3 ms·

I hate this approach to management. Why should I be "shielded" from a better opportunity? That only protects my manager, and gives me no valuable protection.

kthejoker2 9y ago
Translation: "I didn't read the link, here's a non sequitur." The "shield" is just your day-to-day (sometimes minute-to-minute) SELF-evaluation of your current job satisfaction and willingness to leave. It has nothing to do with you being shielded from anything by anyone else.
- OtterCoder 9y ago
  I did, in fact, read the link, and I'm reacting to the condescending language used throughout. The unspoken attitude in the article is that the employee is a dirty traitor and a fool for wanting to move on. 'Shields down' is a telling choice of words because the manager feels that the employee is protected by being his. It's a patronizing, parental sort of attitude towards employees that irks me to no end. To pull another quote: "If I’m sitting here talking with you it means two things: I don’t want you to leave and, to the best of my knowledge, you didn’t want to leave either but here you are leaving." Here he's either assuming he can read the minds of his employees, or that his employees should share every dissatisfaction and stray thought with him. Hyperbole, perhaps, but not by much. I don't want a nosy dad for a boss.
  - dilemma 9y ago
    I agree that the author is condescending. Also, despite writing a lot on the subject, he doesn't actually seem to be a good manager. Very authoritarian.
    - pavlov 9y ago
      He worked at Apple, a company known for a certain authoritarian tendency. (I like Rands' writings though.)
- PeterisP 9y ago
  The problem is with the implied meaning. Calling this mode "shields up" implicitly means that it's something good for you, protecting you - but it's not quite so, this "shield" is protecting the company/manager instead of you. The exact same thing might be called not "shields up" but "complacent mode" or "ignoring opportunity" for the opposite implied evaluation.

kthejoker2 9y ago

Translation: "I didn't read the link, here's a non sequitur." The "shield" is just your day-to-day (sometimes minute-to-minute) SELF-evaluation of your current job satisfaction and willingness to leave. It has nothing to do with you being shielded from anything by anyone else.

OtterCoder 9y ago
I did, in fact, read the link, and I'm reacting to the condescending language used throughout. The unspoken attitude in the article is that the employee is a dirty traitor and a fool for wanting to move on. 'Shields down' is a telling choice of words because the manager feels that the employee is protected by being his. It's a patronizing, parental sort of attitude towards employees that irks me to no end. To pull another quote: "If I’m sitting here talking with you it means two things: I don’t want you to leave and, to the best of my knowledge, you didn’t want to leave either but here you are leaving." Here he's either assuming he can read the minds of his employees, or that his employees should share every dissatisfaction and stray thought with him. Hyperbole, perhaps, but not by much. I don't want a nosy dad for a boss.
- dilemma 9y ago
  I agree that the author is condescending. Also, despite writing a lot on the subject, he doesn't actually seem to be a good manager. Very authoritarian.
  - pavlov 9y ago
    He worked at Apple, a company known for a certain authoritarian tendency. (I like Rands' writings though.)
PeterisP 9y ago
The problem is with the implied meaning. Calling this mode "shields up" implicitly means that it's something good for you, protecting you - but it's not quite so, this "shield" is protecting the company/manager instead of you. The exact same thing might be called not "shields up" but "complacent mode" or "ignoring opportunity" for the opposite implied evaluation.