deals in the last 10-20 yrs where Company A would take over
Company B's employees and then wonder why they became worse at doing the same
job].

I would be constructively explicit early about the things you are
uncomfortable about and try and articulate them to get a story going about
what is changing. This way either you can adapt, or find out if others share
your feelings, or you can decide if there's still a fit. Culture is key - once
the culture (often the engineering culture) goes/radically changes, it
signifies big changes ahead. Also - for the new people (PMs especially) - talk
to them constructively to see if they can explain what they are bringing to
the table, and also what they see as culturally valuable.

------
mr_olive
There's a whole (short) chapter on changes in "Peopleware" [1].

I've just skimmed through it, here are the key points I've found:

1) Change is not a single step. It involves several stages, one of them being
chaos.

2) Chaos implies that things look worse than they used to be. People feel less
comfortable and want to go back to old ways. Their reactions are emotional,
not rational.

3) "You never improve if you can't change at all"

I recommend entire book. If you work in software business, I think you should
know it.

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peopleware:_Productive_Project...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peopleware:_Productive_Projects_and_Teams)

------
toyg
Real authority is granted, not imposed. You and your team can have 15 managers
above you, but in the end, if you just act like they don't matter, _they will
not matter_.

On the other hand, if these people bring real usefulness to the table (for
example by freeing you from stuff you'd rather not do, like dealing with whiny
and confused clients etc), then you should accept them and let them contribute
as peers.

The other side of the coin is that the company is growing and clearly someone
felt it lacked in some areas. If you're interested in those areas (i.e. you
want to step up into management), you have an opportunity to do so.

~~~
ananthdeodhar
Very well said and quite true! A managers job should be to facilitate, sadly
many of them don't understand this, and breath down the developer's necks.

If you are one of those guys who gets the job done, then you shouldn't be
giving a flying f __* about the managers /HR, their job is to make things
easier for you so that you can focus on your core areas of expertise, if
that's not happening, you can and should talk to your founders/owners about
your concerns.

Remember, you were there before these guys even came into the picture, and you
are responsible for the growth of this company which is now even able to
afford new people, and I am sure the company owners do realize that.

~~~
ghettoCoder
... and I am sure the company owners do realize that.

that's a very dangerous assumption. The company comes first for them. If you
can't or won't fit into their vision then, thanks for everything and good
luck.

------
brudgers
Change is usually unsettling. It would be probably be worse if suddenly the
company removed that many positions when having them was the normal.

That said, there are certain sizes at which organizational structure needs to
undergo quantum change. Thresholds I've heard are ~10 [two pizzas], ~30, ~200.
This means that some of the change when an organizational structure hits one
of these is more or less permanent. That doesn't make it bad. Just permanent.

Good luck.

~~~
askafriend
30 and 100 is a pretty substantial change organizationally.

~~~
coldcode
I found ~20 - ~80 - ~200 in the many places I've worked or with. Roughly (1)
hire people directly and know everyone (2) have people hire people and know
only some (3) have no idea who is being hired. All of my direct experience
failed at size 80. Each of these require a culture shift.

------
phamilton
Do not be held hostage by anything other than money.

Demand for engineers is still so high right now that unless you have some form
of golden handcuffs you will be better off leaving if you don't like your
current situation.

------
vinceyuan
When there are managers, things will be complex and there will be politics in
the office. (I was one of the first 10 people of my first employer. It went to
400 people.)

I don't have golden suggestions for you. If you are a developer, stay focused
on coding. If it still drives you mad, go find a better company.

------
zamalek
I ran into something similar to this roughly 6 years ago (PM, PR, team leads
etc.). I recognize your discomfort. It might take time, it might suck at
times, but in the long run it will be for the better.

> I just want advice on how to keep things weird while growing.

That one was easy: get everyone that is new involved in the weirdness. Culture
isn't strictly policy, it's people and it's your job to make sure that the
culture doesn't die. Involve new people in the culture. If the new management
gets in the way of the culture it is your responsibility to communicate that
risk.

