131–140 of 342 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I fit this profile a bit, and it's hard to get hired because that quality is not a tag on a resume. Alas it even caused me harm in college, teachers weren't very welcoming my enthusiasm.
Been there. Learn business or get hurt more. Sorry.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No offense, but this is the kind of thinking that leads to workplace bias. Working styles like this tend to reinforce hiring single, young men who are otherwise unencumbered so they can work long hours and push the envelope of the job description. That leads to a lot of group think, and products that are built for a very small subset of users — so there is real business value in diversity. Reviews are important for s…
What? you are saying only young single men are willing to work hard and actually function autonomously? That is so offensive I can't fathom you actually believe that.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No offense, but this is the kind of thinking that leads to workplace bias. Working styles like this tend to reinforce hiring single, young men who are otherwise unencumbered so they can work long hours and push the envelope of the job description. That leads to a lot of group think, and products that are built for a very small subset of users — so there is real business value in diversity. Reviews are important for s…
What? you are saying only young single men are willing to work hard and actually function autonomously? That is so offensive I can't fathom you actually believe that.
He's saying that it's harder to compete on self-teaching and long hours if you also, say, have a child that you're trying to teach good values to and need to pick up from school at 3:30pm during the week. Which is a reasonable critique of the parent post, IMO.
I've read through most of the comments posted thus far, and I'm far from surprised with the varying sentiment. We run into this at Eager Labs, where we facilitate 360s, performance assessments, and more, for companies. Because we actually embed ourselves within the organizations, I get an opportunity to see how different company cultures trigger different reactions to the process of delivering feedback.
A few things we've observed from our work so far that might be interesting to those following this thread:
[1] For many employees, sitting down with their manager and having a conversation around performance is the thing they value the most. This often occurs because the manager doesn't regularly do this as a part of a 1:1 cadence. Having a formalized time where the company "mandates" this conversation can be a useful forcing function when some managers are less willing / apt to have these conversations on their own.
[2] Getting peers to provide actionable feedback is a real challenge. We've invested a lot of time in crafting our process (both in software, and in a workshop we run) to guide people towards providing less feedback along the lines of "Great job, keep it up", and towards S.B.I.A feedback, (Situation - Behavior - Impact - Action). Even if you have something positive to say to someone, give a concrete example of a situation where they exhibited a positive behavior, how that impacted you, and any actions you want them to take going forward. For example, "When you speak up in meetings and share your opinions, it helps me to feel more empowered to share my own thoughts. I'd love to see you speak up more frequently, if not for your own benefit, than for mine!"
[3] Giving regular feedback is great, but make sure you avoid giving 'drive by feedback'. Knowing the right moment to deliver praise or critiques is a skill, and a lot of peers / managers don't know when the right moment is to deliver feedback. For example, as an engineer, one of the most challenging times to personally receive critical feedback is right after a really hard push to deliver some massive new feature or product. The feedback may be totally valid, but knowing WHEN to provide that feedback can be the difference between it being motivating and just discouraging. So, while I totally agree that "feedback should be a regular part of any peer, manager, or mentee relationship", finding the appropriate times to deliver said feedback matters just as much as the feedback itself.
[4] There is no one size fits all solution for performance reviews or feedback. Whether it's what questions to ask, how to deliver the feedback, or what the cadence should be of delivering that feedback... Every team, department, and organization has unique wrinkles that make them special. We end up spending a lot of time customizing our assessments down at the team level for this very reason, because we find that what makes a sales organization tick is wildly different than an engineering department, and while there may be cultural overlap because of company values, they each have their own needs. This is why it can often be challenging for an HR / People Ops department to craft a process that works for the entire company, which may result in a lot of people having a sour experience.
Thanks to everyone who has taken the time to share their thoughts so far on this thread. It's been a real pleasure to read.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What? you are saying only young single men are willing to work hard and actually function autonomously? That is so offensive I can't fathom you actually believe that.
He never said “only“. For his argument to be true it's enough that the features are more prevalent among young single men, and me didn't say more than that. The work ethic in question involves “long hours and self learning“ self learning implies that it probably also happens outside work hours. People who are in a relationship are obviously less likely to work long hours and self learn in their free time. Statistical…
But gender is only a part of it; unconscious bias is intersectional just like identity. The fewer intersectional traits you share with someone, the greater the cultural gap you have to cover.
More formality at work in terms of expectations and progress provides a clear way to cover that gap.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's in their best interest to acquire those skills, or keep being taken advantage of. A binary choice - that's the world we are living in right now.
> or keep being taken advantage of Presumably they're getting paid for their work.
I was a young employee during a recession, and finding work was difficult. When I landed my first job I was I was grateful and focused on ways I might make my work contribute to the company's bottom line, by pushing the limits of my job description and tasks to ensure my role impacted revenue and value creation. I appreciated training and feedback, but forced myself to deliver results autonomously through self-teachi…
No offense, but this is the kind of thinking that leads to workplace bias. Working styles like this tend to reinforce hiring single, young men who are otherwise unencumbered so they can work long hours and push the envelope of the job description. That leads to a lot of group think, and products that are built for a very small subset of users — so there is real business value in diversity. Reviews are important for s…
After that, he spoke about figuring out how to provide the most value for the business. I've had a 25+ year career and can verify that everyone should follow this advice.
Whatever hidden biases we are concerned about in the workplace, they all pale in comparison to the metric of fulfilling the purpose of the company. It took me a few years to realize that businesses were less interested in paying me because I was smart and could solve hard problems and more interested in how I could measure and move the purposes of the company.
The only direct value a manager provides to a company is a regular calibration of employee purpose with the purpose of the business. This is best done with regular 1-on-1s, not through semi-annual reviews.
There are other indirect things that a good manager brings to the table which mostly revolve around increasing employee happiness and satisfaction, but all of it pales in comparison to aligning employee and company purpose.
Performance review is wonderful cost reducing tool. When employee wonders why he doesn't earn more it can postpone the process by "ask me after performance review" and when it finally comes it can sometimes trick him that "it's not us, it's you" is a valid answer to that question.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How do you distinguish those people during interviews? Are there any specific questions you ask?
Not the Op but I hire the same way and there is some questions I like to ask to gauge people's interest in "getting things done". I like to ask about their passions outside of work. Video games? Sports? Communities they may be a part of? I am not looking for passions that align with the company, I am looking for passion itself. Does this person like to dig into the details and figure out how something works and how t…
I used to think the same. But over time, i realised passion in other stuff doesn't correlate to passion at work. sometimes they end up being distraction.
Also there are people who don't like to share much outside of work.
I think more than passion, focus (esp. attention to details) is essential. Someone who understands depth of his/her work is likely to be better learner. For e.g. everyone can use an open source library but underlying working of libraries are explored by a few.