3 ms·
Whats wrong with any of that? Banning sounds childish but the best fix for someone who is not interested in their work is to fire them, not coddle them. Keeping
by ksk 9y ago
Whats wrong with any of that? Banning sounds childish but the best fix for someone who is not interested in their work is to fire them, not coddle them. Keeping them around is a net drain on the company. Of course if you're biased towards the employer always being in the wrong, then you might feel differently. At some point, you can't tell someone they're doing it wrong if what they're doing works for them and they're producing results.
I don't feel inspired by my manager/team so I'm going to doze off at my desk, and My employees are over-paid lazy sacks of s* are two sides of the same coin.
- hrktb 9y agoI wonder what kind of organisation other people are working in. We do 30~60 minute meetings that are reasonably done well, people are impacted by what is discussed. But honestly it’s nothing so difficult or riveting that needs everyone to focus like crazy for an hour straight. Then people talk slowly, have to explain details that half of the room knows but not the other one. People ask questions that you might not care about but the rest of the people do, and you won’t stand up and go away just for a 5 min question. Then focusing 100% of our intention doesn’t shorten the meeting. We tried, and it wasn’t more efficient in any significant way (who cares for 10min gained for 50 min of full focus?). Instead people would just skip meetings altogether, because the balance between the info to share and one hour of their time was almost always in favor of their time, and dreaded to no end mandatory meetings. ROTI scores were horrible while never improving. We just had to stop.