31–40 of 105 posts
This critique of mine is abstract, and maybe even wrong. I feel like this is a way of disguising the reality of power, and how at least in western society, power is really focused on conformity. The average workplace rehashes the same dramatics as the average sixth grade class cohort. Which makes sense if you consider that education is mostly about learning how to conform, and follow the instructions given to you. Ev…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No one is suggesting killing yourself for someone else’s dream. That is trying to take ownership for something that you have little scope to impact, frankly, and as you note don’t see the benefits for. I’m saying, having ownership of what you are doing and what you control is essential. Not doing so is a path to hell. That can be the section of the codebase you’re specializing in, or just the effectiveness and qualit…
Wouldn't the word responsibility be more accurate here for what you are trying to describe? own·er·ship the act, state, or right of possessing something. re·spon·si·bil·i·ty the state or fact of having a duty to deal with something or of having control over someone. Part of me that's pushing back here is my manipulative language detector going off.
Wiktionary:
2. (business) Responsibility for something.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/ownership
Cambridge English Dictionary:
the fact of taking responsibility for an idea or problem
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/ownershi...
in the end all those frameworks are simplified platitudes with no real actual guidance. you build your own style with experience, based on your personality, your team, your goals - not some self-help crap.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This attitude is the path to hell. If you own nothing (not even your own attitude, or the quality of what you are doing), then you’re a perpetual victim, always at the whims of others, and always unable to change anything that matters for you. If you take ownership of you and what you do, and how it impacts others and can produce value, you can make choices. To say no. To say yes. To push for recognition, and leave i…
By ownership, the OP means "accountable in the micro". Even if you don't own the company or the macro, there is a sense of cultivating your own skills and mental well-being when you make yourself accountable in the micro.
When someone really has ownership, management has to come to terms with the fact that the owner may make choices that are suboptimal to the company for the sake of their or their teams’ sanity. The majority of management never make that mental leap.
history shows that if you're true good, someone worse will kill you and take your place. literally or metaphorically.
"servant leadership" like we live in some hippy utopia. gtfo of here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is a one-weird-trick that management tries to use on underlings: they talk about motivating a sense of ownership to things. But this doesn't jive with the fact that employees are hirelings and thus have no ownership to anything in the company. But it would be convenient for management to push more of the responsibilities of ownership on the underlings, even though they will get none of the benefits. This of cour…
This attitude is the path to hell. If you own nothing (not even your own attitude, or the quality of what you are doing), then you’re a perpetual victim, always at the whims of others, and always unable to change anything that matters for you. If you take ownership of you and what you do, and how it impacts others and can produce value, you can make choices. To say no. To say yes. To push for recognition, and leave i…
Another thing entirely is what you formally own. I mean as in by-law, not some aspirational or motivational bullshit. And someone is trying to manipulate you if they try to foist the responsibilities of ownership onto you (even if it is just in your own mind—staying late, fretting about it in the shower, etc.) by encouraging “taking ownership” without actually physically letting you own it.
> Owning what you’re working on (and refusing to work for someone who won’t let you) is usually a key part of mental health and actual real world success for everyone.
Yes sir/madame.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wouldn't the word responsibility be more accurate here for what you are trying to describe? own·er·ship the act, state, or right of possessing something. re·spon·si·bil·i·ty the state or fact of having a duty to deal with something or of having control over someone. Part of me that's pushing back here is my manipulative language detector going off.
I feel like the intended colloquial interpretation of "ownership" here is a combination of responsibility and agency. Just because you're responsible for something doesn't mean you actually have power to influence the thing. So "sense of ownership over X" is shorthand for "sense of responsibility for X plus the agency necessary to fulfill the responsibility"
It someone will suffer the consequences of an outcome with no ability to change anything (or make decisions), that’s just making someone a scapegoat.
If someone can make decisions/do things but will not benefit from or lose anything from the outcome, then I’m not sure what they are (judge? Arbitrator? Ruler?) - but they don’t own the thing.
My role was to be the “office admin/firewall” to the team so they could do their job as efficiently as possible.
It’s a loveless role.