301–310 of 346 posts
Sounds culturally biased. From working in northern Europe and especially with people from Scandinavian countries, I'd say that for each of those examples the 'wrong' choice would be the more likely to be exchanged and taken at face value. Whereas when I work with people from the US a lot of fluff is always needed or offense may be taken. Just as the article purports. And there is also body language. Here is one of my…
This was one of the most exhausting aspects of working for a US company, especially as an H1B. Simply: just don't say anything, it wasn't worth it. I'm from cultures where we bluntly call a spade a spade and pride ourselves on disdain for hierarchy. There's far less fear in raising concerns generally to anyone, but it's quite possibly because of the far better employment laws.
Sounds like you are Norwegian.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So bleak. It's fine to protect yourself but your managers are people too. You _can_ build a report with them and be frank with them. When I manage folks, I much prefer honesty over someone who just bullshits you.
Managers aren't just people, they're people who have your employment in their hands. Reports will act appropriately for that fact.
In my experience (20yr) good managers don't need any feedback. They were good because of clear communication as to what both parties expected of each other. Bad managers rarely listen to feedback and few make changes.
At my current role I'm thankful for the high level of autonomy received and being shielded from anything not relevant to my primary tasks.
I'm constantly asked to do "side quests" for others due to being a subject matter expert in several things (relative to my colleagues).
Every request gets the same answer - if my line manager agrees to it then I shall help - provided it does not get in the way of my primary tasks.
IMHO unless you own the company, your number one customer should always be your line manager.
Astonishing. Completely backwards. This article describes how to give feedback to your subordinates, not to your superiors. If your superiors are unable to process no-fluff information, regardless of whether it's feedback or updates, they have no business lording over anyone and will sink whatever function they have oversight of. If you find yourself working under such people, don't bother giving feedback, start poli…
>The reason you don't fluff feedback, or any information for that matter to your superiors, is described in basically every handbook on highly effective communication in organizations. This is the key assertion underlying your comment, yet you just wave it off by referring to unnamed "[handbooks] on highly effective communication in organizations". My no-fluff feedback for you: Your comment would've been far stronger…
I know.
That post you linked to is great. I especially found insightful the part where she said "If your boss says no, let it drop and polish up your résumé! "
Astonishing. Completely backwards. This article describes how to give feedback to your subordinates, not to your superiors. If your superiors are unable to process no-fluff information, regardless of whether it's feedback or updates, they have no business lording over anyone and will sink whatever function they have oversight of. If you find yourself working under such people, don't bother giving feedback, start poli…
> If your superiors are unable to process no-fluff information, regardless of whether it's feedback or updates, they have no business lording over anyone and will sink whatever function they have oversight of. If you find yourself working under such people, don't bother giving feedback, start polishing your resume. Sounds good on paper. Maybe true, oh 5 years ago. In this job market, polishing the resume is nice but…
Wouldn't it be better to just not provide feedback and coast along if you're in this position?
Astonishing. Completely backwards. This article describes how to give feedback to your subordinates, not to your superiors. If your superiors are unable to process no-fluff information, regardless of whether it's feedback or updates, they have no business lording over anyone and will sink whatever function they have oversight of. If you find yourself working under such people, don't bother giving feedback, start poli…
There a lot more subtlety to this than you seem to indicate. I’d never give negative feedback to an exec (+2 levels above me) in a large meeting. I’d wait for a more private setting. With my immediate boss (director) I’d provide feedback in a small “managers only” group if I thought there was something to debate as a group, but not an open team meeting. But your comments about subordinates is true. Generally try to k…
Astonishing. Completely backwards. This article describes how to give feedback to your subordinates, not to your superiors. If your superiors are unable to process no-fluff information, regardless of whether it's feedback or updates, they have no business lording over anyone and will sink whatever function they have oversight of. If you find yourself working under such people, don't bother giving feedback, start poli…
> If your superiors are unable to process no-fluff information, regardless of whether it's feedback or updates, they have no business lording over anyone and will sink whatever function they have oversight of. You're arguing based on how you think the world should be instead of how the world actually is.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was curious, so I used Perplexity.AI as a quick sanity check for lijok's comment. Here's the result: https://www.perplexity.ai/search/what-are-some-handbooks-on-... None of the books identified by Perplexity.AI appear to endorse lijok's claim. Of course, it could be a confabulation -- this is just a quick sanity check, to see if the claim is as manifestly true as lijok seems to think. (Putting this in a separate co…
Did you read the result you linked? > Several handbooks on highly effective communication in organizations are: 1. “Winning” by Jack Welch and Suzy Welch, which emphasizes clear communication, open dialogue, and transparency in organizational success. 2. “Fierce Conversations” by Susan Scott, focusing on transforming everyday conversations at work to achieve success. 3. “Radical Candor” by Kim Scott, which promotes e…
Astonishing. Completely backwards. This article describes how to give feedback to your subordinates, not to your superiors. If your superiors are unable to process no-fluff information, regardless of whether it's feedback or updates, they have no business lording over anyone and will sink whatever function they have oversight of. If you find yourself working under such people, don't bother giving feedback, start poli…
> If your superiors are unable to process no-fluff information, regardless of whether it's feedback or updates, they have no business lording over anyone and will sink whatever function they have oversight of. You're assuming that the subordinate's feedback is sufficiently important to the business. It might not be. It might also not be important to the business if subordinates leave b/c their feedback is disregarded…
That's for the superior to evaluate impartially, and if the feedback was not important, feed that back to the subordinate. Are you suggesting that it is reasonable for superiors to shut down when faced with uninteresting feedback?
> You can argue in your exit interview that you were just following handbooks.
I believe you skipped over the following part of my comment;
> If you find yourself working under such people, don't bother giving feedback, start polishing your resume.