As all things, it depends on the type of position. In a hospital, it's probably not common for surgeons to be hauling Pepsi out to their car every day. In a call center, you'll probably get close to 80% of people that would abuse such a privilege based on my first-hand experience.

>Is the best solution to the "soda problem" just to fire those people and be done with it? I'm sure they take liberties with more than just sodas.

I think this is an excellent point. I think that personality defects like abusing privileges is one of many variables to consider in hiring, promoting and firing. As you said, if someone is spending their time scheming on saving a few dollars per week then they have serious moral as well as priorities issues.

This is a variation on "it's better to ask for forgiveness than permission", a disappointingly common point of view within the tech and startup communities.

I use this statement somewhat regularly, though the simplicity of the statement makes it confusing.

Acceptable: My son and I were at a grocery store. He started complaining about his stomach and had thrown up several hours prior. I knew the bathroom at this store was located in an employees-only area. I also knew that one of the managers was a jerk. I could take him to the toilet to discretely regurgitate or ask the manager, risk getting turned down (or just in the time it would take, risk not making it in time) or just walk right past the sign and prevent him from projectile vomiting in the aisle. That was the first phrase I thought of, and I bolted.

On the flip side, if I'm on a White House tour and am told that I must stay with the tour group at all times, I'll be sticking with the tour group at all times, thanks.

In the context of tech companies, I recall a talk Scott Hanselman gave (very paraphrased) where he said he decided one night to just setup a site for Visual Studio fan art (I think he used Tumblr) which he later shared with his boss and was received very positively. He knew if he had proposed the idea that fifteen departments, thousands of dollars and several weeks would be involved (should we really use Tumblr? would corporate branding be upset? Don't forget to run it by legal! What if someone makes porn of it!). Corporate policy (asking permission) wasn't followed, but the result was infinitely better than if the process was followed and I, personally, loved the site.

I'll admit, though, that the line between overstepping with this thinking and doing something very wrong can be very, very, hazy and can land you in serious trouble (often legally).

Whats worrying is that people are using that as an excuse to "get things done" that shouldn't ever have been started in the first place. The permission givers are more often than not there for a reason, and more often then not they are saying no for a reason.

Compliance is amazingly important because getting it wrong can virtually end your company, yet developers get annoyed when the project they are on is delayed as PCI compliance is checked.. etc. The moment they take the "ask forgiveness" approach they put the company at risk of a serious fine, or worse, company limiting restrictions. [Check Path out for an example].

To everybody that has used this mantra: If you don't understand exactly why you are being blocked by the "permission givers" then don't assume that they will freely give forgiveness when you royally screw something up.

As long as you're not being a dick, forgiveness beats permission any day.

Its one thing when its "Tony is out of town, I will borrow his lawn mower and ask for permission later." Its completely different when you don't understand the implications of the thing you are doing.

I have been the "permission granter" thousands of times where permission couldn't be granted due to everything from in feasibility of the request [There are not that many widgets to give], prioritization [its not worth taking from the main product to feet your pet project], compliance [doing what you want will get us fined], to flat out legality.

Developers with this attitude RARELY understand the implications, even in a company of 20 people. They assume that they are getting things done but really they are just moving the problem to a team further down the stack.

Within a company, going around a permission giver is almost always a good way to be labeled a "dick" by the people cleaning up after you.

A person who always follows the "ask permission" strategy ends up with an ingrained unconscious belief that most things they could do are ultimately bad ideas. They end up limiting themselves and only taking actions that are safe, uncontroversial, and unlikely to result in a "no".

A person who always follows the "ask forgiveness" strategy will end up getting slapped down a few times and occasionally get a reputation as a dick and have to find new people to work with. But over time, he'll learn a good intuitive sense of both what the limits are (because he's broken them so many times) and why the limits are there (because he's seen the consequences of breaking them).

All this means that eventually, the person who asked forgiveness a whole lot eventually ends up being the "permission granter". Eventually he ends up taking an opportunity that the "ask permission" folks deemed was too risky and it works out, and people remember the one huge success more than the dozens of minor messes.

So while you may be justified in labeling the "ask forgiveness" guy a dick, that won't stop him from replacing you. Life is sometimes unfair, and assholes sometimes win.

Perhaps I'm an optimist.

Asking permission is a way of hedging against your own judgment. In other words, it's a great thing to do when you're genuinely not sure. But if you are right, you don't get results as efficiently, since you have to let everyone bikeshed first. Maybe you don't even get results at all.

It's really simple. Don't open with what you want to do, open with what you'd like to get, and make sure that you're mentioning 2 or 3 things you're willing to give up. Don't say "I want to write a complex mobile app for the delivery department", say "I need a $200k to hire 2 programmers, buy 30 different phones, and 6 months of nothing on my plate, you got 15 minutes ?".

Obviously, you do this once every 6 months or so at most, preferably less, and follow through.

It's amazing, especially in America, how mentioning dollar amounts focuses people on solving problems and looking at opportunities instead of looking for excuses. Finding excuses is universal in organizations, especially big ones, and the higher ups have as much trouble with it at the cleaning lady. Plus, the fact that you even know how much to ask and have a plan for the negotiation means you have built a business case (don't go in without one).

If your employees don't have the judgment to know when to ask for forgiveness rather than permission, fire them and hire people who do have good judgment. Don't use process to protect yourself from hiring bozos. Just don't hire bozos.

Much of the time you should ask forgiveness rather than permission, you're not really required to ask permission in the first place and you just end up creating useless bikeshedding discussions. If there's a process that requires you to ask permission, and the process is genuinely important, it's a different matter.

It's worth noting that the first person to say "it's easier to ask forgiveness than to get permission" was Grace Hopper, who not only wrote the first compiler, but served for four decades in the Navy. So you can accomplish a lot of things and still somehow not get fired from even stodgy bureaucratic institutions with this mentality.

I'm sorry you've had to work with a lot of dicks and bozos. I had a coworker like that once too. Had. I've used, and seen used, "forgiveness before permission" many times in my career and aside from that guy it always worked out.

Maybe. I have certainly had moments where this seemed appropriate. But everyone has flaws and blind spots. It's far too easy to be blind to your own mistakes and to rationalize unsavory behavior.