4 ms·

So, when a decision is made that doesn't make sense to you, here are the steps: 2. Don't disagree; This sounds like a recipe for a toxic work culture where ev

by drugme 8y ago

So, when a decision is made that doesn't make sense to you, here are the steps: 2. Don't disagree; This sounds like a recipe for a toxic work culture where everyone is walking on eggshells and fearful not only of stating their opinions - but in many cases, making simple statements about objective reality.

zeroxfe 8y ago
Great job taking the comment entirely out of context. The next part of that sentence is "ask about the context and reasons for the change", immediately followed by, "Start with your manager or the main decision maker if you have a prior relationship, and then escalate up the chain of command together (rather than just emailing your thoughts to the CEO)." > making simple statements about objective reality. It is extremely rare that decisions are "objectively" bad -- that was the main point of that section. In fact, the article explicitly says: "Remember there is someone in the chain who thinks this is a good idea; that is why it is being implemented. So, it is worth your time to try to understand the "why" behind this idea"
- drugme 8y ago
  Great job taking the comment entirely out of context. I read and understood the full context. I was keeping it short for the sake of simplicity. The basic message they're conveying is, after all: "If you have disagreements, don't express them." It is extremely rare that decisions are "objectively" bad -- that was the main point of that section. I was referring not to the decisions, but to the assertions about reality that are used to justify them.
  - sokoloff 8y ago
    I read the advice vastly more as "don't immediately express your counter-argument; instead, first ask questions and seek to understand how the decision was reached; after that, you're in a more informed position to discuss intelligently the decision and how that intersects with the way you see things". See also Chesterton's Fence: https://www.chesterton.org/taking-a-fence-down/ https://www.chesterton.org/taking-a-fence-down/

by drugme 8y ago

zeroxfe 8y ago

Great job taking the comment entirely out of context. The next part of that sentence is "ask about the context and reasons for the change", immediately followed by, "Start with your manager or the main decision maker if you have a prior relationship, and then escalate up the chain of command together (rather than just emailing your thoughts to the CEO)." > making simple statements about objective reality. It is extremely rare that decisions are "objectively" bad -- that was the main point of that section. In fact, the article explicitly says: "Remember there is someone in the chain who thinks this is a good idea; that is why it is being implemented. So, it is worth your time to try to understand the "why" behind this idea"

drugme 8y ago
Great job taking the comment entirely out of context. I read and understood the full context. I was keeping it short for the sake of simplicity. The basic message they're conveying is, after all: "If you have disagreements, don't express them." It is extremely rare that decisions are "objectively" bad -- that was the main point of that section. I was referring not to the decisions, but to the assertions about reality that are used to justify them.
- sokoloff 8y ago
  I read the advice vastly more as "don't immediately express your counter-argument; instead, first ask questions and seek to understand how the decision was reached; after that, you're in a more informed position to discuss intelligently the decision and how that intersects with the way you see things". See also Chesterton's Fence: https://www.chesterton.org/taking-a-fence-down/ https://www.chesterton.org/taking-a-fence-down/