Ever seen those web adverts that list a few generic health problems and ask you to 'click here', or read a horoscope that makes claims almost anyone can relate to?
So how is this different? Why so many upvotes...really, this is just more spam - is it not?
I think it's either (a) a voting ring, or (b) the changing demographic here. Ignoring (a) (because we can't prove/disprove as we aren't admins/mods), we can discuss (b).
5-7 years ago, this place was "mostly founders and early employees". This would've likely been flagged or, at best, only received a few upvotes. Today, I suspect its 10% "founders and early employees" and 90% "other". This is likely interesting to the "other" demographic - first they've seen it, or it may resonate with them because it's very negative focused and they see themselves in it.
There's a quicker method of identifying "survival mode": just ask your accounting/finance officer about your cash flow for the last quarter and the projection for the next.
If your company isn't able to cover its burn rate and keep some cash for these two things:
1. Setting up a growth plan (more revenue), or
2. Continuing pivoting until you find something that allows you to do 1 ...
... you're in survival mode.
In survival mode, the only move is to lower your metabolic rate or burn rate. Much like a body would shut down non-critical functions just to "survive" so too will the company need to eliminate non-critical expenses. All this simply to buy more time for a eureka moment that will answer your growth question.
That's not quite a silver bullet definition for all scenarios.
Having worked for large organizations, where "money is no object", the reality of your scenario becomes distorted by the fact that you have to pander to the almighty overlords who control the purse strings. Suddenly everything becomes purely political, and success solely relies on entertaining the favor of powerful people (powerful individuals, with respect to the scope of the organization, and their capacity for making broad, sweeping decisions).
In very big organizations, there might be three or four degrees of separation, between you and your actual masters, the ones that your direct boss is beholden to. Your boss might meet directly with these VEH-HEH-HERRRY important people maybe less than twice a year, but have direct orders handed down from them by their heralds on a weekly basis.
Such orders might come in the form of:
In addition to your usual work load, make X work by next
quarter with with Y people; We understand that you
already have Y people, but your job now depends on making
X work. Do not fail us.
I had a boss come back from a very short meeting like that, ashen and distraught. She left early for the day, and the next few months were a living hell for all of us. We did get X done successfully, and on time, but afterward I quickly drafted my resume, and took a hike.
With jobs at large companies and other forms of organizations and institutions, you might be completely disconnected from the cash flow situation. The reality may be that the organization, by most measures is actually nearly indestructible, and has existed since before you were born and is sure to exist long after you die, but as with any form of collective human effort, there is still a bottom line somewhere in the mix, and you might not have obvious clues as to how it expresses itself, other than the amount of stress your involvement inflicts upon you.
I think this article is pointing to Survival Mode as a state of mind more so than just an accounting reality. Some companies exist in Survival Mode far longer than their accounting might indicate.
I think just about every software company I've worked for exhibited most, if not all, of these traits. Two in particular:
Urgency
I've observed, on several occasions, at multiple companies, senior managers talking openly about deliberately instilling "a sense of constant urgency" into the team. I don't know if we were perceived as unmotivated (we were) or if there was some external threat coming that warranted urgency (debatable), or whether management just picked up on the "a sense of urgency" phrase from some HBS article (probably). Either way, the end result was this kind of "forced urgency" with motivational speeches about how we should all feel urgency about the company's success, and that every task assigned to everyone was always an emergency. Needless to say, it was a great place to work.
Reaction Mode
I've worked at very few software companies that seemed to have an actual long term plan AND were willing to stick to it. It's easier to "just do what the customers are asking for today and then change to do what they are asking for tomorrow". I've worked at companies that pretended to be selling a product, when, in reality, nobody wanted their product as-is and they would get roped into constantly doing custom engineering for VIP customers (bonus: every customer was a VIP customer). So, while the team would be ostensibly working on improving their core product, in reality, they were adding buzzers and lights that had little to do with the core function of the product, in order to react to what one or two customers wanted. The recent "agile" craze has not helped in this regard.
