31–40 of 135 posts
2. When an organization must downsize, you want to make sure once the dust settles that no one under you is able to take your job.
3. These decisions are political, so you need political power to defend against them.
The overall problem can be summarised as we don't live in a meritocracy.
I've seen a fair share of personalities in middle/upper management. My hypothesis is that in large organizations, people that operate at that level often exhibit more survival skills that are ruthless than moral. A common characteristic I've seen is they manage "up" well and are often not good managers themselves. So if they control the narrative with their management, even when they screw up everything, its articula…
Really makes you want to audit ALL communications of the most sociopathic people in your organization and ask an AI to construct the true narrative based on activity and communication logs. Even on any personal devices. Although those slippery people will just begin to perform for the AI as well.
I've seen a fair share of personalities in middle/upper management. My hypothesis is that in large organizations, people that operate at that level often exhibit more survival skills that are ruthless than moral. A common characteristic I've seen is they manage "up" well and are often not good managers themselves. So if they control the narrative with their management, even when they screw up everything, its articula…
> even when they screw up everything, its articulated as something else and not their fault, they may even believe that to be true. The reason this is so important, both in government and in private business, is that these people decide nothing, until you get to the very top. And the ones at the very top are terrified of actually making any decision. They're at the top and what they're currently doing obviously broug…
Which is why they also seem to focus so much on protecting their position.
It explains a lot, frankly.
I've seen a fair share of personalities in middle/upper management. My hypothesis is that in large organizations, people that operate at that level often exhibit more survival skills that are ruthless than moral. A common characteristic I've seen is they manage "up" well and are often not good managers themselves. So if they control the narrative with their management, even when they screw up everything, its articula…
1. Being too good in an organization makes you a threat to those above you. 2. When an organization must downsize, you want to make sure once the dust settles that no one under you is able to take your job. 3. These decisions are political, so you need political power to defend against them.
I mean this sympathetically, but you and your partner seem to have an unhealthy relationship with work. Employment is a business transaction. You sell the company your time - it gives you money. That’s the deal. The company is not your family, your father or a secret ledger of who worked hardest. Think of it like buying groceries. You don’t expect the supermarket to love you because you’ve shopped there for 15 years.…
Corporations are made of people and the structures can be very dysfunctional. I’ve seen it and I’m sure it’s common elsewhere, many decisions are made with no actual rational understanding of “economic sense”. An example is firing someone to save costs but needing to then hire 2 new people to replace them, increasing communication costs and having to pay a training cost.
This is a more general question, which is "Why don't people take accountability for their actions?" Because it's hard work and it's easier to let someone else bear the costs.
That's a more noble aspect of framing the question, and I guess I could even see why someone may try to not kamikaze themselves out of a financially very juicy system even if it was their own actions causing the trouble. However, they all operate in some form of management mesh, so clearly, one level up or across the line must notice or know who caused the chaos? Maybe it is the nature of how failure is expressed at…
I've seen a fair share of personalities in middle/upper management. My hypothesis is that in large organizations, people that operate at that level often exhibit more survival skills that are ruthless than moral. A common characteristic I've seen is they manage "up" well and are often not good managers themselves. So if they control the narrative with their management, even when they screw up everything, its articula…
Really makes you want to audit ALL communications of the most sociopathic people in your organization and ask an AI to construct the true narrative based on activity and communication logs. Even on any personal devices. Although those slippery people will just begin to perform for the AI as well.