I took a role which relates to a strategic goal aligned with correctness of data held. Its public-trust information. From time to time, pragmatism around "can't we just change this record..." makes my blood boil: Its explicitly not what I took the role to do: fixing pragmatic bad choices time after time, makes me want to go do something else, when the intent was to defend a line of historical accuracy and completeness.
The agency is a community benefit NFP, consensus led policy. The decisions we take off-policy worry me intensely. But realistically not all things can be done by consensus. I do think there are some pressures in this space which are similar to the above: if your own moral compass and how the enterprise is driving don't align well, you really need to talk to yourself about why you are doing things. (I am not so far mis-aligned i have this problem, but I have in the past)
Friends left e.g. the IETF, precisely because of this. If you can't adhere to the norms, you need to ask why you're going.
The agency is a community benefit NFP, consensus led policy. The decisions we take off-policy worry me intensely. But realistically not all things can be done by consensus. I do think there are some pressures in this space which are similar to the above: if your own moral compass and how the enterprise is driving don't align well, you really need to talk to yourself about why you are doing things. (I am not so far mis-aligned i have this problem, but I have in the past)
Friends left e.g. the IETF, precisely because of this. If you can't adhere to the norms, you need to ask why you're going.