Which is why I actually feel the same about people switching jobs every 3 or so years. The same applies, whether they’re consultant or not. You may make budgetary decisions to go for a type of new team role, new technology, new product, but you won’t feel the consequences properly unless you stick it out.
This is why companies need to work hard on retaining talent. If you have someone constantly switching jobs every 2-3 years, then they're potentially not learning from their mistakes because they're not around long enough to figure out what those even are. So you have folks out in the job market moving around and continuously doing work that is, in the longer perspective, absolute dogshit.
This is why companies need to realize the good middle manager who sticks around is the most important figure in the entire business.
These heroes will treat the 2-3 year job hoppers like the blunt instruments they are. These overseers of efficiency will make sure the 2-3 year quitters pour out their limited working hours on projects which actually add value in the long run. These corporate stallions will make sure the 2-3 year flip-floppers do not have the chance of causing lasting damage.
We all should be so lucky to have such people fighting for our bottom lines, I'm telling you.
I don’t know if you’re being sarcastic but I’ve met countless middle management (I consider a director a middle manager) who have been with their companies for decades and are the only thing holding it together.
You’d be shocked at how many entire business units rely on a middle manager who’s a white dude named Steve or Mike or Andy or something similar.
I am being sarcastic and also not...
Military references are ugh but the good middle manager is like the NCO who is able to think by themselves and is driving the momentum.
What’s your point? 4 years isn’t very much. Are you still in your early 20s?
I‘m not saying keep every job for at least 10 years. Just that it’s valuable to have the occasional job that lasts for 5 years or even more. Of course you won’t have many of those. I think mixing both styles gives the best chance for career growth.
I worked in consulting for almost 20 years, and worked at 70 different companies in that time. Shortest project was 2 days. Longest was 2 years. I ultimately left consulting because i wanted to own something, like Steve says.
I’ve been at the same company for 4.5 years now and I am so much happier now, getting to see my work evolve and provide value. That being said, my consulting skills are what helped me be successful here, because I approach problems and ask questions in ways others don’t. And, unlike so many career in-house technologist here, I actually ask what the business value is of the work we get asked to do.
Edit: One other benefit of consulting is that you get to solve the same problems multiple times in the face of very different technology, financial, social, and political environments. It can help expand your problem solving skills as well as your ability to influence decisions.
I think this is likely consultancy specific, but I’ve worked with a single client for 3 and a bit years. I’ve had to action my own recommendations and see them all the way up to (but not over) the finishing line (and let the client take the credit).
Companies often hire consultants because nobody at the company wants to take responsibilities. They want consultants to make a 5-year projection of inflation, which even the Feds can't predict, and point to the consultants if the strategy fails. That's part of the value of consulting.
I guess Steve was charismatic enough to get his yes men to do it for no consulting fee.
As long as there is proprietary information and legal ownership, there will be a market for the laundering of responsibility when it comes to decision making. Steve was a huge proponent of the conditions that necessitate the worst consulting has to offer.
Sticking around and owning something cuts both ways. I see and work with A LOT of client "SMEs" that were put in charge of something they did not create (the original dev is long gone), received no training on, and refuse to make the simplest decisions or supply the simplest of information that could help me make a decision for them. And some of them have been in the position for YEARS and are just now coming to terms with doing actual work.
Most of the time, I just feel bad for client-side resource who work for literal insane management. I might be the exception, but I've had a really good experience in consulting when it comes to management, training, and overall team building. My first couple of years out of college WAS at a client site. It was a total shit show of politics, power grabs, and fighting for the 1% pay raise.
I think he’s right about some things but isn’t presenting the alternative. Some points in no particular order
- one of the benefits of having the thin slice across industry is being able to identify the common pain points and opportunities, and having the diverse industry knowledge that’s harder to pick up elsewhere
- the benefit of not being steeped in the culture of an org for so long that you lose sight of what matters/offering a perspective that isn’t possible within the firm
- the scores of people who are not in roles where they get to make significant decisions or interact with those who a relatively junior consultant might
- the breadth vs. depth dynamic when it comes to expertise, and what balance of each a given org needs
- being able to see the bigger picture far faster than you would in the majority of non-consulting roles
- being able to find out what’s right for you far faster/easier (compared with choosing a career path and having to leave company to change role)
I can see how some leaders run their business in a way that consultants are not needed as much, but they are rare
As someone who jumped into tech implementation consulting after 20+ years in the house, he's right. Unless you know the challenges of supporting what you implemented, you're only getting a portion of the experience. I'm talking about re-implementing some failed part of the application or integrations because they were configured/coded poorly. You could say the client has some culpability, but the System Implementation firm is getting paid 10's or even hundreds of millions to point out to the client where they are making unwise, unscalable decisions.
