4 ms·
This. Let's please not make engineering another field where our first concern is whose feelings are hurt. There are, of course, better and worse ways to raise
by chernevik 5y ago
This. Let's please not make engineering another field where our first concern is whose feelings are hurt.
There are, of course, better and worse ways to raise concerns. "Why did you do it this way? It seems to me that . . . " leaves the conversation open to the possibility that there is good reason for something you don't understand. And if there are major problems, it might be better to privately approach someone (and/or their supervisor?) rather than torching them in public.
But if there is a problem, you aren't doing anyone any favors by keeping quiet.
- whatshisface 5y agoIf you're talking to workers from another company, they're going to be bound by what I can only call "loyalty" to not tell you why it happened (what are they going to say, "we think our boss is dumb and he made us do this?") and instead will make up reasons, doubling down on it and starting an argument where one side has a duty to be disingenuous. It's a mess, don't start it.
- HWR_14 5y agoWhether someone's feelings are hurt should be a primary concern. That doesn't mean you cannot correct people making errors, you definitely should. But if you're hurting people's feelings regularly you are bad at providing feedback. I notice the only "softening" of the message you suggest is to allow pushback if you happen to be wrong. It seems you are more likely to cause persistent fixes by treating people as people and correcting them in a way that doesn't hurt their feelings. I guess what I'm saying is that "hurt feelings" is most often a result of how feedback is provided, not what feedback or even how much feedback.
- alexashka 5y ago> Whether someone's feelings are hurt should be a primary concern No. Whether shit gets done is the primary concern, when the primary reason we get together, is to get shit done.
- DoreenMichele 5y agoAs long as that's a two street and you can take it as well as you dish it out. But often it's not. Often the people who like dishing it out are the most easily affronted if you tell them they are in the wrong. Don't get me wrong: I actually agree with you. It's just an unfortunate reality that working with people means dealing with people and feelings are a part of that. It's hard to establish mutually respectful relationships where both parties are equally able to be straight shooters and actually get things done. When it happens, it's wonderful. But in most workplaces, that's just not reality. So it's very often the case that taking the time to try to not hurt feelings in the first place is more efficient than dealing with the damn idiotic fallout.
- arvinsim 5y agoOne of the early disappointments I had with software engineering was that I thought that I would be mostly working to formulate elegant solutions and implement them. Didn't expect software development to need so much people management.
- HWR_14 5y agoI said a primary concern and I stand by it. Yelling or being unpleasant in the name of getting people to agree with you is counterproductive to getting stuff done. People, at least competent people, don't have to put up with your ego and can go do just as interesting things with people who are more pleasant to be around than you. I mean, unless you are Elon Musk or Steve Jobs reincarnated.
- 0xdeadb00f 5y ago> Let's please not make engineering another field where our first concern is whose feelings are hurt. Sorry, but everybody should be doing this in every job, and in all walks of life, all the time (however, like anything, there are limits). Concern for other's feelings isn't weakness, nor should it be a second thought - it's a common courtesy.