6 ms·

I'll try "Places I wouldn't want to work" for 400K, Alex.

Spinnaker_ 6y ago
It's funny how differently people respond to that type of stuff. I grew up playing pretty competitive sports. Being ripped apart in front of my peers was a once a week occurrence for me for most of my life. I had no interest in doing it to anyone else, but it didn't seem like a big deal, and didn't bother me much. My first job was at a company where it happened a lot. I didn't realize how toxic it was until I started talking with co-workers who were having panic attacks from it.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- ygjb 6y ago
  Yep. Not sports here, but military. I will take a dressing down, public or otherwise, over office politics and some of the corporate shenanigans that I have encountered in my private sector career. Give it to me straight, let me know how bad I fucked up, and what we can do to fix it, or walk me out the door. That said, I also understand that this doesn't work for alot of people.
- clausok 6y ago
  Same for me. My high school and college hockey coaches could really let you have it. They never pulled you aside and did it in private either. My college coach had episodes that would make even Bobby Knight look like a pussycat. He once had a roll-on-the-floor grappling fight with a teammate in the locker room between periods. (Coach had a big tactical advantage: he wasn't wearing skates) When I ended up working on a trading desk the impromptu performance review broadsides -- in front of everyone -- felt very familiar.
hintymad 6y ago
It's actually a rare opportunity that someone smart can "rip me apart" for the right reason. Candid truth does not hurt. It stimulates growth. In contrast, the worst place is where everyone is nice, but does not tell you what you have done wrong.
- paxys 6y ago
  Candid truths can be shared in blameless postmortems and a hundred other ways. An executive shouting at someone in a large meeting is an ego trip, nothing more.
  - xyzelement 6y ago
    Blameless is often pointless because sometimes something about the person is the problem. If the project failed because Bob ran it and Bob is too risk averse, then you can't fix it without talking about Bob. Bob either needs to figure out how to be less risk averse (hard and time consuming journey) or Bob shouldn't run projects that require risk taking. Doesn't mean Bob is bad or gets fired, but he is part of the picture. The whole blameless thing is so weak - if there's something about you that caused the failure, don't you want to know?
    - ehaughee 6y ago
      The key mental shift (for me anyway) is that if a system can be brought to its knees by a single person, then the system is very likely flawed. You need to design a better system when the flaw in the system is the people. What that often looks like is changing/instituting processes such that quantitative measure (metrics, checklists, etc) governs decisions (thereby removing much, but importantly not all, of the human element), or you design processes in such a way that one person is not in charge of making the decision (the "two person rule", CRs, leadership approval). There are of course other tools but these two are pretty common in my experience.
      - adwn 6y ago
        > if a system can be brought to its knees by a single person, then the system is very likely flawed. That just means that the person who designed the system deserves the blame. I'm only half-joking here. You can't just rely on the "system" – someone needs to be responsible, either for the decision or for creating the system that makes the decision.

It's funny how differently people respond to that type of stuff. I grew up playing pretty competitive sports. Being ripped apart in front of my peers was a once a week occurrence for me for most of my life. I had no interest in doing it to anyone else, but it didn't seem like a big deal, and didn't bother me much. My first job was at a company where it happened a lot. I didn't realize how toxic it was until I started talking with co-workers who were having panic attacks from it.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
ygjb 6y ago
Yep. Not sports here, but military. I will take a dressing down, public or otherwise, over office politics and some of the corporate shenanigans that I have encountered in my private sector career. Give it to me straight, let me know how bad I fucked up, and what we can do to fix it, or walk me out the door. That said, I also understand that this doesn't work for alot of people.
clausok 6y ago
Same for me. My high school and college hockey coaches could really let you have it. They never pulled you aside and did it in private either. My college coach had episodes that would make even Bobby Knight look like a pussycat. He once had a roll-on-the-floor grappling fight with a teammate in the locker room between periods. (Coach had a big tactical advantage: he wasn't wearing skates) When I ended up working on a trading desk the impromptu performance review broadsides -- in front of everyone -- felt very familiar.

hintymad 6y ago

It's actually a rare opportunity that someone smart can "rip me apart" for the right reason. Candid truth does not hurt. It stimulates growth. In contrast, the worst place is where everyone is nice, but does not tell you what you have done wrong.

paxys 6y ago
Candid truths can be shared in blameless postmortems and a hundred other ways. An executive shouting at someone in a large meeting is an ego trip, nothing more.
- xyzelement 6y ago
  Blameless is often pointless because sometimes something about the person is the problem. If the project failed because Bob ran it and Bob is too risk averse, then you can't fix it without talking about Bob. Bob either needs to figure out how to be less risk averse (hard and time consuming journey) or Bob shouldn't run projects that require risk taking. Doesn't mean Bob is bad or gets fired, but he is part of the picture. The whole blameless thing is so weak - if there's something about you that caused the failure, don't you want to know?
  - ehaughee 6y ago
    The key mental shift (for me anyway) is that if a system can be brought to its knees by a single person, then the system is very likely flawed. You need to design a better system when the flaw in the system is the people. What that often looks like is changing/instituting processes such that quantitative measure (metrics, checklists, etc) governs decisions (thereby removing much, but importantly not all, of the human element), or you design processes in such a way that one person is not in charge of making the decision (the "two person rule", CRs, leadership approval). There are of course other tools but these two are pretty common in my experience.
    - adwn 6y ago
      > if a system can be brought to its knees by a single person, then the system is very likely flawed. That just means that the person who designed the system deserves the blame. I'm only half-joking here. You can't just rely on the "system" – someone needs to be responsible, either for the decision or for creating the system that makes the decision.