3 ms·

I think that's a matter of trust between the manager and his team. If the team culture is set for continuous improvement this kind of feedback should be conside

I think that's a matter of trust between the manager and his team. If the team culture is set for continuous improvement this kind of feedback should be considered normal. If an employee is at risk for termination that won't be determined just by some peer feedback.

wahnfrieden 4y ago
PMC and workers are not allies
- cntainer 4y ago
  That's a choice not a law EDIT: in most successful teams I know manager and team are in the same boat
  - wahnfrieden 4y ago
    "That's an individual's choice" is the weakest perspective on systemic effect PMC are in the same boat in that they're not the owners but they do serve their interests
    - cntainer 4y ago
      It really depends on the system. I agree that most companies tend to end up with a cesspool of middle-management political games but that's not something unavoidable. I've seen examples where the objectives of the management and the teams are sufficiently aligned by the owners to create win-win situations. Yes, it's not that typical, but it's possible.
      - wahnfrieden 4y ago
        this is equivalent to “not all men” type of argument also bosses will never be truly aligned with workers unless it’s from power workers have taken. a wage doesn’t provide the class mobility that ownership and exploitation does.
peteradio 4y ago
> continuous improvement My experience so far is that this means permanent micromanagement because nobody can claim perfection. Might work for some people but I couldn't find a way to view it but as insidious. When I left myself open to essentially permanent criticism of not just my output but how I produce my output at further granularity it led to a frankly confusing role where my manager might as well have been pervertedly resting his hands upon mine and trying to help me type better. > Uhh Jim what are you doing? > I don't want to do this but your typing KPIs are in the toilet, I want to try something. > This isn't funny Jim, we seriously need to talk about the requirements I'm getting. > You don't understand the requirements? We need to get in a meeting. > I haven't received feedback on the last round of contradictions I reported. > Let's get in a meeting after we work on your typing. My suggestion was to fire Jim but that process improvement was denied.
- cntainer 4y ago
  Any process can easily be abused, especially when the people responsible for driving the process are doing it for the wrong reasons I think that shouldn't discredit the original concept though. > My suggestion was to fire Jim but that process improvement was denied. Funny, and maybe the best solution, given the scenario, but I guess my mind was set on more constructive criticism :)

wahnfrieden 4y ago

PMC and workers are not allies

cntainer 4y ago
That's a choice not a law EDIT: in most successful teams I know manager and team are in the same boat
- wahnfrieden 4y ago
  "That's an individual's choice" is the weakest perspective on systemic effect PMC are in the same boat in that they're not the owners but they do serve their interests
  - cntainer 4y ago
    It really depends on the system. I agree that most companies tend to end up with a cesspool of middle-management political games but that's not something unavoidable. I've seen examples where the objectives of the management and the teams are sufficiently aligned by the owners to create win-win situations. Yes, it's not that typical, but it's possible.
    - wahnfrieden 4y ago
      this is equivalent to “not all men” type of argument also bosses will never be truly aligned with workers unless it’s from power workers have taken. a wage doesn’t provide the class mobility that ownership and exploitation does.

peteradio 4y ago

> continuous improvement My experience so far is that this means permanent micromanagement because nobody can claim perfection. Might work for some people but I couldn't find a way to view it but as insidious. When I left myself open to essentially permanent criticism of not just my output but how I produce my output at further granularity it led to a frankly confusing role where my manager might as well have been pervertedly resting his hands upon mine and trying to help me type better. > Uhh Jim what are you doing? > I don't want to do this but your typing KPIs are in the toilet, I want to try something. > This isn't funny Jim, we seriously need to talk about the requirements I'm getting. > You don't understand the requirements? We need to get in a meeting. > I haven't received feedback on the last round of contradictions I reported. > Let's get in a meeting after we work on your typing. My suggestion was to fire Jim but that process improvement was denied.

cntainer 4y ago
Any process can easily be abused, especially when the people responsible for driving the process are doing it for the wrong reasons I think that shouldn't discredit the original concept though. > My suggestion was to fire Jim but that process improvement was denied. Funny, and maybe the best solution, given the scenario, but I guess my mind was set on more constructive criticism :)