Jobs that either don’t contribute in any meaningful way or jobs where one would be better off if they were paid to be on call.

  • AggressivelyPassive@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    8 months ago

    No, they are not.

    They are often enough purely internal documents or remnants of old days, where certain documents were actually important, maybe.

    • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      Depends on the industry. If literally everyone just always documented everything, my job would be much easier.

    • thereisalamp@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      The company I work for now has very much this attitude for the last 50 years.

      As a result they have 3 locations, no sops, and no accountability.

      Over the last 6 months is been my job to put us back in compliance with local and federal reporting requirements and develop SOPs. The feedback from the bottom up is that it’s wonderful to have consistency, different bosses giving the same answers to questions, auditors being able to complete audits in expected and appropriate times, and in compliance with reporting regulations.

      Can companies go overboard and employ people like me who do busy unnecessary work? Absolutely. But it is definitely appropriate to have a couple of administrators.

      • AggressivelyPassive@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Rules and procedures are always a trade-off. However, I would argue that the vast majority of organizations have way too many of them and produces way too much busy work.

        Just look at your own example - I’m 90% sure, that the different locations did have procedures and did document stuff, just not in a consistent way. So their documentation was scattered and their reports practically useless.