> The HR manager scares me, although I am not sure why.

Have lunch with them. That HR manager is more scared than you are. They are
coming into a company with close friends and a culture that they have no idea
about. Be inviting and friendly.

------
ericclemmons
Give it time. I've gone through several growth and downsizing periods. Each
time the people change and, therefore, the culture.

Afterwards, everyone is kinda feeling out everyone else, both professionally
and personally.

The culture usually comes back, in my experience, but with different twists
and personalities.

Worst-case scenario, the job starts to feel like one, the joy gets less and
less, and you end up looking for another one (of really any size) that had a
culture that fits your personality.

You're taking a healthy approach to this already, so let it play out before
you back out.

Good luck!

------
hashkb
Biased: just quit my job (hypergrowth conssidered harmful). There is such a
thing as a lost cause; don't wait too long to bail. You are in demand.

------
cantagi
I've been in this situation twice before as a developer. The first time, the
devs bought nerf guns and scooters to counter the new corporate atmpsphere,
and the second time everyone who wasn't part of the corporate in-crowd got
systematically excluded from social events, and various dogmatic "managers"
got brought in, who were friends with the CEO.

If you can, you should talk to your colleagues and the people in charge, to
convince them that the company needs to be kept awesome and weird, while
growing. Maybe suggest Open Allocation - Github and Valve do it, and I know
people who work within that kind of structure and really enjoy it.

Be extremely wary of lies and corporate doublespeak that some CEOs and HR
people often use to convince you that they care about your company's
atmposphere, when they really just want you shut up and work. I've witnessed
that far too often.

------
zhte415
It sounds like key 'organisational' people are being put in place so the
organisation can transiton to something bigger. This is a good thing, they're
there to support you, as you're the core purpose of the organisation.

Take this as an opportunity for yourself. If you have worked in a corporate
environment before, you're probably familiar with policies, documentation (not
code, organisational), etc. If not, then don't worry.

This is you're chance to shape that from the start.

If you're the owner of a product or part of a product, you have a lot of
leverage and power, just don't use it recklessly.

For example: I joined a company with no job descriptions. When the expansion
came, I got to write my job description. My department (me) had no Statement
of Purpose, so I wrote the Statement of Purpose.

We also had a training course on RACI (basically, a simple way whenever
undertaking a task to make sure who is Responsible, Accountable, who should be
Consulted, and who should be Informed). It's a simple idea, but well worth
keeping in mind whenever doing something because an expansion means the amount
of people that need to be 'in the know' changes (in my case, from casual
chatting and word-of-mouth) to making sure things were documented in emails.
It was different, but it helped.

The good thing is, you're in expansion mode. That means a lot of stuff can
flow to you if communication well.

Don't appear self-conceited (not saying you are, just don't appear like that)
by getting withdrawn. Given your company was small, the boss or VP is probably
close, so let your ambition (be it a specialist, manager of a product or part
of a product, etc) be known to them.

Things can stay casual and personal, but with more and more people, things
_will_ go wrong if issues don't get documented and followed-up more formally
(from feature changes to un-communicated personal leave), simply as there's
many more people who will be out-of-the-loop and uninformed of events.

The transition phase was the worse for me, as others just didn't get it.
There'd be a face-to-face conversation I'd not be involved in, because others
were used to the 'old way' and then things would escalate because someone key
was out-of-the-loop and I'd get a question from the GM 'why was this not
done?' It was a pain. But you can get through it sooner if you adapt sooner.]

------
pasbesoin
> The HR manager scares me, although I am not sure why.

I'll simply and very generally (so, don't take as advice, per se) say that you
are not alone in this.

Generally speaking, HR works for the C suite, not you. _Always_. And, in my
experience, the kind of people who tend to populate HR are much more about
"resources" than "humans".

In particular, if you don't fit the convenient box they have in mind... you
are a problem. The only question then is whether you are a problem they have
to deal with now or accumulate "evidence" against for some anticipated future
use.

