3 ms·

Regardless - You are still an (place derogatory terms here) for threatening your employees like they are little children.

pmarca 14y ago
And you are still being naive for thinking that companies can be run purely by happy-talk.
- askimto 14y ago
  The case for one-on-ones in the follow-up is better. I would have found your colleague's first post on the subject satirical if I didn't know any better. The overall topic was about what it takes to make a company a good place to work and includes a conversation that makes Ben sound like an asshole (does he think he sounds like a badass?) and ends this way: “In summary, you and Tim are preventing me from achieving my one and only goal. You have become a barrier blocking me from achieving my most important goal. As a result, if Tim doesn’t meet with each one of his employees in the next 24 hours, I will have no choice but to fire him and to fire you. Are we clear?” Now really, just imagine the conversation with Tim and his boss later that day... Then the quality of all the one-on-ones with Tim and his reports... Maybe you should get someone to review some of these posts because Ben just embarrassed himself with that previous one.
- goggles99 14y ago
  There is a right way and a wrong way to chastise someone (or keep them on task). The previous blog post: http://bhorowitz.com/2012/08/18/a-good-place-to-work/ http://bhorowitz.com/2012/08/18/a-good-place-to-work/ demonstrates the absolute wrong way. I started to realize in about 5th grade (by watching a threatening, playground bully that everyone hated and a popular friendly kid that everyone liked) that there are ways to get people to do things you want them to do without pissing them off (Those you can't you just cast off and replace). Perhaps the author was the bully, or he missed the lesson. Threatened, disgruntled employees will leave or worse (cause dissension, loss of productivity, they will take their frustration out on their peers and underlings, They will conspire against the threatening, abusive boss, poor morale will spread). I have witnessed this more than once already thus far in my 10 year career. If warning them in a human adult-to-adult civilized manner does not work, and they continually demonstrates incompetence or insubordination, then replace them... no need to threaten them in such a harsh manner and blog about it like you just won a fistfight against a little kid (smacked em down good). You are not doing anyone any favors - trust me. Your Abusive Ego may feel good, but your company will certainly suffer. Funny that your very claims for doing what you did are to make your company the best place to work - but in reality you just made it worse with your approach and choice of words. This approach may sound new-age, feminine, soft, or touchy feely to you - but (in some ways) unfortunately it is the reality of today's tech worker's generation and how they expect to be treated (with some respect and consideration). Those who do not understand this, will repeatedly fail. I say in some ways unfortunate - because it is taken way too far in way too many cases by today's young generation and they are simply lazy, unmotivated and have an entitlement attitude. Their expectation of respect and consideration is taken way too far (they expect to be coddled and never reprimanded). I am not changing my earlier viewpoints, I am simply establishing a foundation by which my statements should be based on.
001sky 14y ago
I too read Ben's earlier post and did some head-scratching. Honestly, I think that earlier post was a bit off. But 1-on-1 meetings happen in many contexts. We all need to beware of overgeneralizing our own experiences. This post perhaps hinted at something, there. Not all 1-on-1s are MSFT force/rank performance reviews. There are, alternative uses of meetings. Think about an MFA student who want some feedback on her portfolio?[1] She wants office hours. She's junior. Different dynamic. Sr Prof has to be there. 1:1. Thats part of the job. Obvious. Everyone know it. Is it possible for an eccentric genius to be lost in the studio/lab all semester? yes, it happens. Has a Dean ever had to call in a department chair to politely remind everyone involved (who is tenured, respected etc) that if they don't get an office hour and portfolio review for this poor girl by the end of Term they'd look like fools? It would be a bit of a scandal? That of the very few things one might actually get fired for, The abject neglect of a protege might be one? "Does this need to be said any clearer?" he might ask. "No. Got it" might be the reply. [2] Is that how it went down at opsware? I've no idea. But, there are certain contexts in which folks remind themselves in a way overfomally that they have jobs to do. No one should feel threatened per se, unless something is truly wrong or someone is completely out of their depth. [3] [1] For an example of MFA style portfolio critique: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4440345 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4440345 [2] (...Commence drinking booz, etc - optional- remember this is academia ;D) [3] In which case, it wouldn't be the 1 on 1 that is the subject of a chat. Edit: link/typos.

