5 ms·

This seems like something between a conspiracy theory and your own ego going unchecked. I observed something like this, or at least I thought I did. With many

This seems like something between a conspiracy theory and your own ego going unchecked. I observed something like this, or at least I thought I did. With many more years of reflection, and there were hints along the way as it happened in realtime, I came to realize that the contribution of those I had written off as non-performers and dead weight was actually higher than I had estimated and difficult to actually quantify. My hope for you is that you one day reach similar epiphanies. Because your attitude that some are much better than others and need to be compensated out of proportion is quite toxic. Even harmful to those you have estimated as "top performers" should they make the kind of kind of money you think they deserve. It is a false estimation of their ability and contribution, and there is seldom worse than confidently false judgements that exclude some people and favor others. Harmful to all parties involved.

AnimalMuppet 3y ago
My personal theory is that the most important person at a company, the one most responsible for the company's success, isn't the president or CEO. It's not the star contributor or the one who writes the most lines of code. It's whoever makes the coffee. Because without the coffee, a whole lot less work gets done. Don't forget whoever replaces the toilet paper rolls in the bathroom, either.
wiseowise 3y ago
How would you suggest to reward people who strive for more?
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- asveikau 3y ago
  First with an understanding that your opinions are subjective and that you will evaluate people incorrectly. Or more simply, with humility. Second, I think if you genuinely have a complaint about dead weight it's probably better to hire selectively, cautiously and consciously rather than evaluate staff as sub-par after that point. Yes that's difficult to do especially with the first point, and it won't be perfect either.
  - wiseowise 3y ago
    I completely agree with the premise that labeling people dead weight is wrong. My question was about rewarding people who step further. Specifically about this: > Even harmful to those you have estimated as "top performers" should they make the kind of kind of money you think they deserve. It is a false estimation of their ability and contribution, and there is seldom worse than confidently false judgements that exclude some people and favor others. Harmful to all parties involved.

AnimalMuppet 3y ago

My personal theory is that the most important person at a company, the one most responsible for the company's success, isn't the president or CEO. It's not the star contributor or the one who writes the most lines of code. It's whoever makes the coffee. Because without the coffee, a whole lot less work gets done. Don't forget whoever replaces the toilet paper rolls in the bathroom, either.

wiseowise 3y ago

How would you suggest to reward people who strive for more?

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
asveikau 3y ago
First with an understanding that your opinions are subjective and that you will evaluate people incorrectly. Or more simply, with humility. Second, I think if you genuinely have a complaint about dead weight it's probably better to hire selectively, cautiously and consciously rather than evaluate staff as sub-par after that point. Yes that's difficult to do especially with the first point, and it won't be perfect either.
- wiseowise 3y ago
  I completely agree with the premise that labeling people dead weight is wrong. My question was about rewarding people who step further. Specifically about this: > Even harmful to those you have estimated as "top performers" should they make the kind of kind of money you think they deserve. It is a false estimation of their ability and contribution, and there is seldom worse than confidently false judgements that exclude some people and favor others. Harmful to all parties involved.