Story: “It would be career limiting..."

Post by yucky » Thu, Nov 10, 2022, 1:58 PM UTC

tonnydourado wrote: post #331

yucky wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because part of the process of saying that something is wrong is being willing to learn that maybe you are the wrong one. Ironically, you are wrong. Not only are there better ways to let people know they're wrong when you're 100% right, but in your example you aren't even sure you're 100% right, yet telling others they're wrong. Good luck with that :)

What other way there is to tell someone that they are wrong then, well, telling them?

    "Because part of the process of saying that something is wrong is being willing to learn that maybe you are the wrong one."

Post by tonnydourado » Thu, Nov 10, 2022, 4:43 PM UTC

simplotek wrote: post #303

tonnydourado wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it’s better to be liked than right. Broadly, maybe. At work, I don't care about being liked by people that can't admit they are wrong. That doesn't being a dick to anyone I think is wrong. The whole point of telling someone that they're wrong is to correct course and fix things, and bullheaded, righteous, approaches never accomplish that. But it does mean you don't keep quite. You don't give up. You ask questions,…

> Broadly, maybe. At work, I don't care about being liked by people that can't admit they are wrong. Why do you presume all outcomes of your eggregious interactions is placing blame on others? It seems you are totally oblivious to some of the most basic principles of working in a professional environment: if you antagonize and attack your team members, you are not trusted to help out and have their backs. This means…

Post by tonnydourado » Thu, Nov 10, 2022, 8:38 PM UTC

yucky wrote: post #335

tonnydourado wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Saying that something is wrong doesn't imply (at least for me) that you're 100% sure that it's wrong. I always consider colloquial affirmations to carry an implicit degree of confidence, which is rarely 100%, and I often try to make that explicit by phrasing it like "I think that ...", etc. So, yeah, I don't see a conflict on thinking something is wrong, pointing it out, and arguing for change, and at the same time b…

Saying that something is wrong doesn't imply (at least for me) that you're 100% sure that it's wrong. This is wrong. Words have meanings.

Post by tonnydourado » Fri, Nov 11, 2022, 1:52 AM UTC

yucky wrote: post #337

tonnydourado wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sorry, I genuinely do not understand your point. If I think something you say is incorrect, and I say "Hey, I think this is not right. Not 100% sure, but I think it isn't", you're saying that this is not "saying that something is wrong"? English is my second language, so, I might be missing some nuance.

English is my second language, so, I might be missing some nuance. Indeed you are, but had I known English was your 2nd language it would have made more sense and I probably wouldn't have even corrected you since your English is very good.

Post by MathMonkeyMan » Fri, Nov 11, 2022, 8:02 AM UTC

deepsun wrote: post #103

duped wrote: post #47

I mean this story is cathartic, but I don't get what the "rabble rousers" expected to happen. You don't go into a meeting like that to present problems, but to present solutions. And a 12 month delay on a $60 million contract isn't a solution, it's another problem for the sales/client success people. And doing it in front of a group of management, no less - that's like firing a shot across the bow, declaring that the…

I agree, however, the teams where people don't need to read the audience, and can just freely present problems whenever they want without fear of repercussions are the most productive, in my experience. The management team must be "thick skinned" enough, though, to be able to take the blame and work on the problem. Maybe talk in private to the person about the tact. Of course, I'm not going to try, just personal obse…