I agree with GP. Can't really answer the hiring question (because I am not interested in being anyone's boss), but why not? Do you think that the way to advance your career is always do what you're being told? GP's suggestion, at least, makes life a lot more interesting.. And people willing to take risks and make their own projects typically will have better CVs.
I would rather see somebody genuinely advance in the organization by genuinely improving something (and taking some risk), while taking time from a stupid project, rather than by taking credit for work of someone else (but that never happens, right?). And in fact it's the latter people who get angry, so for that really doesn't matter on whose time you do it.
As for your suggestion, why is it OK for employer to steal employee's free time and not OK for employee to steal employer's time? We are talking about improvement to the employer's business, after all.
I would rather see somebody genuinely advance in the organization by genuinely improving something (and taking some risk), while taking time from a stupid project, rather than by taking credit for work of someone else (but that never happens, right?).
What you don't seem to realise is that there are no stupid projects. Someone in the business believes that the "stupid project" is a good idea that's worthwhile paying a developer to work on, and they've persuaded the people higher up that this is the case. If you just decide that it's not worth your time and something else is more important then you're effectively telling everyone who has agreed to let the "stupid project" go ahead that they're all wrong and you know best. That is not the best way to further your career.
Open a dialogue. Provide evidence. Don't just say "I know best!" and forge ahead while ignoring everyone else's input. If you're right then people will listen.
I have at times needed to keep projects "secret" because I knew that there would be a 95% chance that the idea would be shot down immediately in any meeting due to being infeasible, politically/personally tricky in some way, difficult to explain, and so on. So I have worked on these ideas sometimes at off hours, or while also making progress on other tasks. Thus far, these skunkworks have been very successful. There is an element to it in many things I do... I often prefer a bit of vagueness around what I am actually doing, since it gives me more freedom to consider solutions that might not be in line with what everybody would expect. Which sometimes makes me wonder if I am being a "cowboy coder" or something. Some of it is due to my skills of persuasion and communication—if I were better at that, maybe I wouldn't need secrecy. But I also just know that some good ideas will not fly in a group meeting before a prototype exists. Then my duty and passion for the product and company override my duty to clear everything with the whole team, I feel. It's not an easy question.
It seems akin to saying there are no stupid moves in chess. Because every move is vetted by the player, and he has a good reason to do it. Unfortunately, people do make mistakes and at least, better moves - than the ones you decided to do - happen.
> you're effectively telling everyone who has agreed to let the "stupid project" go ahead that they're all wrong and you know best
But sometimes you do know best. I didn't say you have to drop work on the stupid project entirely, I just think you should be entitled to be part of the decision too.
Speaking about that, what is the theoretical ideal of how the hierarchical decision-making should look like? I mean, when someone decides things on higher level, how can they do that? If they were to made optimal decision, they need all the information that individual decision makers under them have. So isn't the decision they made always suboptimal? Isn't actually the best way how to make decision in a hierarchy at all to let all the deciders on a lower level decide what decisions have to be made on the upper level?
There should be a mathematical model supporting how hierarchical decision making works, but I have never seen one.
> That is not the best way to further your career
If you do what I suggested, you're taking a risk. It may give you a good result or a bad one, as it happens.
> No one ever succeeds on their own
Even if that is true, which isn't, you can still at least spark a success on your own.
I would rather see somebody genuinely advance in the organization by genuinely improving something (and taking some risk), while taking time from a stupid project, rather than by taking credit for work of someone else (but that never happens, right?). And in fact it's the latter people who get angry, so for that really doesn't matter on whose time you do it.
As for your suggestion, why is it OK for employer to steal employee's free time and not OK for employee to steal employer's time? We are talking about improvement to the employer's business, after all.