pmarca 14y ago

And you are still being naive for thinking that companies can be run purely by happy-talk.

askimto 14y ago
The case for one-on-ones in the follow-up is better. I would have found your colleague's first post on the subject satirical if I didn't know any better. The overall topic was about what it takes to make a company a good place to work and includes a conversation that makes Ben sound like an asshole (does he think he sounds like a badass?) and ends this way: “In summary, you and Tim are preventing me from achieving my one and only goal. You have become a barrier blocking me from achieving my most important goal. As a result, if Tim doesn’t meet with each one of his employees in the next 24 hours, I will have no choice but to fire him and to fire you. Are we clear?” Now really, just imagine the conversation with Tim and his boss later that day... Then the quality of all the one-on-ones with Tim and his reports... Maybe you should get someone to review some of these posts because Ben just embarrassed himself with that previous one.
goggles99 14y ago
There is a right way and a wrong way to chastise someone (or keep them on task). The previous blog post: http://bhorowitz.com/2012/08/18/a-good-place-to-work/ http://bhorowitz.com/2012/08/18/a-good-place-to-work/ demonstrates the absolute wrong way. I started to realize in about 5th grade (by watching a threatening, playground bully that everyone hated and a popular friendly kid that everyone liked) that there are ways to get people to do things you want them to do without pissing them off (Those you can't you just cast off and replace). Perhaps the author was the bully, or he missed the lesson. Threatened, disgruntled employees will leave or worse (cause dissension, loss of productivity, they will take their frustration out on their peers and underlings, They will conspire against the threatening, abusive boss, poor morale will spread). I have witnessed this more than once already thus far in my 10 year career. If warning them in a human adult-to-adult civilized manner does not work, and they continually demonstrates incompetence or insubordination, then replace them... no need to threaten them in such a harsh manner and blog about it like you just won a fistfight against a little kid (smacked em down good). You are not doing anyone any favors - trust me. Your Abusive Ego may feel good, but your company will certainly suffer. Funny that your very claims for doing what you did are to make your company the best place to work - but in reality you just made it worse with your approach and choice of words. This approach may sound new-age, feminine, soft, or touchy feely to you - but (in some ways) unfortunately it is the reality of today's tech worker's generation and how they expect to be treated (with some respect and consideration). Those who do not understand this, will repeatedly fail. I say in some ways unfortunate - because it is taken way too far in way too many cases by today's young generation and they are simply lazy, unmotivated and have an entitlement attitude. Their expectation of respect and consideration is taken way too far (they expect to be coddled and never reprimanded). I am not changing my earlier viewpoints, I am simply establishing a foundation by which my statements should be based on.

001sky 14y ago

I too read Ben's earlier post and did some head-scratching. Honestly, I think that earlier post was a bit off. But 1-on-1 meetings happen in many contexts. We all need to beware of overgeneralizing our own experiences. This post perhaps hinted at something, there. Not all 1-on-1s are MSFT force/rank performance reviews. There are, alternative uses of meetings. Think about an MFA student who want some feedback on her portfolio?[1] She wants office hours. She's junior. Different dynamic. Sr Prof has to be there. 1:1. Thats part of the job. Obvious. Everyone know it. Is it possible for an eccentric genius to be lost in the studio/lab all semester? yes, it happens. Has a Dean ever had to call in a department chair to politely remind everyone involved (who is tenured, respected etc) that if they don't get an office hour and portfolio review for this poor girl by the end of Term they'd look like fools? It would be a bit of a scandal? That of the very few things one might actually get fired for, The abject neglect of a protege might be one? "Does this need to be said any clearer?" he might ask. "No. Got it" might be the reply. [2] Is that how it went down at opsware? I've no idea. But, there are certain contexts in which folks remind themselves in a way overfomally that they have jobs to do. No one should feel threatened per se, unless something is truly wrong or someone is completely out of their depth. [3] [1] For an example of MFA style portfolio critique: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4440345 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4440345 [2] (...Commence drinking booz, etc - optional- remember this is academia ;D) [3] In which case, it wouldn't be the 1 on 1 that is the subject of a chat. Edit: link/typos.