7 ms·
He needed to evaluate the team based on some criteria one way or another. He chose certain criteria and used the computer to assist him in the evaluation. Anot
by emerongi 6y ago
He needed to evaluate the team based on some criteria one way or another. He chose certain criteria and used the computer to assist him in the evaluation.
Another option would be to choose the team on who you just "like the most". Maybe this would have been more to your liking? It's more human, I guess. However, notice that there is still a criteria and still an evaluation phase, you can't avoid it (unless you pick by random).
None of this means that you have to use text-to-speech and have the computer read out the list of names who were fired. You can still go to each team member and talk about it, like a human.
- foepys 6y agoLiking each other is a pretty huge part of a positive team dynamic. The line to unfair favoritism is thin but a team of high-skilled engineers that don't like each other will most likely perform worse than a team that likes each other but has a bit worse average skill level. Sometimes a person that is regarded as low skill can motivate other team members to hugely increase their productivity by building a positive atmosphere.
- mech422 6y ago>>Sometimes a person that is regarded as low skill can motivate other team members to hugely increase their productivity by building a positive atmosphere. Umm - Isn't that just part of the job? Most workers are expected to at least not _negatively_ impact the working environment, while being at least as competent as their co-workers. This actually sounds more like someone trying to get co-workers to cover their short-comings for them...
- jacquesm 6y agoHe should have realized that he lacked the knowledge and experience to tell his boss to fuck off because on day #2 on the job you simply can not make this decision in a way that won't kill the company.
- SMFloris 6y agoIt is pretty interesting how this conversation goes. CTO: I can't do that on my 2nd day. CEO: I thought your interests align with the company. It is your job to align everyone under you to our direction. CTO: Yes, of course. Right away.
- dvfjsdhgfv 6y ago> CTO: Yes, of course. Right away. If it's the best reply they can come up with, they're not competent enough for the position.
- _vertigo 6y agoWhat’s a better reply?
- bravura 6y agoCTO: "This is an important and disruptive decision. I feel that we need X more time to gather information and make sure we don't kill the company doing it incorrectly. What do you suggest?" It's the CEO's job to be able to weigh different kinds of risks and make a decision. So bubbling up your concerns is the correct answer.
- jacquesm 6y agoSpot on. This is surgery and requires precision, not axe work, and definitely not something that you're going to solve by coming up with some clever algorithm. Intra-team relationships are super important, as are the degrees to which the team members have arrived at the company, how long they have known each other, whether they knew each other prior to their arrival and so on. Before you know it you have a mass walk-out on your hands with those that have options leaving first. The best way to deal with this is to do it very gradually and taking great care to not inadvertently wreck the core structure of the tech department.
- dvfjsdhgfv 6y ago
- dvt 6y ago> He chose certain criteria and used the computer to assist him in the evaluation. I used better evaluation criteria when figuring out who to kick out of my World of Warcraft guild than this guy used on his employees. Anyone that defends OP's post clearly has never led a team of anything or been in charge of people. Writing a program to "optimize" who to fire is bonkers and shows a clear lack of leadership strategy.