4 ms·
Right, the issue here is that 1: a project is poorly managed and 2: that an individual decided to take up the banner and by sheer force of will (however unreaso
by rubin55 7y ago
Right, the issue here is that 1: a project is poorly managed and 2: that an individual decided to take up the banner and by sheer force of will (however unreasonable) "saves the project".
I would say that if 1 is the case, then 2 might not be the best way to deal with it, but:
What if a project is not particularly poorly managed? What if you simply have an ambitious deadline that the team as a whole tries to make, whereby different individuals probably perform differently? Is the "hero" or heroes, defined implicitly (in the article) by a higher pace, still to blame for a "toxic culture" as you call it?
While you go ahead and nip that in the bud and make sure your teams are as average as possible, I'd go work somewhere where going the extra mile is actually appreciated.
- laughingbovine 7y ago"Ambitious" deadline a.k.a. crunch time required to meet deadline == poorly managed While you're working unpaid overtime, I'll go work somewhere where "work life balance" is not just something they put in the company description.
- rubin55 7y agoWhat if you have an autonomous team that set the ambitious deadline themselves? What if the deadline initially seemed realistic but later became more questionable? My point is, the option and choice to work harder is one of a few options that can be chosen. That choice should never be forced upon the team or individual members, but if done freely it can work out great. And who said anything about unpaid overtime?