4 ms·
I agree. Just be careful when you assign motive to an entire organization when it could be just a single person inside being an ass. Repeated shaming of this
by naikrovek 6y ago
I agree. Just be careful when you assign motive to an entire organization when it could be just a single person inside being an ass.
Repeated shaming of this nature should weed those people out, but it won't always have that effect.
- ponker 6y agoWhen people ascribe a motive to an organization nobody thinks that every single person in the organization has that motive. Rather what it means is that the organization's structure and members cause the organization to act in accordance with that motive.
- bbarnett 6y agoIndeed. And whether it's one person, a group of people, or a departmental "culture", is meaningless. The org allows it to happen, CEO downward, through all the ranks. It is entirely the corp/org's fault, and yes, that reputation can rub off on you.
- izacus 6y ago> I agree. Just be careful when you assign motive to an entire organization when it could be just a single person inside being an ass. Preventing motivations of a single person inside an organization from tanking its products and direction is one of the main jobs for organizational management. Good companies are resistant to fiefdom building and having managers damage their reputation for personal gain.
- coliveira 6y agoIf this is being held by a single person (or small number of people), then the problem is really the organization. This should not happen with security issues.