Mastodawn

Does anyone have background on the shift from tech companies having "values" to instead having "operating principles"? I assume it came from some VC group text.

Today's GitLab announcement follows that playbook - retiring a written list of values without replacement, instead offering operating principles that are about ways of doing things rather than things that matter.

Same thing happened three years ago at a previous employer when an incoming board-installed CEO needed to make his mark on the company. Same thing a year ago when I asked a founder what kind of company they want to build.

Did Peter Thiel announce that values were woke or something? Are execs really explicitly rejecting the concept of valuing things? Of things mattering, even when you get to pick what things matter?

Show thread

gabriele renzi

@samstokes it reminds me of something the Dilbert dude wrote , that companies start with a purpose (we want to sell computers) transition to mission (one computer on every desk) and then to vision (we will evolve into pure energy beings no longer bothered by human flesh).

In each increasing step becoming more and more abstract and detached from their actual business.

The guy ended up as a mad right wing prop but I miss early Dilbert

Show thread

Sam Stokes 4d ago

@riffraff yeah, but I actually think some of the abstract "why" is necessary, both ethically (e.g. do you sell computers to the military?) and pragmatically (if you employ both humans who object to selling to the military, and humans who object to refusing to sell to the military, they might have trouble working together effectively).

What bugs me about this apparent move away from the "why" is that there is always a "why", so this is just a move away from writing it down. Which makes it less transparent, which one might uncharitably assume is the real goal.

Show thread

piebob 3d ago

@samstokes @riffraff i don't see that as being uncharitable at all, given the state of, well, everything.