5 ms·

>>Never submit negative feedback via "anonymous" or "confidential" feedback processes at work Never give feedback at work, unless positive. This includes thing

by kamaal 8y ago

>>Never submit negative feedback via "anonymous" or "confidential" feedback processes at work Never give feedback at work, unless positive. This includes things like code review. The dirty little secret of human relationships is every one wants to be made to feel special, error less and look good. Only thing any kind of feed back, correction or criticism leads to is rivalry/enmity, and it won't end well. The question is not if some thing like that happens, but to what degree. There are stories going back to the time of Abraham Lincoln, where he refuses to even criticize big mistakes made by generals during the civil war. If that is what some one in the position of Abe Lincoln, in a matter as serious as Civil war did, your code review feedback can wait. Nothing productive ever comes out of these processes. If you absolutely have to display allegiance to political cartels at work. Wait until a clear leadership superiority is established, Meanwhile use silence and smile as a strategic activity to avoid getting shafted. There can be no friends at work. In stack ranked systems, with subjective evaluation. You need to follow the Kissinger doctrine. No permanent friends or enemies only allies based on interest that serves you. Seen too much of this to realize to leave people/systems on their own.

BOOSTERHIDROGEN 8y ago
Do you have any good resources how to give feedback in work/relationships?
- kamaal 8y ago
  Robert Greene's books: The 48 Laws of Power, The Art of Seduction, The 33 Strategies of War, The 50th Law, and The Laws of Human Nature. Stealing the Corner office by Brendan Reid Assorted works of Niccolo Machiavelli and Balatazar Gracian. It will be hard to impossible to make transition even after reading these books, but at least you can detect and avoid problems at work. Or at best set up a firewall around you. Lastly expecting goodness from people is wrong. The fact of the matter is people are bad and do what is good in their interests even if it hurts the whole world, be prepared, be ready and have means to take care of yourself.
  - nf05papsjfVbc 8y ago
    I'm afraid I disagree with your last statement. It is possible that perhaps I've just been so fortunate that all the people I've ever come across are mostly similar in what they want from life. It seems to be the same all over the world: general well being, safety and security of their family and their future. People disagree on priorities and not everyone's incentives are the same but I've never felt that by default people are bad. I'm no scientist (or sage) and just an average human. So, this is just how I see things and not based on expert scientific inquiry. Make of it what you will.
  - circlefavshape 8y ago
    > expecting goodness from people is wrong. The fact of the matter is people are bad Oh for goodness sake! This is just silliness. Either you have watched too many gangster movies or you are a sociopath
    - kamaal 8y ago
      I'm only suggesting you wear a seat belt when you drive. You seem to be suggesting I'm a sociopath for wearing a seatbelt and not trust fellow car drivers on the road. You need to understand how department wide politics work. There are fixed budgets when it comes to giving raises, bonuses and RSUs. The person who negotiates and deals better wins. That means lesser for everyone. Note how even without wanting to harm you, they actually have. Then come the second rounds of power play. One way to negotiate is to prove they are better, second way to prove it is you are not. Setting team mates up for failure happens all the time, even without one realizing it. Plenty of other things happen. Actively building a bad case for other people. It might not be overt, but leave a bad CR comment or two, keep doing it actively. Make it a point to drop a bad comment or feedback for the person you might want to harm. Then over a time you tend to build a case against them mentally in the mind of your manager. These tactics are super common. Wrong people get promoted, and right people get shafted all the time. In almost every company- promotions, raises and RSUs require building a case(like a promotion packet), which is basically a pile of documentation. That can only be done over time, its chiseling away at a rock wanting to make it into a statue. Part of that is also making sure other people's statue isn't as good as yours. As a part of building that documentation, you need your name plastered to important things in a positive way. Appreciation emails, feed backs, positive CR text walls etc. This is why so much ceremony goes in most companies when it comes to rewards and promotions. Basically quotas are fixed, and you manager needs to build a case for you. Building that requires negotiating and dealing with them to build you a better promotion packet. Almost anybody can be made to look good or bad, regardless of their efforts. Given stack ranked systems, somebody always has to take the fall for the person who negotiates better. These things are not even new. The world of Politics(regardless of the system(Democracy/Monarchy/Republic)) has had this for 1000s of years now.
johnny99 8y ago