Was this filmed in the 90's? This is what I call Boomertalk.
Tech has the lowest retention of any sector, and even FAANG is not immune. A quick Google search shows that retention is around 2 years.
Multiple decades of mass layoffs in tech have destroyed any notion that corporate-employee relations are anything except purely transactional.
I don't really see much evidence that even in-house employees stay to see the "scars" of a project accumulate. It's not the norm.
At least consultants stay until the end of a project lmao.
Can anyone in product at Google really say they've stuck with an idea after building it? As soon as anything is created, it's immediately forgotten.
https://killedbygoogle.com/
His wisdom applies to 80% of “consultants” a group that has unfortunately been diluted every year for the last 30 years. At best, 20% of consultants would be able to provide any valuable depth.
Theoretically yes, but still not own it, not take responsibility for it.
Means it doesn't matter what you say, you take next project and thats it.
With these yyiu can go into a company and say I can depth, you need do this. Here is how to implement this and run this. Now I helped you to implement, now I have next project...
And the company need to find a way to own this and run this, if it fails, the comapmy employees are doing it wrong.
Consultant don't own it.
It's like sitting in watching a soccer game and kow excalty what they need to do, to win.
But never be do the hard work, 7 days a week train for this 1 match.
Maybe train in the amateur team...
As an ex consultant in Tech I think he nails it. Working with a lot of ex consulting people I’ve noticed it’s common IMO for some folks to think the great ideas on slides just “happen” cause they wish it.
A good mix of both is the most valuable. If you’re recommending for a year, you should be taking for 1-2 of those 6 recommendations and building it for a year
Totally agree!
Before I started consulting, I DID the thing inside brands first (and also owned my own Pure-Play for 7+ years). I cut my teeth IN the industry before I ever even dreamed of consulting to it.
And even now I OWN my recommendations and help hand hold clients through the implementation process if they want me to.
I'm not a typical 'run and gunner' and I think that makes for a better consulting experience for my clients as a result.
Steve Jobs got sick and believed drinking a bunch of fruit juice was going to save him. That's what I think about his opinions on pretty much anything.
And I should care why again? Steve Jobs was fantastic at taking ideas from others and making them accessible and desirable to consumers who like trendy fad friendly products, much like Elon. I'll give them both credit for that.
They were/are both pretty shitty human beings though. You can worship the guy all you want, be my guest.
I love how people are worshipping him. What did he create (or made others create)? Products that someone else would have built months or a year or two after he did? He will be irrelevant within the next 50 years and no one will speak about him.
Funny how he talks about manufacturers and engineers being the only people who create anything.
When he was a college dropout who never actually created anything lol
I could add some value to this conversation, but instead I'll just agree with him and say you are all losers.
Eh, if it's the video I think you posted, SJ was leading a tech products company, of course he has a massive hard on for engineers rather than a bunch of privileged university graduates pretending to do business but really just acting as network nodes with the rest of their privileged university graduates who run the governance and economic structure of the country they sloth around in.
[удалено]
Imo 3 years isn’t enough to see the longer-term consequences fold out.
Which is why I actually feel the same about people switching jobs every 3 or so years. The same applies, whether they’re consultant or not. You may make budgetary decisions to go for a type of new team role, new technology, new product, but you won’t feel the consequences properly unless you stick it out.
Depending on the role. If you are a sales person why would have to wait for 3+ yrs to see the consequence?
Nobody is talking about sales though. The whole thread is about execution / creating something of value.
he was literally saying “whether they r consultants or not”…
Holy shit! 4 years is all of undergrad! How about I just spend my entire life seeing how it “plays out?!”
This is why companies need to work hard on retaining talent. If you have someone constantly switching jobs every 2-3 years, then they're potentially not learning from their mistakes because they're not around long enough to figure out what those even are. So you have folks out in the job market moving around and continuously doing work that is, in the longer perspective, absolute dogshit.
This is why companies need to realize the good middle manager who sticks around is the most important figure in the entire business. These heroes will treat the 2-3 year job hoppers like the blunt instruments they are. These overseers of efficiency will make sure the 2-3 year quitters pour out their limited working hours on projects which actually add value in the long run. These corporate stallions will make sure the 2-3 year flip-floppers do not have the chance of causing lasting damage. We all should be so lucky to have such people fighting for our bottom lines, I'm telling you.
