71–80 of 123 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You've probably noticed that there aren't really any successful companies that are run as democracies. There are good reasons for that.
Co-ops?
"Build Consensus" - hah, the words of an org chart climber. I've recently joined a BigCo (as a senior+ engineer), and the culture here isn't building consensus (out of authentic building blocks) - it's a toxic "we must be consensus after every meeting." There's always a "champion" idea (but you can bring a "challenger" idea so people feel heard), there's always a need to "be in alignment" after every 45 min chunk of…
What is the issue?
https://billwadge.wordpress.com/2019/03/24/laws-of-the-unive... Wadge’s Law (of Meetings). Before every formal meeting there’s a smaller, more exclusive, less formal meeting where all the important decisions are made. This is based on decades of experience in academia and friends’ experience in industry and government. Sometimes there’s an even smaller, more exclusive, less formal pre pre meeting where all the decisi…
I'm a boss type guy and I absolutely do this intentionally but not because it's not really me setting policy as much as I'm focus group testing. I run it past peers or a few influential people who could be receptive. Get them to to think about it and give some feedback. When I bring it up to the group it's because it's been well-received and the other influencers are ready to back it. Similar to how this article expl…
The other key aspect is that it's just far more efficient. My last few jobs have espoused being highly collaborative, but in practice what that means is that everyone winds up in the proverbial room. Chaos ensues, nothing ever gets decided.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And this is how you end up with an entire engineering team that has no idea what the hell is going on. Don't be a "10x engineer". Empower 10 other people around you. That's what the real 10x engineers are doing.
It is not easy to find a team that wants to be "empowered" by a 10x engineer. Usually the 1x engineers focus on irrelevant or counterproductive issues, inundate the 10x with non-feasible suggestions and play office politics. Upon which the 10x moves to inner emigration and gets work done. For which the "team" gets the credit. Where are those teams that you speak of? At which companies?
So this behavior has a name... I'm sick of this nemawashi thing used by people as an instrument (in the context of cross-company working groups). It's not about building consensus together, it's about sneaking your "consensus" into the group by the means of divide-and-conquire. It's very hard to build a solid alternative consensus (or a defense strategy) if all the opposing points have been voiced independently, and…
But that assumes the person using this process is acting in bad faith to begin with (they're not pursuing the best idea, but rather their idea). If this technique is used in good faith with an open mind, it's one of the most effective ways to deal with large organizations.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm married and have pets :shrug: Use your free time post-covid to build up something worthwhile. A cat is a good start! Love for its own sake is more than enough. But it takes a suspension of disbelief that modernity may have beat out of you.
> Use your free time post-covid to build up something worthwhile. A cat is a good start! And to take it further, even if you’re one of those (many) people who thinks the sky is constantly falling with COVID...there is still no reason to wait until “post-COVID”. If you want to build a skillset start working towards that now, not tomorrow
So this behavior has a name... I'm sick of this nemawashi thing used by people as an instrument (in the context of cross-company working groups). It's not about building consensus together, it's about sneaking your "consensus" into the group by the means of divide-and-conquire. It's very hard to build a solid alternative consensus (or a defense strategy) if all the opposing points have been voiced independently, and…
"Build Consensus" - hah, the words of an org chart climber. I've recently joined a BigCo (as a senior+ engineer), and the culture here isn't building consensus (out of authentic building blocks) - it's a toxic "we must be consensus after every meeting." There's always a "champion" idea (but you can bring a "challenger" idea so people feel heard), there's always a need to "be in alignment" after every 45 min chunk of…
[Disagree and commit]( https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Disagree_and_commit ) is a common management methodology and one that the most effective teams utilize successfully. What is the issue?
except it isn't
the principle is "have backbone; disagree and commit"
there's checks and balances in the principle's words themself. every leader i've had who has "disagree and commit" as their guiding light has just been an autocrat. they never mention on the "have backbone" part.
i had a VPE from BigCos come into a LittleBigCo. he was all about "disagree and commit"
really, he had a nose for dissent. he went around managers who disagreed with him to corral their engineers to his side. he put near-founding engineers on bad projects to force them out.
i tried to have backbone with this guy once. i thought one of his tech decisions was bad (and in reality it was politically motivated to force people out.) i wasn't rude or anything. he had a 1-on-1 call with me, and acted like i was being irrational. i stood my ground and made fact-based arguments. he was losing the 1-on-1 debate, so how did he close it?
"look whateveracct..i just have this crystal ball in my stomach, and it's usually right"
disagree and commit? more like stfu i'm the boss
So this behavior has a name... I'm sick of this nemawashi thing used by people as an instrument (in the context of cross-company working groups). It's not about building consensus together, it's about sneaking your "consensus" into the group by the means of divide-and-conquire. It's very hard to build a solid alternative consensus (or a defense strategy) if all the opposing points have been voiced independently, and…
I think, as with anything, it can be used in bad faith. By taking advantage of the fact that many of the stakeholders are only able to give an idea some basic consideration due to time constraints, it's often possible to build consensus around an idea that isn't actually the best one. And by the time someone with a better idea comes around, the idea that has already built consensus can use that power to squash it. Bu…
It would be nice to have a workflow for group discussions that is robust against the faith differences. Just like we have specific workflow on voting in politics, doing it independently and resisting some of the human crowd instincts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can't get to a better future by demanding that it have existed in the past. That doesn't make any sense. Now I'd really like to hear these 'good reasons' and what makes them 'good'. Before you list them, please try and apply them to 'why should we abandon slavery'. If your arguments work for both instances, please explain why we ever abandoned slavery, since clearly there are 'good reasons' for owning slaves, so…
A word of advice, injecting such topics needlessly distracts from the actual point you’re trying to make.