31–40 of 109 posts
They worked on the technical bits that they liked, created a terrible UX that sounds user-hostile, and then shocked-pikachu discovered that their jobs got cut in half.
The decision to whisk UX duties to a team miles away was moronic, of course. But that was a reaction to the bad acts this team did - to their customers, to the business, and to themselves.
I've been in an organisation that was actively winding down the research side of R&D. Lots of chemists and physicists let go, or at least not replaced. Projects that had gone nowhere for years canned; people with no output for years canned. More focus on product roadmaps. What's really weird is that every step seemed pretty reasonable, but the overall capability was much less in the end. It's really tricky.
"And that was exactly what had happened here. It wasn’t that people were deliberately trying to sabotage progress, they were showing up to work and doing their jobs as instructed. But nothing more." In labor market conflict situations it is called an Italian strike?
Of course everyone wants to get more for free, that is why do many complaints that people are lazy and don't do any extra work which can benefit their employer.
I don't know how things must be going wrong that you decide to sabotage / avoid collaboration like that
"And that was exactly what had happened here. It wasn’t that people were deliberately trying to sabotage progress, they were showing up to work and doing their jobs as instructed. But nothing more." In labor market conflict situations it is called an Italian strike?
Many managers will be happy to have people who are showing to work and just do their job. Isn't it the reason why people are hired? To do their job. Of course everyone wants to get more for free, that is why do many complaints that people are lazy and don't do any extra work which can benefit their employer.
This team did it to themselves. “R” has little to do with it. They worked on the technical bits that they liked, created a terrible UX that sounds user-hostile, and then shocked-pikachu discovered that their jobs got cut in half. The decision to whisk UX duties to a team miles away was moronic, of course. But that was a reaction to the bad acts this team did - to their customers, to the business, and to themselves.
Why do we expect that skilled SEs are also skilled UX designers? As everything, design requires training. The problem seemed to be such people trained in design were missing from the R&D team, which sounds like management's fault rather than the engineers' in the first place. Then, the management, while correctly identified the lack of design skills, instead of strengthening their R&D team with that missing talent, they put designers in a different group, creating a different set of issues within the company. Seems a case for an overall bad management in my eyes.
The missing letter in R&D is E (experimentation). You have to validate assumptions and ideas and bridge the gap.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How so?
The entire industry of CAD
How is paper not accessible? Do people not have note paper? What about junk mail? The last few pages of a book? You can make a scale ruler with any uniform markings.