Lincoln did criticize his generals, eventually removing McClellan from command for timidity. He was careful about how he did that though, and how he interacted with the rest of the general staff. But he proved to have a better grasp of strategy than most of them, which he was able to implement once he found Grant. You're correct he was reluctant to overtly criticize, but the lesson to take away isn't to just not criticize. It's to be diplomatic and patient when trying to effect change. Being a natural leader, brilliant, and with great strategic intuition also helps :-)
watwut 8y ago
Not every workplace is as sociopathic. And I would rather emulate people who have ethical limits rather then those who seek power regarless of how much they lie or cause harm .
- kamaal 8y ago
  Every workplace is made up of Human structures, and humans act as humans. I'm only suggesting you shield yourself from problems, not create the problems yourself. Getting yourself immunity isn't exactly wrong.
  - watwut 8y ago
    > Never give feedback at work, unless positive. This includes things like code review. This rule is creating problems. It actively makes relationships and work itself worst. It creates leads to passive aggressive environment where everyone is insecure and in doubt and problems wont get solved. > There can be no friends at work. Same here. > No permanent friends or enemies only allies based on interest that serves you. Same here too. I am glad I worked in mutually cooperative environment where people took my interests into account and did not based all their actions on their own interest.
kurtisc 8y ago
>your code review feedback can wait. Nothing productive ever comes out of these processes Then the errors get merged and I'm liable.
- kamaal 8y ago
  Of course if you are the person signing off on a piece of code, then your work is code review. But other wise, unless some one is doing 'rm -rf /', there is no real reason to go criticize some one's work on a company wide visible text wall.
  - viraptor 8y ago
    Sure there is. Maintainability in the future, non-obvious edge cases, potential security issues, etc. Either you keep each other accountable for stuff like that or end up with a monster system which you can't realistically work on. "criticize some one's work on a company wide visible text wall" is a depressing way to look at it. Try "collectively learning about better approaches on a company-wide visible text wall". You'll need to convince people that it's one and not the other.
    - kamaal 8y ago
      All your arguments are valid, in ideal scenarios. In an ideal scenario any comment or feedback should be taken in the right spirit and acted upon. But in these days of stack ranking and subjective evaluations. You giving a lot of feedback can be considered of lack of ability to write good code on the part of that person(after-all if they could write good code, why would it get so much criticism?). Then the next thing that happens- Which is that your CR comments being used as a proof to downrank them in the stack. Your colleague will and right so think you are actively criticizing them to ensure you get promoted over them. Enmity and rivalry begins from there. Then they could raid your CR wall and do the same to you. Then all kinds of backstabbing and self-promotion activities start. Before you know it you would have made a few enemies within the team.
      - 8y ago
viraptor 8y ago
> Never give feedback at work, unless positive. This includes things like code review. > There can be no friends at work. I think that's a bad advice. I'm sad that this is an experience someone can take from a job and that there are jobs where this applies. Unless you can't lose a job, do disagree on technical reasons and do make friends with good people. Not every place is so restrictive and full of backstabbers. And if it is, maybe it's worth discovering that and leaving.
- kamaal 8y ago
  >>Unless you can't lose a job, do disagree on technical reasons and do make friends with good people. This really is the equivalent of marking a giant X on your back and walking in to an arena full of ace snipers. I have literally seen people being labelled as non-team players and eliminated for arguing against bad technical decisions. In most departments projects are started to gain visibility of high impact work- on which they will later ride to get to rewards and promotions. Disagreeing means telling them they have to eliminate you for their project to happen. They will get their project eventually. Congratulations, you have now been marked as some that needs to eliminated for them have a good career. And they will deal with you appropriately. This happens in all people structures. People are the same everywhere, in all times. Don't be in the delusion that some companies are special enough that it won't happen there. If some one is in a position of power. Any debate, disagreement or criticism is a bad move to make against them.
  - viraptor 8y ago
    I've been doing it for over a decade. I've only experienced a bad reaction to criticism twice. Either I'm really lucky or your experience is really bad. Either way, I know I'm not staying in a place where you can't exchange constructive criticism, because alternatives really exist. This sounds like trying to explain an abusive relationship - what you're experiencing is unhealthy, there are better places, unless you're going to go homeless, maybe you should try?

