Creation Ex Nihilo: Or corporations want to get everything from nothing.
Posted by WantToVent@reddit | sysadmin | View on Reddit | 14 comments
We are an IT services company, but our CIO/CTO is under the CFO in the hierachy. That's tells you everything you need to know about our strategic priorities: minimise short term cost at likely long term cost.
Everything is "doing more with less", asking us to lower expenses like licensing costs as if we can just pick which machines can be turned off or just tell the vendors to not raise prices, cutting teams in half and surprised Pikachu face when we either spend the days firefighting AND quality decreases, and a long et cetera.
The ideal sceneario our CFO wants to see is creatio ex nihilo i.e. creation out of nothing, infinite work from zero money.
The do not understand there is a minimum cost for any operation, EVEN if they had a magic AI that did all the work of 10000 people, it will still use something: electricity, hardware repairs, software improvements, data feeding, token fees, you name it, and those things need to be paid.
Of course this is not only my company, all companies are looking into cost-cutting initiatives. But they are harming mid and long term growth and business sustainability for short terms "savings". You save nothing long term, if your short term cuts need to be reversed later, at more expensive rates, you lose customers in the process if your quality goes down too much, and you spend more reverting the savings. For a net gain of zero, but lots of intermediate pain.
phoenix823@reddit
I'll offer a contrasting point of view.
In my last job, there was no one person in charge of our AWS systems. IT and Development teams had access to create their own resources in non-prod, and if the dev team told the DevOps team they needed X databases, Y web servers, some S3 buckets and some lambda functions, DevOps built it for them. They saw their role as writing Terraform to automate the build of that infrastructure so things were efficient. That's what "good" looked like. Long story short, I get tasked with figuring out if our cloud spend was "right sized" or if there was optimization available. Within 60 days, I cut $1 million/year (about 20%) of the cloud spend because there were no lifecycle controls in place. At all.
And this isn't a one-off thing. I've seen lots of places with half-assed processes that never clean things up, never reclaim licenses/spend, never close the loop. That's done a lot of damage and results in this perception that IT needs adult supervision, gets us stuck under CFOs, and encourages them to push and behave like this.
Pale-Price-7156@reddit
How is this a CFO win?
To me, this is an IT governance and skills failure. The CFO did not create value because finance has some unique insight into AWS. The CFO found a mess that should have already been governed by the technical leadership responsible for the environment.
If an AWS environment has no lifecycle controls, no ownership model, no tagging discipline, no cleanup process, no chargeback/showback, no budget alarms, no account guardrails, and no recurring review of spend, that is not “cloud being expensive.” That is poor cloud management.
This is exactly the kind of thing AWS governance is meant to prevent. Anyone operating at a Solutions Architect level should understand that cloud is not just about building resources quickly. It is also about controlling who can create resources, how those resources are governed, how they are tracked, how spend is monitored, and how unused resources are retired.
Terraform does not equal governance. Automation only makes the mess repeatable if there are no standards behind it.
So I would not call this a CFO win. I would call it a failure by IT leadership, cloud engineering, and management to put basic operational controls in place. The CFO stepping in is the symptom. The root cause is that the technology organization failed to govern its own environment.
sedition666@reddit
The very reason most people are in AWS is due to corporate hype cycles which is another cancer in our industry. Running business on the hyperscalers can absolutely be worthwhile, but almost no one will invest on the refactoring of environments to actually do that. Most businesses are in cloud because thats what they think they should do rather than actually building serverless apps etc.
WantToVent@reddit (OP)
Agreed that some people never clean after themselves. This post was mostly a rant of our current situation.
We can always improve, make things better, but just not this way.
Leinheart@reddit
Yeah. Every job ive ever had has been like this. Probably a side effect from beginning my career in 2008. I figured in 5 to 10 years, we'll have a full on slave trade started back up.
darthereandthere@reddit
bill always comes due, it's just 18 months later when you're rebuilding from scratch because the 'cost-cutting' quarter killed everything. And the CFO who made the decision is already at another company taking credit for your corpse's P&L
AppIdentityGuy@reddit
This a result of a fundamental flaw in the western business model. Metrics drive behavior and everyone is driven to meet quarterly and annual financial numbers. This automatically leads to short term thinking. Also most CFO only understand cost and can't comprehend value. Rory Sutherland has some wonderful insights on this precise situation.
Pale-Price-7156@reddit
"The ideal sceneario our CFO wants to see is creatio ex nihilo i.e. creation out of nothing, infinite work from zero money."
Of course they do. How else would the CFO justify their C level salary? Everyone gripes about HR, but the CFO literally does nothing but input Excel formulas and tell teams to do more with less, all the while they are making 5x the top engineer in your firm.
I guess you are just ranting, because you did not ask a question, but if you think you can do this better, you should break away, create your own IT services company and put them out of business.
Isn't that how the free market is supposed to work?
I'm not trying to beat you up. You're not wrong.
Any IT services company that staffs a CFO position is a red flag anyways. What value do they add? If I'm wrong, please tell me what I am wrong about?
If in 2026, you can not ask an AI model to build an Excel formula for you to help you understand what you are spending money on, and what you shouldn't be spending money on, you deserve all the bad things that are about to happen to your organization.
WantToVent@reddit (OP)
I am trying to create my own company, at least on my team (I am the lead of the sysadmins) the culture is to focus on doing things right the first time even if it takes longer.
As someone that had to lose sleep and weekends on things that could have been prevented, I do as much as I can to protect my team time, that includes being efficient, but not using efficiency as an excuse to drive people like slaves.
lenswipe@reddit
yeah the problem is that "things we shouldn't be spending money on" are often things like payroll and staff retention while the c suite all get bonuses for doing very little
RansomStark78@reddit
CFO
Have no cents
vivkkrishnan2005@reddit
Nothing new. Bean counters are more prioritized over engineering.
Look at Boeing
lenswipe@reddit
Boeing is a case study of what happens if you put MBAs in charge of engineering
SevaraB@reddit
Business people line through constant cognitive dissonance- their magical utopian ideal is “passive income” where an owner gets revenue with zero labor input.
Of course, it’s a myth- a service is, by definition, labor, and a product requires marketing because its value is determined by supply and demand.
The CFOs are often the ones that want employees and labor gone the most, because it’s not the CEO’s name on the bank account. When the whole thing collapses in on itself and becomes “passive income,” the CFO (who is usually also the treasurer) is going to be the one taking in all that income. I’ve met good and bad CEOs, but I’ve never once walked away from a conversation with a CFO involving money without feeling like I needed to spend the next hour scrubbing the slime off myself.