This happens in American workplaces, too. In my experience, most people at tech startups think the same, especially non-product people (anyone who isn't in engineering, design or product). If you want to unconditionally love the mission of your company, chances are you have to set aside your own personal opinions.
It is statistically very unlikely that your personal viewpoints are exactly parallel to the company's. Nobody wants to hire someone who thinks for themselves. Which is a bit ironic, because the best people are the ones who don't give a shit what other people think and are willing to call bullshit on their own product and even their own co-workers if they have to. Seen a lot of groupthink in SF tech especially, and it gets old. SF tech is like fight club -- everyone knows it's cult-like, but nobody wants to talk about it.
Nobody wants to be the one misfit who rains on the parade, even if the parade is headed off a cliff. In my experience, VC money makes smart people less smart. Having an outsider's viewpoint is going to be extremely valuable in the coming years, but it's currently out of fashion.
This is the paradoxical struggle I've had, from day one, at the startup for which I work.
I was praised for being "fresh eyes" and having "creative ideas", only to be reminded "how we do things here" after producing something that I thought would be a progressive way of addressing the company's challenges.
I continue to try new directions, and every once in a while something sticks, but often times I just have to be "another pair of hands" and do things the established way, flaws and all, because often that's what they really want me to do but don't want to admit.
It's especially frustrating when I can see the consequences of this a mile away and know that I'll be the one to have to deal with it, but what can I do?
This is normal. If you are an IC or middle manager you are there to execute (do what your boss says). Defining process and culture is not your job. Whether your process is better or not is besides the point. Fighting this will only lead to political pain.
Sure. But it’s frustrating when management says that they want me to help improve processes and produce “new and different” only for me to deliver what they say they want and realize they really didn’t want that.
In my case, it’s not so much “do what your boss says” so much as it’s “try to figure out if your boss really wants you to do what he/she says or if they just like the idea of change and really just want you to leave everything alone”.
Yes, if you want to keep your job then you don't question your employers' politics. If you're annoying to your manager (or their manager, etc), they will fabricate reasons to fire you. It might take a while (in countries with employee protection), but they'll get there.
That sounds like a dreadful work environment you've got there. Some workplaces encourage communication with management, provided it's done respectfully.
Had to leave one job already. Bashing white people on company meetings while going on about wonderfully diverse they were.
Their disdain in having to hire a white guy was constant.
Product was falling apart since they had nothing but juniors of the correct races sexes and orientations.
They say racism is something that happens between groups, so you are racist by definition if you're white. This makes huge assumptions - that individuals are nothing more than members of the group, that only groups matter, that white people are a single homogeneous group, and that young people bear the guilt of their parents and grandparents. There is no nuance here, it doesn't matter if you're hard working or not if you're white because they can explain away your accomplishments as privilege. Anti-racism at its finest, using reverse polarity racism to fix racism. How could that backfire? It's like going to war for peace or fucking for virginity.
" If you want to unconditionally love the mission of your company, chances are you have to set aside your own personal opinions."
This research is not about 'company viewpoints', it's about 'workplace diversity of individual viewpoints'.
In fact, the article is very clearly about 'political' viewpoints etc. and doesn't refer at all to pro/anti-company thinking etc. which frankly deserves study but would represent a different kind of social artifact.
It is statistically very unlikely that your personal viewpoints are exactly parallel to the company's. Nobody wants to hire someone who thinks for themselves. Which is a bit ironic, because the best people are the ones who don't give a shit what other people think and are willing to call bullshit on their own product and even their own co-workers if they have to. Seen a lot of groupthink in SF tech especially, and it gets old. SF tech is like fight club -- everyone knows it's cult-like, but nobody wants to talk about it.
Nobody wants to be the one misfit who rains on the parade, even if the parade is headed off a cliff. In my experience, VC money makes smart people less smart. Having an outsider's viewpoint is going to be extremely valuable in the coming years, but it's currently out of fashion.