>> I've observed, on several occasions, at multiple companies, senior managers talking openly about deliberately instilling "a sense of constant urgency" into the team.
Holy crap, that's a terrible thing to do. But if senior management thinks like that, it would explain some stupid stuff I've seen in various companies...
I get what you're saying; startups can be frantic and match almost all of those points. But a startup shouldn't exhibit sign #2. No matter how crazy things gets everyone should have a vision of what the product should be and know what goal they're trying to reach.
I think a startup where you can consistently observe sign#2, without being in a UAT[1] phase, is a startup that's about to fail.
I definitely recognize these patterns from non-startups. Ingredients: demanding customers, company led by former developers who still avoid all non-coding related improvements as enterprisy. Often it is simply the Peter Principle at work, duct-tape programming led you here, but not further.
All of these sound like symptoms of a total loss of control. Whether through poorly negotiated contract or necessity, you're in a position where decisions of any importance are taken out of your hands.
Not being the master of your own fate (edit: insomuch as you can choose what to work on and when to work) can be brutal for some people. I'm not at all suited for it.
Since plenty of people here seem to have experience with this sort of thing ... I'm currently in a place where I can at least see 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 8 for me and 1 and 7 for others as well. Would it be wise to stay there or are those signs rather a sign that I should be looking somewhere else?
Well said, describes where I'm at now. Many people associate these signs exclusively with "burnout" but my problem with that term and thought is that it feels "terminal"-- meaning there is no fixing it apart from quitting and taking time off, finding a new idea/company you are passionate about and trying again.
I think it's common to be in this state without being what I'd call "burned out." If your management doesn't understand or support your team, and have undue expectations, that could easily put you in "survival mode."
Me too. Maybe those who have doubts if they are in survival mode should also check if they are burnt out at the same time. To identify the problem is the first step solving it.
Hang in there! We are in the same boat too. Our problem is that we thought we had a growth problem until recently, only it turned out that we have more of a strategy problem. What are we selling? To whom are we selling? Do they even want "it"!??
One of the main reasons is that the team is over committed. An important move is to draw a line in the sand. After that line, you will reestimate your current work to include learning and quality built in (lots of slack time). Until that line, figure out what you CAN finish, and only commit to that. Yes, this involves having a sincere talk with your peers and leaders, something we are usually shying away from doing, but is an important part of making everyone see the same reality that you see. It's not easy. It just works.
So, let me pick everything negative that can be said about a working environment, put it in a post and then come up with a term for it. How about... survival mode! Great, post finished.
OK, a few suggestions (which you might be sick of hearing, but restating the basics can some times help)
1) Get the calendar for deadlines for assignments and dates for the exams for all the modules. Synthesise all the dates onto a single planner. Work out the order of priorities.
2) Make a time plan for the week and try to stick to it. The plan must include breaks and (at least) a day off a week. Do things with other people in the day off and at certain times of day like meals.
3) Get topic lists for each module and check them off as you study those topics.
4) Find other people at about your 'level' of confidence in each module and try to buddy up with them for study periods in the library...
5) ...find a place to study that isn't your own room/house/wherever. Libraries can be good, as you have to get work done, but somewhere else helps as long as it is away from where you sleep (&c).
6) Reduce friction to getting started. Keep notes, study guides, any equipment and textbooks for each module organised. Pop them into your bag as you go off to the study location. Pack the night before if possible. Put the bookmarks to module Websites on your Web-browser tool bar. Use a password manager so you don't even need to authenticate.
7) Google The Pomodoro Method for the actual study time. The author has gone commercial now but there are summaries. Its easy.
Any good?
EDIT: 8) At the end of each study day, prepare the stuff you need for tomorrow. Try to find an easy task on whatever is on the time plan that will get you started (the Hemingway strategy).
Thanks for the reply. Every term I promise myself that I'll make a timetable and stick to it etc. but I always end up prioritising other things and before I know it, I find myself having to cut corners to scrape through and meet deadlines :( Pomodoro method looks cool, I'll try it next term
So how is this different? Why so many upvotes...really, this is just more spam - is it not?