What shorts of Bullshit Jobs are there?

Summary from book Bullshit Jobs by David Graeber

What Flunkies Do

Flunky jobs are roles that exist mainly to make someone else look or feel important, without serving a real functional purpose. These jobs are often symbolic, like the feudal retainers of old, whose presence emphasized their master's status. In modern times, examples include doormen, receptionists in companies with little real need for them, or assistants hired solely to make higher-ups appear more successful or busy. The primary goal is to create an image of importance or authority for those in power, rather than perform necessary tasks.

What Goons Do

In this excerpt, the term "goons" is metaphorically used to describe workers whose jobs exist primarily to serve the interests of their employers in an aggressive, often manipulative way, even though they may not contribute positively to society. These roles, which include national armed forces, corporate lawyers, telemarketers, PR specialists, and others, exist mainly because other people or entities also employ similar roles.

The key idea is that many of these jobs, like literal goons, serve to protect or advance their employers' interests rather than provide genuine value to society. For instance, armies exist because other countries have armies; without any armies, they would not be necessary. Similarly, marketing professionals and PR specialists often manipulate public perceptions, while corporate lawyers help large corporations navigate or exploit the legal system for financial gain. The term "goon" is also used to describe jobs that feel coercive, deceptive, or manipulative, like those in advertising or call centers, where workers might feel they are tricking or pressuring people into buying things they don’t need.

Many people in such roles feel their jobs are ultimately pointless, and they experience frustration or a sense of moral conflict because their work does not fulfill a real societal need. This disillusionment, particularly among those in marketing, PR, or advertising, often stems from the feeling that they are contributing to a culture of deception or unnecessary consumption.

Godi Media and influencers in India

In Indian context" Godi media" (a term often used in India to describe media outlets perceived as being overly supportive of the government) and certain influencers can fit the metaphorical "goon" category as described in the text. Both may serve to push narratives or propaganda that align with government or corporate interests, rather than providing independent, balanced information or genuine value to the public.

"Godi media" would be seen as aggressively promoting a particular agenda, often bending or omitting facts to favor those in power. Similarly, influencers who are paid to endorse products or political views—sometimes without disclosing their sponsorships—can manipulate public opinion or create demand for things people don't really need, much like the advertising professionals mentioned in the excerpt.

Duct Tapers

Duct tapers, as described in this excerpt, are people whose jobs exist to fix or manage problems that shouldn't exist in the first place. Their work often involves patching up mistakes, inefficiencies, or incompetencies in an organization, rather than contributing anything fundamentally necessary or innovative.

The metaphor is borrowed from the software industry, where some jobs involve applying "duct tape" to make different technologies work together. Ideally, if the core technology was built properly, there would be no need for this kind of patchwork, just as a well-maintained system wouldn't require constant fixing. This same principle applies across different industries, where employees spend their time fixing issues caused by structural flaws or inefficiencies.

Examples include:

• Correcting mistakes by incompetent superiors: A "tester" proofreading reports written by someone who can’t write properly but refuses to correct their errors.
• Fixing malfunctioning or mismanaged systems: A programmer forced to cover up for a flawed algorithm invented by a company "genius."
• Performing tasks that could easily be automated: Like entering data manually because management has failed to automate the process or refuses to due to bureaucracy or power struggles.

In essence, duct tapers perform work that arises from organizational dysfunction, and these jobs can breed frustration, as the workers realize their efforts are addressing symptoms of deeper problems, not real needs. It's the equivalent of placing a bucket under a leaky roof instead of repairing the roof itself—more effort goes into managing the damage than fixing the root cause.

Box tickers

Box tickers are employees whose primary role is to allow an organization to claim that it is fulfilling a task or objective, even though the actual purpose is not being accomplished. Their work revolves around completing forms, reports, or compliance measures that create the illusion of progress or adherence to standards. However, these activities rarely contribute to meaningful outcomes, often undermining the very goals they are supposed to support.

For instance, Betsy, who coordinated leisure activities in a care home, spent most of her time filling out forms about residents' preferences, forms that were never used. Her primary duty, in the eyes of her boss, was the completion of these forms, even though they diverted time from actually providing leisure activities to the residents. This focus on bureaucracy rather than practical impact is a hallmark of box-ticking jobs.

