職場現象論 Phenomena in the Workplace

今天要來討論的有趣現象是
Today’s discussion will focus on an interesting phenomenon:

為什麼每次聽到大人強調自己很重視 XX 時，就有很高的機會表示對方或是對方的團隊很缺乏 XX 的概念，或在 XX 領域做得比平均水準差？

Why is it that whenever we hear adults emphasizing how much they value XX, there is a high probability that they or their team lack a solid understanding of XX, or perform below average in the XX domain?

舉幾個例子

For examples

• 我們公司很重視軟體品質，都有在做軟體驗證
• We place great emphasis on software quality and always perform software validation.

表示這家公司的 QA 團隊可能根本就還在手動驗證狀態，完全沒自動化，而且可能每次急著出產品並沒有好好地花時間做自動化驗證。而且因為手動驗證的關係，所以導致每一次的驗證時程拉的很長，而且為了趕上時程每次都把工程師也拉進去一起測試。

This might indicate that the company’s QA team is still relying on manual testing with no automation in place. They may rush to release products without taking the necessary time for automated validation. Due to the reliance on manual testing, each testing cycle is prolonged, and engineers are often pulled in to help with testing to meet deadlines.

• 我們團隊很在意 code 的品質，花了很多時間在做 code review
• Our team is very concerned about code quality and spends a lot of time on code reviews.

表示這個團隊可能根本在 code review 上沒有共識，每次都花很多時間 review 卻還是產不出好的品質，或是根本就隨便勾一勾沒在看，導致他們必須一直花時間在規範 code review 的規則。

This could imply that the team has no consensus on code review standards, spending a lot of time on reviewing code but still can’t produce good quality code. Alternatively, they might be conducting superficial reviews, leading to a constant need to refine the code review process and rules.

• 我們公司最在意的是用戶體驗，任何東西都是用戶優先
• Our company prioritizes user experience, putting users first in everything we do.

表示這家公司的產品可能一直收到顧客抱怨，而且一直嘗試著加很多以為是顧客要的東西，但抱怨聲還是一直襲來。如同亨利・福特指出來的問題（註 1 ），只聽不思索，因此一直找更快的馬給予顧客。

This may suggest that the company’s products frequently receive customer complaints. They may be continuously adding features they assume customers want, yet complaints persist. This mirrors the issue highlighted by Henry Ford(Note 1): simply listening without thoughtful consideration leads to offering customers faster horses instead of innovative solutions.

最後為避免大家覺得我在開地圖炮，我舉個自己的例子

To avoid giving the impression that I’m making broad, unfounded criticisms, let me share a personal example.

我面試時常常會講我寫程式會寫 Unit Test，而且用了什麼什麼工具，從哪裡開始寫，怎麼帶團隊一起寫，做了什麼又什麼的自動化測試，正要開始 TDD，但實際情況是我從來沒真的跑過 TDD ，甚至內心裡對於很大程度的 Unit Test 不怎麼感興趣，原因可能是對於邏輯偏簡單、直接的功能就會覺得不需要也可以，或是寫完程式才發現架構讓 Unit Test 好難寫，因此乾脆偷懶放著，下次再做等等，這些例子不勝枚舉，當然有些事後讓我付出慘痛教訓，有些就未爆彈的被埋在原地，但每每讓我困擾的是，為啥我面試的時候要自找死路自己挖坑哩？

In interviews, I often talk about how I write unit tests, mentioning the tools I use, where I start writing them, how I lead the team to write them, and what kinds of automated tests I’ve implemented. I even mentioned that I’m beginning to practice TDD (Test-Driven Development). But the reality is that I’ve never actually done TDD, and I’m not particularly interested in extensive unit testing. This might be because I feel it’s unnecessary for simpler, more straightforward functionalities, or because I realize after writing the code that the architecture I designed makes unit testing very difficult, so I end up procrastinating. There are countless examples of this. Some have led to painful lessons later on, while others remain hidden ticking time bombs. And what really bothers me, though, is why I dig myself into this hole during interviews by making such claims.

鑑於上述情境，我發現自己也會有這個缺點，因此我覺得我需要更理解和更深入討論一下這個議題，所以下面我嘗試著找了一些切入點來理解這個現象

According to the above situation, I realize that I also have this shortcoming. Therefore, I feel I need to have better understand and delve deeper into this issue. Consequently, I have attempted to find some perspectives to comprehend this phenomenon.

達克效應 Dunning-Kruger effect

首先當然最直覺的反應是達克效應，俗話說的半瓶水響叮噹，雖然達克效應還有許多意思，但其最著名的部分就是人在學習一項技能最初期時會對自身的能力有過度的自信。這用在這裡理解可以看成，這間公司可能剛開始推動某個類型的文化或是做事方式，但會覺得自己已經做得很多很好了。

The immediate response, of course, would be the Dunning-Kruger Effect. As the saying goes, “a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.” While the Dunning-Kruger Effect encompasses various meanings, its most famous aspect is the overconfidence people have in their abilities when they are learning a new skill. Applied here, it can be understood as the company possibly initiating a new type of culture or approach to doing things but feeling they have already done a lot and done it well.

