Tactics: unify voice or accept constraints

In this episode, Dave and Jamison answer these questions:

1. I’m a senior software engineer at a remote company (~500–700 people), and over the last year a new HR org replaced our old people team. They’ve spent six months building a new goals/leveling framework. During a public meeting I asked in slack: “We’ve had goals before and then stopped using them. How will these be different?” Nobody answered directly.

   The next day I was pulled into a meeting. The new VP of HR had screenshotted my question and sent it up my management chain. My manager told me they were on my side but leadership didn’t appreciate it. Days later I was pulled in again and told the problem was my “tone.” I didn’t argue because we were at an impasse. It felt like tone policing and like being sent to the principal’s office. I didn’t feel like they were treating me like an adult. In yet another 1:1, my manager said leadership wanted it raised again and that they don’t want questions like that in public. I told him the meeting should’ve been an email and that would’ve avoided this problem.

   Is this normal? What should I do? It’s upsetting enough that every time this gets brought up, it wrecks the rest of my workday. I’ve already been passively job searching for about three years because of broader issues, and now I feel like leadership might be pushing me out. This also follows being labeled a “dissident” by our product director after I raised roadmap concerns in another all-hands. Most of the leaders involved are newer (2 years or less), while I’ve been here 4+ years, so I’m wondering if the culture is changing right in front of me. Thanks for the show! Y’all have helped my career a lot.

2. Hi Softskillets! Love the show, thanks for making me laugh every walk break I take!

   I’m in an org where the Frontend Platform Team has adopted a fairly rigid rule—forcing all domain logic into pure functions—to prevent “bad code.” I see value in for the big picture, but the rule is enforced at every level, even within my own team modules. It feels incredibly unnatural and cumbersome. I see our team is often leaking logic into our UI layer to avoid boilerplate that usually come “out of the box.” (in this React(ive) framework).

   I’ve tried to address this a few times, but I always get shut down with “theoretically correct” answers that don’t actually acknowledge the pain we feel on the ground. Most of the feature engineers have tried to bring this up, felt unheard, and eventually just stopped trying.

   Recently, I used AI to help me synthesize these conversations and better understand the bottleneck. I wrote a long markdown file to validate with my teammates if they felt the same. The Platform Team got wind of it, and I shared it. This triggered a lot of frustration (understandably they felt it was AI slop sent their way).

   I eventually got a meeting with one of the platform engineers. I tried to stay focused purely on the problems, knowing my solution (allowing state management in the domain layer) would be pushed away. The meeting went poorly. I didn’t feel like the weight of our frustration was understood, and when I mentioned potentially allowing some optionality for senior engineers, I was literally laughed at.

   It feels like this rule is now followed like a religion. How do I rebuild this relationship and actually be taken seriously? How can I change a culture where the “builders” feel like the “gatekeepers” are limiting them instead of helping them?