------
gloves
Hey Klunger,

Dharmesh Shah (Founder of Hubspot) actually gave a decent talk at Business of
Software on this: [http://thebln.com/talk/lessons-from-the-trenches-in-
scaling-...](http://thebln.com/talk/lessons-from-the-trenches-in-scaling-
culture/)

I think he can say it far better than I could.

That being said, I think it's something alot of companies go through when
growing. It's important though!

------
bsmartt
I just wanted to say I reaped a ton of benefit from some of the comments here.
Thanks bros.

~~~
pcpolice00
Small nitpick, but not necessarily everyone here identifies as a man.

------
analognoise
Why are people so obsessed with 'culture' and 'keeping things weird'? Be an
adult, go to work. It isn't about weirdness (or stroking your perceived
uniqueness and individuality concepts), it's about getting a job done.

If you are weird or unique, good for you. Not everyone wants in on 'silly hat
and trousers' day.

Office 'culture' is a lie to keep you working harder, at the office longer,
and people eat that shit up then wonder why most 'tech' people are unmarried
young white men. Get married. You'll suddenly realize you don't give a shit
about the office beer club. Grow as an individual into an adult, not a large-
child.

You were very wise to realize it is a 'you' problem - that's a huge first
step. Now see it for the crap it all is, and go to work anyway - or find a new
place that thinks middle school 'in group cultural awareness' is still en
vogue, and join their clique.

A better piece of advice? Join a club outside work. Get your individuality
stroked there, and return to work refreshed and assured you are a beautiful
and unique snowflake, just like everybody else.

~~~
calinet6
"culture" with a small c is a lie, but "Culture" with a capital C is real.

Work should be real, meaningful, and authentic. It should be intrinsically
motivating, and it should drive respect for people and a desire to do well.
This type of culture amplifies productivity and 'joy in work' (as W. Edwards
Deming called it) and is good for everyone. It is not happy hours, table
tennis, foosball, or any of that fake stuff—it's feeling happy about the
'adult work' you're doing, and fulfilled by your contribution to a larger
effort.

I think when people speak of 'culture going downhill,' they aren't talking
about the trivial stuff that you'd get from clubs or 'silly hat and trousers'
day. They're talking about the parts of work they enjoyed because they allowed
the work itself to be meaningful.

This is why people are so obsessed with culture. If you aren't, you haven't
bridged that gap yet, but keep looking for how to preserve that meaningful
connection to the joy of work and how to drive it.

~~~
manigandham
How is this anything but the individual's personal problem? You can't just
make work meaningful all of a sudden, it's just work that the business needs
to get done - you decide voluntarily if you want to do it in exchange for
cash.

Not everything is going to be joyful/satisfying/life-affirming or whatever and
I don't get this constant complaint that the company somehow needs to give you
a reason to do your job.

Sure it can help at some basic HR/motivational level perhaps and some kinds of
work truly have more impact but it's ridiculous to expect every job to be like
this.

~~~
ADanFromCanada
"How is this anything but the individual's personal problem?"

It is everybody's problem. Both the company leadership and the individual.
Individuals need to be self-motivating and self-regulating and self-aware. But
leadership needs to respect their workers, create an enjoyable workplace, and
create an atmosphere that caters to the personality types they hire.

You may take issue with the "create an enjoyable workplace" part. But I would
challenge that you don't have a wide enough variety of experience yet or
you've been lucky. Personally I've been in environments where I've been
treated like a "code monkey", expected to be at my desk typing for 8 to 10
hours a day, and expected to never socialize with my co-workers because
socializing is seen as not productive. That was not enjoyable.

On the other hand, I've been in environments where programming is seen as a
creative endeadvour, socializing and brainstorming is seen as lubricant for
creativity, and the purpose of the job is seen not as pumping out code but
solving problems and being creative. This one was clearly enjoyable.

Now as a manager/leader, I strive to create the second type of environment and
the decisions I make and policies I put in place directly affect the outcome
and the attitudes of my employees.

