4 ms·
Something I think the article misses to point out are the cliques that form with the groups who appear to execute well under the tyrant vs the groups who are sa
by jarjoura 9y ago
Something I think the article misses to point out are the cliques that form with the groups who appear to execute well under the tyrant vs the groups who are sabotaged. The colleagues who feel sabotaged become resentful and then make it harder for things to get done. Then depending on the office culture, this can spiral into a toxic mess where everyone goes behind everyone's back to get stuff done and then no one gets anything done.
- neumann 9y agoDo you sit in my office!?
- marktangotango 9y agoIndeed, it can be very much worse than the present article even imagines. I’ve seen incompetent, tyrannical managers scape goat and fire developers because the teams failed to make releases. Never mind the mountains of technical debt, lack of tests or even the most basic documentation that made even the most trivial changes into bug fests.
- madmork 9y agoyes. really good point. I've seen that happen to a minor degree. I'd start by carefully documenting everything that's agreed and changed and then raising to issue to senior management on both teams so they can sit down and discuss it. Worse case you also flag this to HR and during the 360 review process but there's only so much you can do ....