by kamaal 8y ago

BOOSTERHIDROGEN 8y ago

Do you have any good resources how to give feedback in work/relationships?

kamaal 8y ago
Robert Greene's books: The 48 Laws of Power, The Art of Seduction, The 33 Strategies of War, The 50th Law, and The Laws of Human Nature. Stealing the Corner office by Brendan Reid Assorted works of Niccolo Machiavelli and Balatazar Gracian. It will be hard to impossible to make transition even after reading these books, but at least you can detect and avoid problems at work. Or at best set up a firewall around you. Lastly expecting goodness from people is wrong. The fact of the matter is people are bad and do what is good in their interests even if it hurts the whole world, be prepared, be ready and have means to take care of yourself.
- nf05papsjfVbc 8y ago
  I'm afraid I disagree with your last statement. It is possible that perhaps I've just been so fortunate that all the people I've ever come across are mostly similar in what they want from life. It seems to be the same all over the world: general well being, safety and security of their family and their future. People disagree on priorities and not everyone's incentives are the same but I've never felt that by default people are bad. I'm no scientist (or sage) and just an average human. So, this is just how I see things and not based on expert scientific inquiry. Make of it what you will.
- circlefavshape 8y ago
  > expecting goodness from people is wrong. The fact of the matter is people are bad Oh for goodness sake! This is just silliness. Either you have watched too many gangster movies or you are a sociopath
  - kamaal 8y ago
    I'm only suggesting you wear a seat belt when you drive. You seem to be suggesting I'm a sociopath for wearing a seatbelt and not trust fellow car drivers on the road. You need to understand how department wide politics work. There are fixed budgets when it comes to giving raises, bonuses and RSUs. The person who negotiates and deals better wins. That means lesser for everyone. Note how even without wanting to harm you, they actually have. Then come the second rounds of power play. One way to negotiate is to prove they are better, second way to prove it is you are not. Setting team mates up for failure happens all the time, even without one realizing it. Plenty of other things happen. Actively building a bad case for other people. It might not be overt, but leave a bad CR comment or two, keep doing it actively. Make it a point to drop a bad comment or feedback for the person you might want to harm. Then over a time you tend to build a case against them mentally in the mind of your manager. These tactics are super common. Wrong people get promoted, and right people get shafted all the time. In almost every company- promotions, raises and RSUs require building a case(like a promotion packet), which is basically a pile of documentation. That can only be done over time, its chiseling away at a rock wanting to make it into a statue. Part of that is also making sure other people's statue isn't as good as yours. As a part of building that documentation, you need your name plastered to important things in a positive way. Appreciation emails, feed backs, positive CR text walls etc. This is why so much ceremony goes in most companies when it comes to rewards and promotions. Basically quotas are fixed, and you manager needs to build a case for you. Building that requires negotiating and dealing with them to build you a better promotion packet. Almost anybody can be made to look good or bad, regardless of their efforts. Given stack ranked systems, somebody always has to take the fall for the person who negotiates better. These things are not even new. The world of Politics(regardless of the system(Democracy/Monarchy/Republic)) has had this for 1000s of years now.

