So now you have a three individual contributors, a line manager, a human resource people lead or whatever it's called this year and many many meetings.
That will get you targeted in the current corp environment pretty bad.
They also tend to compulsively tell the truth - also a bad idea in the current corp environment.
And if doing something outside of their interest, burnout is hard to avoid. Especially when you have bosses screaming at you to go go go - to do stuff that just doesn’t work.
When I see this it's pretty clear how big companies like meta can dump billion after billion into something and have nothing to show for it. Most of the work is just artificial, satisfying other teams' unnecessary requirements.
I could see this being an argument for why it ends up being bland or having an inconsistent style (for example).
So I suppose that could be a theory, that what happens naturally has a structure that needs to be corrected for, and right now the mechanism that produces the structural correction is overly simplistic and heavily overweights examples of that structure, but that this structure does not actually occur naturally from the model.
You simply can't "do more with less" in the long term by overloading people. There are only 8 hours in the workday. So the ridiculous growth mandates of Jack Welch et al simply create a certain amount of disappointment that needs to be absorbed somewhere in the org chart.
Autistics can frequently do the work, but they have difficulty handling this particular trauma of not making the numbers being demanded. Of disappointing their bosses. Demanding unrealistic numbers is an attempt to stress the people at the bottom into staying busy all the time, and if they are already busy all the time, they will show no improvement.
Stay on for a few years and you internalize that a certain amount of disappointment is mandated, and should not be taken personally. The "expectations" might be distant goals, but they were never expected. Chasing the sunrise a bit, day by day - you'll never get there. If you're putting in your eight hours, staying busy, you're doing all you can, and you should treat a manager asking for more like you would a new CEO who's completely illiterate - dangerous but not living in the same world, informationally, as you.
If you have a manager that isn't completely incompetent, they would rather keep on an employee like OP and not meet goals, than deal with a new hire who will be even worse relative to goals. It is only when management is spineless, incompetent, or corrupt that they give in to this sort of pressure and let go of performers.
I’ve got a dual Voltron of Aspergers and ADD. This makes it so that not only do I have cognitive superpowers (the Aspergers), but also that this cassette tape of extraordinary skills has been violently jammed in backwards (the ADD), spooling all the tape out, gumming up the entire mechanism, and making the entire enchilada essentially useless at surviving in today’s economic environment.
Like, f*k me.
Put briefly, Adolf Hennecke was the poster boy for a productivity campaign like what management tried to effectuate in the story, and that the author thinks has anything to do with neoliberalism. The thing is that Adolf Hennecke didn't live in a neoliberalist country or work for a neoliberalist company, he lived in East Germany and worked for a VEB, which you may translate as "public corporation". He worked for a state-owned company with a duty to general society rather than any shareholders.
There isn't really a lineage between that and contemporary capitalist culture IMO.
My sense is that this is due to automation, not “neoliberal capitalism” as the author says. It’s much easier to automate a job if it’s a single task that’s done in a deterministic way.
