Never argue with your boss (2009)
righteousit.com
Never argue with your boss (2009)
1–10 of 67 posts
Re: Never argue with your boss (2009)
#2If your boss is so fragile they can't take a healthy debate or discussion or stand to be challenged on anything then find a new boss.
Re: Never argue with your boss (2009)
#3If your boss is so fragile they can't take a healthy debate or discussion or stand to be challenged on anything then find a new boss.
Yeah. My takeaway was sure, on one hand, arguing with your boss isn't going to end well. On the other hand, if arguing with your boss wouldn't end well (meaning you have a well reasoned technical disagreement, not just being insubordinate) then your boss is a bad boss...
Re: Never argue with your boss (2009)
#4If your boss is so fragile they can't take a healthy debate or discussion or stand to be challenged on anything then find a new boss.
Did you read the article? It provided a pretty good argument against exactly this attitude.
Re: Never argue with your boss (2009)
#5If your boss is so fragile they can't take a healthy debate or discussion or stand to be challenged on anything then find a new boss.
Did you read the article? It provided a pretty good argument against exactly this attitude.
I didn't read the article, because I got two PR_CONNECT_RESET_ERRORs in a row, I don't know whose fault it is, but I blame the bosses.
Re: Never argue with your boss (2009)
#6The title should be “Never argue with your boss disrespectfully”. In front of his boss nonetheless. Arguing with your boss is fine, just don’t throw tantrums.
Re: Never argue with your boss (2009)
#7Have seen this myself in practise. Just like in this case it didnt end well. But this «lesson» so to speak is just the same concept in everyday life applied to work. You should generally never argue with authorities publically. It never ends well. Perhaps some free speech fanatics mean otherwise, but free speech doesn’t really exist.
Re: Never argue with your boss (2009)
#8In East Asia, particularly in Korea, there is a term called 'ganeon' (諫言, remonstration). It refers to speaking up when a superior's approach is wrong, in order to correct it.
But does a East Asian Confucian perspective always require it? Not necessarily.
From the Confucian viewpoint, an organization is not simply an arena for individual logical debates. Everyone has their own role and position, and when those roles collapse, the order of the community collapses.
'A superior must decide like a superior. A subordinate must remonstrate and support like a subordinate.'
What the OP's post did was not just make the boss look wrong. It declared that the boss 'could not function as a boss.' That's why the colleagues felt fear. It wasn't 'technically correct.' It was 'that person can publicly destroy the team's hierarchy.'
In Confucian terms, this is called 'remonstration without propriety.'
Good remonstration usually involves speaking privately first, respecting the other person's social face, and presenting options while preserving the form that the superior is the decision-maker. Those options should include risks and alternatives, so that it leads toward the direction you want.
In other words, you start by acknowledging that the boss's point is valid, then frame your disagreement as a risk you are worried about, but you're concerned about certain risks. If you say it that way, team members will later remember that you warned them, and the boss can't avoid responsibility either.
Of course, the boss also needs to have the right 'virtue' for that position. They need to listen to why subordinates object, and have the ability to make technical judgments. Storming out of a meeting saying 'I don't need this shit' is not boss-like behavior, so in an East Asian perspective, both sides are at fault. But many would see the subordinate who shattered the other's face as more at fault.
And of course, human relationships don't always have a right answer. I don't always follow this myself either—I fight with clients every day.
Re: Never argue with your boss (2009)
#9The article seems to be about arguing with your boss in _public_. Having a fight with anyone in public in a professional environment is pretty intense behaviour. Not saying I've never done it, but it's not usually productive. It takes a lot of skill to get things done your way without alienating people. We should always be careful of how we "debate" in a professional context. Discussion habits picked up on HN translate poorly to Slack.
Arguing with your boss in private, now that's a completely different deck of Magic cards. Totally helpful, productive behaviour if done respectfully and constructively. You're there to solve problems together, having differences of opinion is natural. Thrash it out between you in a 1:1, book time to engage and brainstorm.
Be nice, be prepared, find solutions that move things forward without bruising egos, try and get them to think it was their idea.
Importantly, you're coming to a decision in which they get the final say, because it's their team. Once a decision is made, after consultation, you just gotta roll with it. Don't bitch, or moan, or rub it in if things go wrong. Chain of command. One of these days you'll be there too.
If you keep on "losing" or finding yourself in constant conflict with your boss, that suggests a deeper problem. Jobs are like relationships, they've gotta work both ways. Maybe this isn't the right one for you (or them, but just as likely you).
Anyway. Never argue with your boss _in public_. Debate in private, come to a decision and move forward.
Re: Never argue with your boss (2009)
#10If your boss is so fragile they can't take a healthy debate or discussion or stand to be challenged on anything then find a new boss.
If finding a new boss was that easy, we wouldn't have people job hunting for months and getting 0 responses...