4 ms·

I do work on communication skills and I will continue to do so. This is solid advice for all technical workers. But I would also like to add that I have often

by p4wnc6 11y ago

I do work on communication skills and I will continue to do so. This is solid advice for all technical workers. But I would also like to add that I have often been complimented by my bosses on my ability to communicate technical concepts in very entertaining and understandable ways. At one recent interview, an HR representative from the firm told me that the only feedback she received that was better than the feedback about my technical skills was the feedback that I would "mesh instantly" with the team and they all enjoyed my sense of humor. Sadly, that role was only budgeted to pay around 50% of what I had earned previously and there was no way to compromise. I have occasionally worked in situations where a manager disapproved of my proactive nature and I need to improve my communication skills in those situations. It is very reminiscent of the type of situation from a recent research paper [0] about how extraverted managers tend to suppress the talents of proactive, introverted subordinates. Thus far, I feel my communication skills have been one of my strongest assets and strongest attractive features for potential employers. But I do agree that I (like anyone) need to continue to work on them. [0] "Reversing The Extraverted Leadership Advantage: The Role of Employee Proactivity" (2011); Grant, Gino, and Hofmann < http://homepages.se.edu/cvonbergen/files/2013/01/Reversing-the-Extraverted-Leadership-Advantage_The-Role-of-Employee-Proactivity.pdf http://homepages.se.edu/cvonbergen/files/2013/01/Reversing-t... >

ktRolster 11y ago
> Thus far, I feel my communication skills have been one > of my strongest assets and strongest attractive features > for potential employers. Well, you are absolutely wrong. Your communication comes across as defensive, angry, defiant, and self-important. It's a major turnoff.
- p4wnc6 11y ago
  I am not claiming that my communication is good. I am only saying that in all the jobs I have had and many interviews, my communication and explanatory skill has been praised and cited as a positive attribute by others. It has been a strong asset for me ... that much is simply empirical fact. But I thank you for saying that you find my communication style defensive, angry, defiant, and self-important. I apologize to you for coming across that way. It means I am failing to write my true feelings and I am not living up to the high standard of communication that I set for myself even in a medium like Hacker News comments. It is helpful to hear this criticism from you, even if it's uncomfortable, because it gives me the chance to reflect on what I've written and try to discover how I could communicate it in a way that still expresses my personal values (such as the failure of open-plan offices) but without giving the incorrect impressions of e.g. defiance or self-importance. Thank you for sharing your thoughts about it with me. I sincerely appreciate it.
  - ktRolster 11y ago
    > Thank you for sharing your thoughts about it with me. I sincerely appreciate it. That's rather open minded of you. Since you like it, I can add: you come across as arrogant and judgmental as well. If a company would rather get things done quickly instead of high-quality, that is their choice. Would you look down on me for driving a 20-year-old car because I want to save money? We all want to work on interesting jobs all the time, but that's not what work is about. Work is about producing things other people want (otherwise no one will pay you).
    - p4wnc6 11y ago
      I think I see one point of confusion. In the cases where a company chose to prioritize speed of delivery, it was typically after an overwhelming number of engineers (not just me) had conducted research on the system, the business needs, and so forth, and presented quite a lot of evidence that the fast approach would actually cost the business more money than the more careful approach, even in the short term. When I speak about prioritizing quality, I am speaking mostly from the point of view of the book Peopleware, especially the chapter called "Quality ... if time permits" in which they offer a lot of evidence to debunk the idea that there must be a trade-off between quality and speed of delivery. In fact, in the few cases where I've been tasked with pursuing the higher-quality option, I have found that the claims of Peopleware are extremely accurate: people are often more motivated and more productive when they are asked to make something of high quality. As a result, they often actually make something that is both higher quality and delivered sooner than the alternative when they are asked to prioritize pure speed of delivery. At any rate, I'm attempting to speak from a position where I am talking about adding value in the business's bottom line -- not at all just my personal desire for pet projects or Ivory Tower planning. I can see how my earlier comments did not include these details and it would be easy to read my earlier comments and to think that I merely wanted to focus on quality for the sake of my own interests. However, that is certainly not the case. I'm very glad you pointed this out, because it helped me to see that I need to include more details about the basis of my feelings -- which is a long-running set of research results that illustrate the bottom-line productivity benefits of things like private office space and explicit focus on quality of engineering.

by p4wnc6 11y ago

ktRolster 11y ago

> Thus far, I feel my communication skills have been one > of my strongest assets and strongest attractive features > for potential employers. Well, you are absolutely wrong. Your communication comes across as defensive, angry, defiant, and self-important. It's a major turnoff.

p4wnc6 11y ago
I am not claiming that my communication is good. I am only saying that in all the jobs I have had and many interviews, my communication and explanatory skill has been praised and cited as a positive attribute by others. It has been a strong asset for me ... that much is simply empirical fact. But I thank you for saying that you find my communication style defensive, angry, defiant, and self-important. I apologize to you for coming across that way. It means I am failing to write my true feelings and I am not living up to the high standard of communication that I set for myself even in a medium like Hacker News comments. It is helpful to hear this criticism from you, even if it's uncomfortable, because it gives me the chance to reflect on what I've written and try to discover how I could communicate it in a way that still expresses my personal values (such as the failure of open-plan offices) but without giving the incorrect impressions of e.g. defiance or self-importance. Thank you for sharing your thoughts about it with me. I sincerely appreciate it.
- ktRolster 11y ago
  > Thank you for sharing your thoughts about it with me. I sincerely appreciate it. That's rather open minded of you. Since you like it, I can add: you come across as arrogant and judgmental as well. If a company would rather get things done quickly instead of high-quality, that is their choice. Would you look down on me for driving a 20-year-old car because I want to save money? We all want to work on interesting jobs all the time, but that's not what work is about. Work is about producing things other people want (otherwise no one will pay you).
  - p4wnc6 11y ago
    I think I see one point of confusion. In the cases where a company chose to prioritize speed of delivery, it was typically after an overwhelming number of engineers (not just me) had conducted research on the system, the business needs, and so forth, and presented quite a lot of evidence that the fast approach would actually cost the business more money than the more careful approach, even in the short term. When I speak about prioritizing quality, I am speaking mostly from the point of view of the book Peopleware, especially the chapter called "Quality ... if time permits" in which they offer a lot of evidence to debunk the idea that there must be a trade-off between quality and speed of delivery. In fact, in the few cases where I've been tasked with pursuing the higher-quality option, I have found that the claims of Peopleware are extremely accurate: people are often more motivated and more productive when they are asked to make something of high quality. As a result, they often actually make something that is both higher quality and delivered sooner than the alternative when they are asked to prioritize pure speed of delivery. At any rate, I'm attempting to speak from a position where I am talking about adding value in the business's bottom line -- not at all just my personal desire for pet projects or Ivory Tower planning. I can see how my earlier comments did not include these details and it would be easy to read my earlier comments and to think that I merely wanted to focus on quality for the sake of my own interests. However, that is certainly not the case. I'm very glad you pointed this out, because it helped me to see that I need to include more details about the basis of my feelings -- which is a long-running set of research results that illustrate the bottom-line productivity benefits of things like private office space and explicit focus on quality of engineering.