johnny99 8y ago

Lincoln did criticize his generals, eventually removing McClellan from command for timidity. He was careful about how he did that though, and how he interacted with the rest of the general staff. But he proved to have a better grasp of strategy than most of them, which he was able to implement once he found Grant. You're correct he was reluctant to overtly criticize, but the lesson to take away isn't to just not criticize. It's to be diplomatic and patient when trying to effect change. Being a natural leader, brilliant, and with great strategic intuition also helps :-)

watwut 8y ago

Not every workplace is as sociopathic. And I would rather emulate people who have ethical limits rather then those who seek power regarless of how much they lie or cause harm .

kamaal 8y ago
Every workplace is made up of Human structures, and humans act as humans. I'm only suggesting you shield yourself from problems, not create the problems yourself. Getting yourself immunity isn't exactly wrong.
- watwut 8y ago
  > Never give feedback at work, unless positive. This includes things like code review. This rule is creating problems. It actively makes relationships and work itself worst. It creates leads to passive aggressive environment where everyone is insecure and in doubt and problems wont get solved. > There can be no friends at work. Same here. > No permanent friends or enemies only allies based on interest that serves you. Same here too. I am glad I worked in mutually cooperative environment where people took my interests into account and did not based all their actions on their own interest.

kurtisc 8y ago

>your code review feedback can wait. Nothing productive ever comes out of these processes Then the errors get merged and I'm liable.

kamaal 8y ago
Of course if you are the person signing off on a piece of code, then your work is code review. But other wise, unless some one is doing 'rm -rf /', there is no real reason to go criticize some one's work on a company wide visible text wall.
- viraptor 8y ago
  Sure there is. Maintainability in the future, non-obvious edge cases, potential security issues, etc. Either you keep each other accountable for stuff like that or end up with a monster system which you can't realistically work on. "criticize some one's work on a company wide visible text wall" is a depressing way to look at it. Try "collectively learning about better approaches on a company-wide visible text wall". You'll need to convince people that it's one and not the other.
  - kamaal 8y ago
    All your arguments are valid, in ideal scenarios. In an ideal scenario any comment or feedback should be taken in the right spirit and acted upon. But in these days of stack ranking and subjective evaluations. You giving a lot of feedback can be considered of lack of ability to write good code on the part of that person(after-all if they could write good code, why would it get so much criticism?). Then the next thing that happens- Which is that your CR comments being used as a proof to downrank them in the stack. Your colleague will and right so think you are actively criticizing them to ensure you get promoted over them. Enmity and rivalry begins from there. Then they could raid your CR wall and do the same to you. Then all kinds of backstabbing and self-promotion activities start. Before you know it you would have made a few enemies within the team.
    - 8y ago

viraptor 8y ago

> Never give feedback at work, unless positive. This includes things like code review. > There can be no friends at work. I think that's a bad advice. I'm sad that this is an experience someone can take from a job and that there are jobs where this applies. Unless you can't lose a job, do disagree on technical reasons and do make friends with good people. Not every place is so restrictive and full of backstabbers. And if it is, maybe it's worth discovering that and leaving.

kamaal 8y ago
>>Unless you can't lose a job, do disagree on technical reasons and do make friends with good people. This really is the equivalent of marking a giant X on your back and walking in to an arena full of ace snipers. I have literally seen people being labelled as non-team players and eliminated for arguing against bad technical decisions. In most departments projects are started to gain visibility of high impact work- on which they will later ride to get to rewards and promotions. Disagreeing means telling them they have to eliminate you for their project to happen. They will get their project eventually. Congratulations, you have now been marked as some that needs to eliminated for them have a good career. And they will deal with you appropriately. This happens in all people structures. People are the same everywhere, in all times. Don't be in the delusion that some companies are special enough that it won't happen there. If some one is in a position of power. Any debate, disagreement or criticism is a bad move to make against them.
- viraptor 8y ago
  I've been doing it for over a decade. I've only experienced a bad reaction to criticism twice. Either I'm really lucky or your experience is really bad. Either way, I know I'm not staying in a place where you can't exchange constructive criticism, because alternatives really exist. This sounds like trying to explain an abusive relationship - what you're experiencing is unhealthy, there are better places, unless you're going to go homeless, maybe you should try?