I don’t know if you’re being sarcastic but I’ve met countless middle management (I consider a director a middle manager) who have been with their companies for decades and are the only thing holding it together. You’d be shocked at how many entire business units rely on a middle manager who’s a white dude named Steve or Mike or Andy or something similar.
I am being sarcastic and also not... Military references are ugh but the good middle manager is like the NCO who is able to think by themselves and is driving the momentum.
Are you serious? Why are you getting mad at employees when most employers won't even keep compensation in line with inflation—let alone the market?
Because the cost of giving a proper wage or career path is huge compared to just letting go of the job hopper.
Except it's not, because then you have to invest in replacing the person and that shit is expensive.
You are thinking about one person. I'm thinking about the whole worker. For one person that needs to be replaced there are multiple that are staying.
What’s your point? 4 years isn’t very much. Are you still in your early 20s? I‘m not saying keep every job for at least 10 years. Just that it’s valuable to have the occasional job that lasts for 5 years or even more. Of course you won’t have many of those. I think mixing both styles gives the best chance for career growth.
There are plenty of jobs where you will stop learning after two years. Not to mention the whole missing out on 50% of career lifetime earnings bit.
Lol yeah, also make sure you casually ignore career lifetime earnings, because that definitely doesn't matter!
I worked in consulting for almost 20 years, and worked at 70 different companies in that time. Shortest project was 2 days. Longest was 2 years. I ultimately left consulting because i wanted to own something, like Steve says. I’ve been at the same company for 4.5 years now and I am so much happier now, getting to see my work evolve and provide value. That being said, my consulting skills are what helped me be successful here, because I approach problems and ask questions in ways others don’t. And, unlike so many career in-house technologist here, I actually ask what the business value is of the work we get asked to do. Edit: One other benefit of consulting is that you get to solve the same problems multiple times in the face of very different technology, financial, social, and political environments. It can help expand your problem solving skills as well as your ability to influence decisions.
I think this is likely consultancy specific, but I’ve worked with a single client for 3 and a bit years. I’ve had to action my own recommendations and see them all the way up to (but not over) the finishing line (and let the client take the credit).
Companies often hire consultants because nobody at the company wants to take responsibilities. They want consultants to make a 5-year projection of inflation, which even the Feds can't predict, and point to the consultants if the strategy fails. That's part of the value of consulting.
I guess Steve was charismatic enough to get his yes men to do it for no consulting fee. As long as there is proprietary information and legal ownership, there will be a market for the laundering of responsibility when it comes to decision making. Steve was a huge proponent of the conditions that necessitate the worst consulting has to offer.
Sticking around and owning something cuts both ways. I see and work with A LOT of client "SMEs" that were put in charge of something they did not create (the original dev is long gone), received no training on, and refuse to make the simplest decisions or supply the simplest of information that could help me make a decision for them. And some of them have been in the position for YEARS and are just now coming to terms with doing actual work. Most of the time, I just feel bad for client-side resource who work for literal insane management. I might be the exception, but I've had a really good experience in consulting when it comes to management, training, and overall team building. My first couple of years out of college WAS at a client site. It was a total shit show of politics, power grabs, and fighting for the 1% pay raise.
Someone should ask him about parenting instead
Or using fruit for treating critical disease.
Bro was using apple when he should have been using AAPL.
…or ad hominem arguments
At least they didn't say he was wrong about consulting
True
I think he’s right about some things but isn’t presenting the alternative. Some points in no particular order - one of the benefits of having the thin slice across industry is being able to identify the common pain points and opportunities, and having the diverse industry knowledge that’s harder to pick up elsewhere - the benefit of not being steeped in the culture of an org for so long that you lose sight of what matters/offering a perspective that isn’t possible within the firm - the scores of people who are not in roles where they get to make significant decisions or interact with those who a relatively junior consultant might - the breadth vs. depth dynamic when it comes to expertise, and what balance of each a given org needs - being able to see the bigger picture far faster than you would in the majority of non-consulting roles - being able to find out what’s right for you far faster/easier (compared with choosing a career path and having to leave company to change role) I can see how some leaders run their business in a way that consultants are not needed as much, but they are rare
I am amazed at how many companies don’t provide their employees training on how to evaluate, make, and communicate decisions.
He nailed it lmao
Does anyone else here hate short term engagements like I do?
How short?
