4 ms·

In the context of work discussions, I think people should be strongly discouraged from describing their position in terms of how they 'feel' because what they f

In the context of work discussions, I think people should be strongly discouraged from describing their position in terms of how they 'feel' because what they feel is a result of their focus on work. Therefore the root cause of a person's feeling should be expressed instead and will be harder to dismiss in a discussion. It typically takes a lot of work to understand the root cause but it is also empowering for people when they can turn their intense feelings into rational arguments. My two cents.

BeetleB 7y ago
I think providing an example will help me understand what you're trying to say. And I worry I will soon hit my comment limit so I may not be able to respond. I do not think what people "feel" is necessary a result of a focus on work. I've often encountered upset people at work because they believed a coworker was implying they were stupid. And in any case, things like fairness in compensation/promotions, etc can play a big role. I agree with root causing, but I often find it's hard to root cause someone else's problem without knowing their feelings. The sad truth about communications is that most people suck at it. Half of becoming a better communicator is learning to deal with poor communicators, and making it easier for them to express what's on their mind (something many/most are reluctant to do).
- uk_programmer 7y ago
  Why would you need to know their feelings to find the actual root cause of a problem? You need to know the facts and then make a decision based on them.
  - SolaceQuantum 7y ago
    Someone feeling a certain way is a fact. In fact, if a conflict is that someone is upset, it is the critical fact before we can conclude a decision requires making!
    - uk_programmer 7y ago
      In the scope we are talking about (solving a problem). Their feelings are mostly irrelevant. Their feelings are their own responsibility not others. Going back to the facts and going through them dispassionately is the only way to solve a problem properly.
      - SolaceQuantum 7y ago
        Handling a problem dispassionately requires resolving the meta-problem of emotional response around the problem in the first place, especially if it's part of what made the problem happen. EG. A co worker's parent has been hospitalized from covid19 and therefore their emotions are preventing them from matching previous velocity in the previous sprint, which puts heat on the project manager. This is a conflict that requires and understanding and consideration of feelings to resolve. In my experience feelings-type problems are significantly more numerous than technical problems to resolve dispassionately.
        uk_programmer 7y ago
        I would send that person home and just accept that things will not get done as quickly or find additional resource from somewhere else. I solved the problem by accepting the facts of the matter (they are upset and are not going to be productive). I didn't need to go through all this other nonsense. > In my experience feelings-type problems are significantly more numerous than technical problems to resolve dispassionately. That is because people don't think about things objectively which they should be doing. But I am an objectivist so I suppose I am biased.
        SolaceQuantum 7y ago
        > That is because people don't think about things objectively which they should be doing. But I am an objectivist so I suppose I am biased. But whether or not they are thinking about things objectively has no basis on whether or not they are thinking objectively right now. Neither is whether or not you are an objectivist with your own bias (a feeling) relevant to the fact that someone has their own feelings that need to be understood during the analysis part of problem solving.
- itronitron 7y ago
  As an example, consider a product manager that decides to remove a previously planned feature that one or more people have spent considerable effort working towards. If they can discuss the benefit of keeping the feature (or the cost associated with dropping it) then they stand a better chance of a favorable outcome than if they discuss in terms of how the product manager made them feel. While I think people are right to have feelings I think they are more likely to achieve the outcome they want if they can understand and express why they feel that way. This is assuming that they are conscientious workers which is the more common case. If they are bonkers then they probably won't be able to pin down a sensible root cause.
  - kungtotte 7y ago
    As long as it doesn't affect the health of the codebase or force the engineers to work overtime, why do the engineers care about what features get shipped or not? They're paid to code, so if they aren't sacrificing code quality or working overtime they should just focus on coding features that may or may not get shipped. I mean, if we're being strictly objective that is. If the engineers have feelings they might feel dismissed and devalued if they spend time and effort making features nobody will ever see.

BeetleB 7y ago

I think providing an example will help me understand what you're trying to say. And I worry I will soon hit my comment limit so I may not be able to respond. I do not think what people "feel" is necessary a result of a focus on work. I've often encountered upset people at work because they believed a coworker was implying they were stupid. And in any case, things like fairness in compensation/promotions, etc can play a big role. I agree with root causing, but I often find it's hard to root cause someone else's problem without knowing their feelings. The sad truth about communications is that most people suck at it. Half of becoming a better communicator is learning to deal with poor communicators, and making it easier for them to express what's on their mind (something many/most are reluctant to do).

uk_programmer 7y ago
Why would you need to know their feelings to find the actual root cause of a problem? You need to know the facts and then make a decision based on them.
- SolaceQuantum 7y ago
  Someone feeling a certain way is a fact. In fact, if a conflict is that someone is upset, it is the critical fact before we can conclude a decision requires making!
  - uk_programmer 7y ago
    In the scope we are talking about (solving a problem). Their feelings are mostly irrelevant. Their feelings are their own responsibility not others. Going back to the facts and going through them dispassionately is the only way to solve a problem properly.
    - SolaceQuantum 7y ago
      Handling a problem dispassionately requires resolving the meta-problem of emotional response around the problem in the first place, especially if it's part of what made the problem happen. EG. A co worker's parent has been hospitalized from covid19 and therefore their emotions are preventing them from matching previous velocity in the previous sprint, which puts heat on the project manager. This is a conflict that requires and understanding and consideration of feelings to resolve. In my experience feelings-type problems are significantly more numerous than technical problems to resolve dispassionately.
      - uk_programmer 7y ago
        I would send that person home and just accept that things will not get done as quickly or find additional resource from somewhere else. I solved the problem by accepting the facts of the matter (they are upset and are not going to be productive). I didn't need to go through all this other nonsense. > In my experience feelings-type problems are significantly more numerous than technical problems to resolve dispassionately. That is because people don't think about things objectively which they should be doing. But I am an objectivist so I suppose I am biased.
        SolaceQuantum 7y ago
        > That is because people don't think about things objectively which they should be doing. But I am an objectivist so I suppose I am biased. But whether or not they are thinking about things objectively has no basis on whether or not they are thinking objectively right now. Neither is whether or not you are an objectivist with your own bias (a feeling) relevant to the fact that someone has their own feelings that need to be understood during the analysis part of problem solving.
itronitron 7y ago
As an example, consider a product manager that decides to remove a previously planned feature that one or more people have spent considerable effort working towards. If they can discuss the benefit of keeping the feature (or the cost associated with dropping it) then they stand a better chance of a favorable outcome than if they discuss in terms of how the product manager made them feel. While I think people are right to have feelings I think they are more likely to achieve the outcome they want if they can understand and express why they feel that way. This is assuming that they are conscientious workers which is the more common case. If they are bonkers then they probably won't be able to pin down a sensible root cause.
- kungtotte 7y ago
  As long as it doesn't affect the health of the codebase or force the engineers to work overtime, why do the engineers care about what features get shipped or not? They're paid to code, so if they aren't sacrificing code quality or working overtime they should just focus on coding features that may or may not get shipped. I mean, if we're being strictly objective that is. If the engineers have feelings they might feel dismissed and devalued if they spend time and effort making features nobody will ever see.