4 ms·
> The brain drain has been so pronounced that at one gathering in 2016 of the agency’s elite hacking division, one individual raised the concern with Rogers dir
by candiodari 9y ago
> The brain drain has been so pronounced that at one gathering in 2016 of the agency’s elite hacking division, one individual raised the concern with Rogers directly. According to several people familiar with the exchange, Rogers disputed that there was any increase in attrition and told his employees that they should stop complaining and get back to work.
Remember this. As someone who started their professional life in 2000, lived through 2009, and went through a multinational's "reorg" (mass-firing by geography, several 10s of thousands of people), let me tell you :
As soon as you notice there is general discontent, and people no longer care enough about their jobs to ask questions like this to the top brass, it is time to make sure you have another job lined up. You can get better jobs this way, and the hammer will come down.
Above all, know that this Rogers guy is fairly honest. And yet, he directly contradicts the Washington Post. He's an exec, and he has ONE job : do exactly what his superiors say without bother them.
He (once for me it was a she) will NOT give you any piece of information you do not already have. They are there to get people to work together.
By "motivating".
By lying.
By cheating.
This means that when it comes to the health of the company and your future job prospects, a sober chat with the cleaning staff will yield more useful information than an hour long "fireside chat" with a highly placed manager. Not because they know a lot, but simply because they don't lie, and they know a little. An executive is not talking to you, except in the way a vet is talking to stray dogs at the impound. They don't respect you, they can't do anything for you, they don't like you ... and they're very, very good at hiding this (just look at financial presentations on youtube, say of the IBM CEO, knowing that she has for years, every 2 months or so, fired 1000+ people, with the constant online reports of them getting cheated out of severance. Listen to her, then think about the kind of person who does that. You half expect to get free candy and a hug every 2 minutes or so when listening to her. Or listen to Clinton talking, knowing that he's the sort of man that threatens women to have sex with him. Think about what those people he talks to really mean to him)
- itronitron 9y agoI feel like many organizations, of which NSA is one example, make the mistake of putting technical program leads in charge of people. Leading people and motivating them to do their best work together requires a different skill set, and Rogers' response to the vocalized attrition concern suggests that he isn't capable of keeping people in the organization. I appreciate that he took time to talk with staff and take questions but he needs to become a better listener, or in other words ... work on his signals intelligence.
- candiodari 9y agoYou misunderstood my post. No he doesn't need to listen. In fact, listening is the quickest way for him to lose his job. The fact that you even say this means you partially believe him, and that's a mistake on your part. The only signals intelligence this guy needs or wants is listening to his superiors, and his job is one-way data transmission from his boss to the rank and file. STRICTLY one-way (and trust me, it doesn't matter if his boss is Trump or Obama). Of course he "talks" with staff and takes questions. Why ? Because despite his wages, he is not all that good at correctly transmitting information, so he is doing this so he might do his job better by having his team interpret his ideas, and try to clarify them to him by asking questions. This is done mostly to avoid the worst of screwups. Only questions that follow this pattern get answered, or even seriously considered (check those financial videos again, trust me you'll see this happen). He does not have an opinion (I mean he does, but none that you'll ever hear). Remember that. You cannot ask him for it, you will never get an answer. And when you do, because there are amounts of alcohol that will make him divulge opinions, please don't start destroying careers (mostly your own, but you may drag others down) by telling other people what those opinions are. He won't care about attrition until the ability of the organisation to carry out his boss's orders is in danger, or when his boss cares. Nothing other than that can make him care. But he's paid a LOT of money to make you think he cares.
- itronitron 9y agoWell, I agree with you about the one-way transmission. My point about listening is that I expect that a lot of their technical capability is initially developed through individual/team interest and not top-down direction so in the interest of advancing the organization's operational capabilities management should support two-way communication.
- jcadam 9y agoI love everything about this post. I've dealt with enough sociopaths in "leadership" positions (and can count the number of true leaders I've encountered in my life on one hand) that I automatically distrust and dislike anyone in an executive role (and such a person would have to work very hard to get me to trust them). It's sad because I started out my adult life as a very trusting person...