自動導航 Unconscious behavior

這個角度的解釋是，人通常對於熟練的事物會像呼吸和喝水一樣為開啟自動導航模式一樣變下意識行為，所以人通常不會強調自己今天呼吸呼吸的多棒，但卻會對自己還做得磕磕絆絆的事情牢記在心，而因此會過份強調這件事，並且還會過度的從日常工作中找尋與之相關的事情記在腦中。

From this perspective, the explanation is that people tend to engage in unconscious behavior with things they are proficient at, much like breathing or drinking water, which activates automatic navigation mode. Therefore, people won’t emphasize how well they breathe today, but they do tend to remember their stumbling blocks. Consequently, they may excessively emphasize these instances and overly focus on finding related incidents from their daily work to remember.

80/20 法則 The 80/20 rule

可以這樣理解，一個公司的產品的 80% 會由 20％ 的做事產生出來，這代表這間公司擅長的地方，反過來說剩下的 80% 的事情卻只能做出 20% 的成效，但我們卻比較會說出口的是自己大部分時間都在幹嘛，而講出來的東西反而會是其實比較沒有成效的事。

The 80/20 rule can be understood as follows: 80% of a company’s products are generated by 20% of its efforts. This signifies the areas where the company excels. Conversely, the remaining 80% of tasks only yield 20% of the results. However, what we tend to vocalize more often is what we spend the majority of our time on, even though the most effective activities might be different.

迴聲室效應 The echo chamber effect.

通常來講這會被用在社群裡面，不過在公司裡面，尤其是主管本身感覺也很容易發生，比方說主管可能只是安排了一個軟體品質相關的 KPI ，這時候整個部門會有如回聲機一般一直重複著類似的工作，不管是開始有人做 QA 技術分享，有人做了自動化測試，每個人都報告著這禮拜為了軟體品質多做了什麼事，可能真的有些東西是新做得，但也有可能是原本就有的，只是老闆重視就順便沾個光，一切都像回聲一般交織在一起，而分不清楚是誰在發聲。

This is often referred to in social media contexts, but it can easily occur within companies as well, especially among supervisors. For instance, a supervisor might only set a KPI related to software quality. In such cases, the entire department might echo similar tasks, resembling an echo chamber. Regardless of whether someone starts doing QA technical sharing or implements automated testing, each person reports on what they’ve done to improve software quality that week. Some actions might genuinely be new, while others might have already been in place, but now gain attention because the boss values them. Everything blends together like an echo, making it difficult to discern who is contributing what.

結尾聊聊動機好了，其實做這篇的動機是我面試的時候感受到的有趣事情，就我這個面試者的角度來說，我不僅僅是在面試的時候會發現對方在描述自己的公司的時候常常會有挖坑給自己跳的問題，對於自己我也常常挖給自己跳，因此我覺得蠻有趣的，另外面試也是個有趣體驗，你只能藉由這短短的時間從對方的敘述去理解這家公司，而對方必定會偏向不講太多的自己的缺點，或是想要輕描淡寫缺點，但往往『粉紅色的大象』（註 2 ）總是會一而再再而三的蹦出我們的面試過程，當然反過來說這隻粉色大象也會不吝嗇的在面試者身上起舞。

Let’s wrap up by talking about motivation. The motivation behind writing this piece actually stems from some interesting observations I made during job interviews. As an interviewee, I’ve noticed that not only do interviewers often set traps when describing their company, but I also tend to set traps for myself, too. So, I found this phenomenon quite interesting. Moreover, job interviews themselves are fascinating experiences. In that short period, you can only understand a company through the descriptions provided by the interviewer. However, interviewers often tend to avoid discussing their company’s lacks or try to downplay them. Nevertheless, no matter what, that “pink elephant”(Note 2) always manages to pop up repeatedly during our interview process. Of course, conversely, this pink elephant also doesn’t hesitate to dance in the interviewee’s brain.

註1：原文為汽車大王亨利・福特的一句話：如果我當年去問顧客他們想要什麼，他們肯定會告訴我：「一匹更快的馬」。另外我並不確定這是否是真的有留下這句話，只是很經典就拿來用了～

Note 1: The original quote is attributed to automotive magnate Henry Ford: “If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.” Additionally, I’m not certain if this quote was actually said by him, but it’s a classic and commonly used.

註2：心理學用語，越是請人不要想到某個東西，他反而越容易在他腦海裡看到它。

Note 2: Psychological term: The more someone tries not to think about something, the more likely it is to pop up in their mind.