3 ms·

In a perfect world, I would agree. However, people are people and they often feel ashamed or embarrassed about not living up to expectations, whether those expe

In a perfect world, I would agree. However, people are people and they often feel ashamed or embarrassed about not living up to expectations, whether those expectations are reasonable or not. Forcing someone to process those emotions publicly can be extremely humiliating and can seriously undermine trust building in a relationship. I'm generally in favor of increased salary transparency since it will probably help to level the playing field. My point is that you have to draw the line somewhere. Even making performance review details optional to disclose (as an official policy) might inadvertently create a culture where people look at you sideways as though you have something to hide if you appear as though you're not being forthcoming. On the other hand, I don't think there's generally an expectation at most companies that you shouldn't discuss how things are going for you with your colleagues. That is, of course, as long as you don't seem to be doing an excessive amount of griping and finger pointing in the process.

jka 5y ago
> Forcing someone to process those emotions publicly can be extremely humiliating and can seriously undermine trust building in a relationship. That's an important, accurate observation, thank you for voicing it - understood, I'll take that on board. Emotional support, companionship and other ways to indirectly process the situation (games?) seem like they could be helpful responses in that kind of situation? > Even making performance review details optional to disclose (as an official policy) might inadvertently create a culture where people look at you sideways as though you have something to hide if you appear as though you're not being forthcoming. That does sound very tricky to handle in a transparent environment too. I'm not sure whether I have great responses there other than to set a cultural expectation and understanding about the organization up-front (before applicants join). To be honest, that makes me wonder whether a truly transparent organization should even offer the option for private feedback at all (note that that's a greenfield approach, as opposed to the question of how existing organizations could transition to a more transparent model).

jka 5y ago

> Forcing someone to process those emotions publicly can be extremely humiliating and can seriously undermine trust building in a relationship. That's an important, accurate observation, thank you for voicing it - understood, I'll take that on board. Emotional support, companionship and other ways to indirectly process the situation (games?) seem like they could be helpful responses in that kind of situation? > Even making performance review details optional to disclose (as an official policy) might inadvertently create a culture where people look at you sideways as though you have something to hide if you appear as though you're not being forthcoming. That does sound very tricky to handle in a transparent environment too. I'm not sure whether I have great responses there other than to set a cultural expectation and understanding about the organization up-front (before applicants join). To be honest, that makes me wonder whether a truly transparent organization should even offer the option for private feedback at all (note that that's a greenfield approach, as opposed to the question of how existing organizations could transition to a more transparent model).