3 ms·

Letting brilliant jerks ruin it for others is a management problem, not a brilliant jerk problem. Great comment of an instance. The class: "Letting <anything

by edw519 9y ago

Letting brilliant jerks ruin it for others is a management problem, not a brilliant jerk problem. Great comment of an instance. The class: "Letting <anything> ruin it for others is a management problem, not an <anything> problem." I have rarely run into the "brilliant jerk" problem. I have almost always run into the "incompetent manager" problem. "Incompetent Managers in Engineering". Now there's an article I'd really like to read.

watwut 9y ago
There are people, including highly skilled, who are not jerks and are not destroying anything to others. There are even people who are not jerks despite management itself being evil. Management has part of blame, but jerk is responsible for his own behavior. Jerk is responsible for what strategies he choose to look brilliant. (And people with autism don't count as jerks unless they are. Most of them are willing to stop behavior when explained what the issue is directly.)
- alexanderstears 9y ago
  You're right that productive people are productive despite being jerks, not because they're jerks. And sure, cast as much judgement on jerks as you feel is proper. But most people are pretty set in their ways. Everyone who yells at cashiers when they're 40 has done so before, they've probably faced some consequences for their actions and the behavior persists so either you need to be more persuasive than the totality of their lived experience or you can adjust your sails. If we can accept people who miss work for sick kids, we can accept jerks. But we don't have to accept either. Everything is subservient to money. You can simply pay for excellent people, but some corporations need to compete elsewhere. I wouldn't pay a jerk as much as a team player (all other things equal), but for the right price I'd put up with the headaches. That's the right call for me, it's not the right call for others. What's important is that corporations and managers get creative about making things work for people.
  - s73ver_ 9y ago
    I find the comparison of being a jerk to your co-workers, and someone taking time off (to which they are entitled in companies that have sick leave) to care for their sick child to be false equivalence to the point of absurdity. Further, why should I tolerate someone who is making my work life that much unpleasant? I can easily get a job somewhere else.
    - alexanderstears 9y ago
      If the person has a kid that's sick as often as the jerk is a jerk (read - a majority of the time), you won't be so thrilled about picking up their slack. There are people who have chronicly sick kids and you have to believe that it affects their productivity / affects them every single day. And the situations aren't perfectly analogous with respect to the intention behind leaving work for a sick kid, or being a jerk. But the effect is the same and they can use the same solution: accommodations. Now, you shouldn't tolerate someone making your life worse and if you change jobs to improve your life, more power to you. But I humbly argue that management could solve your problem so you changing jobs is an issue of bad management, not a bad coworker.
      - watwut 9y ago
        People with kids have lower salaries and are passed for promotions. People (women mostly) expected to have kids or suspect of wanting to be with kids at least some of the time too. Jerks affect productivity of those around, people who were bacstabbed, people who were not told information, people who were lied about, people who were smeared (including professional reputation aka calling good ideas stupid to get dominance), etc. So yeah, if local jerk has lower salary and is refused promotion, then it is kinda fair. Still, he himself is to be blamed for his behavior.
        alexanderstears 9y ago
        I live in a country with reasonable abortion access and adoption laws - every parent is a parent by choice. I'm not sure that every jerk is as accountable for their behavior.

by edw519 9y ago

watwut 9y ago

There are people, including highly skilled, who are not jerks and are not destroying anything to others. There are even people who are not jerks despite management itself being evil. Management has part of blame, but jerk is responsible for his own behavior. Jerk is responsible for what strategies he choose to look brilliant. (And people with autism don't count as jerks unless they are. Most of them are willing to stop behavior when explained what the issue is directly.)

alexanderstears 9y ago
You're right that productive people are productive despite being jerks, not because they're jerks. And sure, cast as much judgement on jerks as you feel is proper. But most people are pretty set in their ways. Everyone who yells at cashiers when they're 40 has done so before, they've probably faced some consequences for their actions and the behavior persists so either you need to be more persuasive than the totality of their lived experience or you can adjust your sails. If we can accept people who miss work for sick kids, we can accept jerks. But we don't have to accept either. Everything is subservient to money. You can simply pay for excellent people, but some corporations need to compete elsewhere. I wouldn't pay a jerk as much as a team player (all other things equal), but for the right price I'd put up with the headaches. That's the right call for me, it's not the right call for others. What's important is that corporations and managers get creative about making things work for people.
- s73ver_ 9y ago
  I find the comparison of being a jerk to your co-workers, and someone taking time off (to which they are entitled in companies that have sick leave) to care for their sick child to be false equivalence to the point of absurdity. Further, why should I tolerate someone who is making my work life that much unpleasant? I can easily get a job somewhere else.
  - alexanderstears 9y ago
    If the person has a kid that's sick as often as the jerk is a jerk (read - a majority of the time), you won't be so thrilled about picking up their slack. There are people who have chronicly sick kids and you have to believe that it affects their productivity / affects them every single day. And the situations aren't perfectly analogous with respect to the intention behind leaving work for a sick kid, or being a jerk. But the effect is the same and they can use the same solution: accommodations. Now, you shouldn't tolerate someone making your life worse and if you change jobs to improve your life, more power to you. But I humbly argue that management could solve your problem so you changing jobs is an issue of bad management, not a bad coworker.
    - watwut 9y ago
      People with kids have lower salaries and are passed for promotions. People (women mostly) expected to have kids or suspect of wanting to be with kids at least some of the time too. Jerks affect productivity of those around, people who were bacstabbed, people who were not told information, people who were lied about, people who were smeared (including professional reputation aka calling good ideas stupid to get dominance), etc. So yeah, if local jerk has lower salary and is refused promotion, then it is kinda fair. Still, he himself is to be blamed for his behavior.
      - alexanderstears 9y ago
        I live in a country with reasonable abortion access and adoption laws - every parent is a parent by choice. I'm not sure that every jerk is as accountable for their behavior.