These roles often arise in response to governmental regulations or corporate policies, where organizations must demonstrate compliance, but the effort put into documentation and reports outweighs any real benefit. In large corporations or government agencies, reports and data are often manipulated or presented in ways that serve to reassure management or regulators without leading to substantial improvements in service delivery or operations. For example, Mark, a senior officer in a UK council, described his job as revolving around producing meaningless numbers that made it look like things were improving, even though they did nothing to help citizens.

Box-ticking jobs can involve endless sequences of ritualistic activities, such as preparing reports, conducting surveys, or creating presentations that are often never read or acted upon. In the corporate sector, these roles can include preparing elaborate PowerPoint presentations or reports that executives use to maintain appearances, even when the information is superficial or irrelevant.

In essence, box tickers are hired not to solve problems but to document that the organization is pretending to address them, and employees in these roles are typically very aware of the futility of their work.

Taskmasters

Taskmasters are a unique category of bullshit jobs, divided into two types:

1. Type 1 Taskmasters are unnecessary supervisors who assign work that subordinates could easily handle without their oversight. These roles are the opposite of "flunkies," as they represent unnecessary superiors. People in these roles may feel their contribution is minimal, like Ben, a middle manager who spends most of his time allocating tasks that his team could manage on their own. Even though these taskmasters might try to do more meaningful work, they are often discouraged by their superiors.

2. Type 2 Taskmasters go beyond simply assigning tasks—they create unnecessary tasks for others. These taskmasters, often found in bureaucratic or managerial roles, are responsible for supervising tasks that may not need doing or even creating entirely new jobs that are equally meaningless. Chloe, an Academic Dean, is a prime example of this type. Her job was to develop "strategic" documents, but since she held no actual power, her role was purely performative. She admits that had she been given real authority, her job might have been harmful, creating pointless work for others to justify her position.

Testimonies from people in taskmaster positions reveal the frustrating cycle of supervising or creating work that often serves no real purpose.

Type 1 Taskmasters in Indian Bureaucracy

In Indian bureaucracy, there are numerous officials whose main job is to supervise or manage tasks that do not require their oversight. These individuals often occupy middle management positions in various governmental departments. For example, many government offices have layers of hierarchy, with a Section Officer overseeing clerks who are already proficient in their work. This results in redundant supervision, where the clerks could handle the tasks independently. The over-reliance on hierarchy leads to situations where multiple approvals or signatures are required for even routine work, causing delays and inefficiency.

The "Ben" in Indian bureaucracy could be an officer sitting in an office with no real role but constantly signing files that could have been processed without their intervention. This not only slows down work but fosters an environment where officials earn their salary without adding real value, similar to the flunkies and taskmasters described in the text.

Type 2 Taskmasters and Redundant Processes

Type 2 taskmasters, who create unnecessary tasks for others, are especially visible in the administrative bloat seen in Indian bureaucratic institutions. Many bureaucrats generate excessive paperwork, complex procedures, and extra layers of approvals to justify their existence and position. For example, public sector companies, ministries, and local government offices often create complex forms, reports, and approvals that serve no real purpose but give the appearance of work.

Chloe’s role, as described in the text, parallels the experience of many in India who occupy "strategic" positions but with no actual power or influence. These positions might exist to create policies, strategies, or reforms on paper, but in reality, they lack the authority or resources to implement any meaningful changes. Their reports and documents often pile up in bureaucratic files, never actually impacting governance or public services, echoing the famous "file culture" of Indian bureaucracy.

Corruption: A Byproduct of Taskmaster Roles

The taskmaster role can also feed into corruption, a major issue in Indian bureaucracy. With so many redundant layers of supervision and approval, taskmasters often leverage their position to demand bribes in exchange for speeding up or facilitating work that doesn't need their involvement in the first place. In such cases, they actively generate hurdles or delays that only they can remove, creating opportunities for rent-seeking. This is particularly common in departments like public works, land registration, customs, and tax collection, where bureaucrats hold key decision-making power and can delay files unless unofficial payments are made.