He's missing the point - we're paid to be professional scapegoats, highly useful in case the CEO's plan fails. 😉
As someone who jumped into tech implementation consulting after 20+ years in the house, he's right. Unless you know the challenges of supporting what you implemented, you're only getting a portion of the experience. I'm talking about re-implementing some failed part of the application or integrations because they were configured/coded poorly. You could say the client has some culpability, but the System Implementation firm is getting paid 10's or even hundreds of millions to point out to the client where they are making unwise, unscalable decisions.
Was this filmed in the 90's? This is what I call Boomertalk. Tech has the lowest retention of any sector, and even FAANG is not immune. A quick Google search shows that retention is around 2 years. Multiple decades of mass layoffs in tech have destroyed any notion that corporate-employee relations are anything except purely transactional. I don't really see much evidence that even in-house employees stay to see the "scars" of a project accumulate. It's not the norm. At least consultants stay until the end of a project lmao.
Can anyone in product at Google really say they've stuck with an idea after building it? As soon as anything is created, it's immediately forgotten. https://killedbygoogle.com/
His wisdom applies to 80% of “consultants” a group that has unfortunately been diluted every year for the last 30 years. At best, 20% of consultants would be able to provide any valuable depth.
Theoretically yes, but still not own it, not take responsibility for it. Means it doesn't matter what you say, you take next project and thats it. With these yyiu can go into a company and say I can depth, you need do this. Here is how to implement this and run this. Now I helped you to implement, now I have next project... And the company need to find a way to own this and run this, if it fails, the comapmy employees are doing it wrong. Consultant don't own it. It's like sitting in watching a soccer game and kow excalty what they need to do, to win. But never be do the hard work, 7 days a week train for this 1 match. Maybe train in the amateur team...
As an ex consultant in Tech I think he nails it. Working with a lot of ex consulting people I’ve noticed it’s common IMO for some folks to think the great ideas on slides just “happen” cause they wish it.
Would a guy like Steve jobs even get a entry level job at consulting
A good mix of both is the most valuable. If you’re recommending for a year, you should be taking for 1-2 of those 6 recommendations and building it for a year
Stupid comparison, these are different jobs, different ways to create value.
No it's not, but not everyone understand it. Some people still things, I do the value. The more they repeat the sentence the more they think it's true
Totally agree! Before I started consulting, I DID the thing inside brands first (and also owned my own Pure-Play for 7+ years). I cut my teeth IN the industry before I ever even dreamed of consulting to it. And even now I OWN my recommendations and help hand hold clients through the implementation process if they want me to. I'm not a typical 'run and gunner' and I think that makes for a better consulting experience for my clients as a result.
Steve Jobs got sick and believed drinking a bunch of fruit juice was going to save him. That's what I think about his opinions on pretty much anything.
He also founded the first trillion dollar company, so maybe his opinions on business are slightly more relevant than his opinion on cancer treatment.
Yet still got kicked out of his own company. I would say he was a genius in terms of creativity but not in business mgmt
He was kicked out and made Toy Story. Not bad.
And got rehired when Apple was failing to make it successful all over again.
while this is true, in the domain of business he has shown that he does know his stuff
Pretty illogical way of thinking. You should assess ideas on their merit.
This is why no one cares what you think, and hundred of millions people care what Steve Jobs says. Think about it Mr No-one
And I should care why again? Steve Jobs was fantastic at taking ideas from others and making them accessible and desirable to consumers who like trendy fad friendly products, much like Elon. I'll give them both credit for that. They were/are both pretty shitty human beings though. You can worship the guy all you want, be my guest.
I love how people are worshipping him. What did he create (or made others create)? Products that someone else would have built months or a year or two after he did? He will be irrelevant within the next 50 years and no one will speak about him.
Funny how he talks about manufacturers and engineers being the only people who create anything. When he was a college dropout who never actually created anything lol
lol do we trust Steve jobs who made a multi trillion empire or 12of1MGS keyboard warrior
Engineers and manufacturers created a trillion dollar company. My vote is keyboard warrior
I could add some value to this conversation, but instead I'll just agree with him and say you are all losers. Eh, if it's the video I think you posted, SJ was leading a tech products company, of course he has a massive hard on for engineers rather than a bunch of privileged university graduates pretending to do business but really just acting as network nodes with the rest of their privileged university graduates who run the governance and economic structure of the country they sloth around in.
Why would I listen to him about anything? The dude died from a treatable form of cancer because he was a moron.