So aving been in both sides, and now being a leader who clearly sees his
behaviour affecting it, I'll re-iterate:

Culture is contributed to by Everybody and leadership/management play a huge
role; and it impacts the enjoyment and meaningfulness of work directly and
clearly.

~~~
manigandham
This I understand and agree with. I never said anything about not creating an
enjoyable workspace. However this is completely different from what the parent
was talking about re: "Work should be real, meaningful, and authentic."

That just sounds like random gibberish to me considering the realities of what
most work entails. You can perhaps make the _environment_ more enjoyable and
have better rules and practices but that doesn't change the basis of the work
itself, only the surroundings. How "meaningful and authentic" something is, is
completely up to you.

~~~
calinet6
You're right that a lot of it is up to the individual.

My point was that people already want to do work that is good—whatever that
means to you. Yes, it can be sophistic bull to call it all those lofty things,
but in the end I think everyone wants a good job, doing something they
consider valuable, that makes them feel like their time isn't being thrown
away in exchange for a wage. Whether everyone can achieve this or not is more
of an economic question, but it's something almost everyone strives for. Work
that is real.

And jobs, companies, and organizations start out this way too. Of course they
want to get things done and achieve common goals, and most importantly make a
lot of money, but I promise you they also don't want to throw their time away.
Even executives want their time and their lives to be meaningful, and they
usually want that for their employees, too.

And most people realize—and it has been proven—that organizations that do this
right, and find meaning and value in their work, whatever it may be—are also
more successful, make more profit, are more competitive in the market, and
have all kinds of other positive results. So it appears to be a no-brainer.

Problem is, things get complicated in complex organizations, and no one knows
how to handle it. All of that stuff about work being meaningful and worth a
damn goes out the window, and people just start doing their jobs for a
paycheck. _That 's_ when big-C Culture gets destroyed.

It's not that people don't want that fluffy stuff about their work being
worthwhile, it's that they can't see any path for achieving it. All of the
structures of organizations are put in the way. My advice was to leaders: work
on stripping the company of the barriers to people finding joy and worth in
the work itself. You can't give people that stuff, but it sure is easy to take
away—so start by not doing that.

There's a lot that's the individual worker's responsibility to self-motivate
and find meaning in their own work, if they need it—but there's a ton of stuff
in modern companies that also destroys their ability to do that. You need to
tackle it from both sides, both the environment (and not just at the surface,
but deep, deep down) and the individual.

And my personal opinion (and you might disagree with this) is that 90% of the
potential for motivated, real, meaningful work has nothing to do with
individual responsibility, but is the responsibility of managers and leaders.
Individuals are always going to try their hardest to self-motivate and do
their best—that's the easy part. Building an organizational environment that
enables them to do that is the hard part, so it's where we (leaders, managers,
executives) need to put in the work.

This reminds me of a story—a consultant tried to implement some of these
organizational improvement ideas at a chick hatching farm. When he was
interviewing one of the workers about how the workplace could be improved, the
man said "Sir, we throw all the male baby chicks into grinders. I think that
says everything." So, you're right. Regardless, that consultant was still able
to improve even that dismal work so that the employees could do their jobs as
well as possible and not be demeaned by both poor management _as well as_ the
nature of the work.

So my response is, even supposedly horrible work can be meaningful, and it's
almost always the unconscious organizational structures that get in the way,
not how individual workers feel about their own job. The individual is such a
small problem in comparison to the organization.

------
glossyscr
It's _your_ problem.

See it positive:

\- The company is growing

\- You guys do something right

\- The CEO is doing something right

\- Fast growth or just growth is never easy for an organization

\- But if everybody is proactive and empathic then you make it easier for the
organization and all folks involved

=> Go out, see new opportunities and be proactive—growth brings always new
opportunities for everyone

It's _you_ and your inner fear of change. You fear the loss of the good old
times.

EDIT: Why do people downvote so fast on HN? I wrote a positive post and a get
an instant downvote.

~~~
chrisseaton
> I realize that all of this is my problem

> It's _your_ problem

He already knows this. He said so in the post. That's probably why you were
downvoted.

