5 ms·

> Adam Mendler, a workplace expert, told Inc. that this kind of exercise carries real risk when companies invite openness without ever clarifying how that vulne

by rdtsc 2mo ago

> Adam Mendler, a workplace expert, told Inc. that this kind of exercise carries real risk when companies invite openness without ever clarifying how that vulnerability will be treated afterward. I always felt that those trust exercises, "bring your whole self to work", "let us pay for a personality test so we can know each other better" are all ruses to find the most gullible people and then take advantage of them or get rid of them.

jquery 2mo ago
Probably so, but it was incredibly ill advised of Netflix to admit to this. That’s what I find the most shocking, far more than the firing itself. I cannot fathom how admitting “yeah we fired them for going to therapy” plays to their benefit.
- bjt 2mo ago
  Because at some point their emails about the firing will be subpoenaed, and if they lie about it now it's going to bite them harder later.
  - nvme0n1p1 2mo ago
    They still didn't have to outright confess to the crime though. When talking to journalists you're allowed to say "no comment".
  - eru 2mo ago
    That's why we got training at Google that more or less told us not to put these kinds of things in writing. Remember: the e in e-mail stands for evidence.
    - Scoundreller 2mo ago
      And the O in RTO stands for Oral-communication-only
    - lukan 2mo ago
      "Remember: the e in e-mail stands for evidence." Were you told this literally?
      - eru 2mo ago
        It's a common joke, but it's not something you would find literally in the Google-internal official material. They ain't that stupid. The joke ain't Google specific, I might have picked it up working in finance. If you bing the phrase, you'll find plenty of hits in published articles.
    - shrikant 2mo ago
      Yeah when I worked at Deloitte Consulting, we had similar training that said something to the effect of "don't put something in an email that wouldn't feel comfortable as a newspaper headline".
      - red-iron-pine 2mo ago
        "assume your mother, and/or the courts, will read it." was the version I heard
    - DonsDiscountGas 2mo ago
      And the s stands for secure
8f2ab37a-ed6c 2mo ago
Please don't bring your whole self to work, the rest of us don't need that from you. Be polite, congenial and professional. You have the rest of your day to let it rip however you'd like.
- PepegaRoach 2mo ago
  [dead]
- ksenzee 2mo ago
  Maybe not your whole self, but I'd like the people I work with to feel safe talking about their family, their disabilities, their religion, their culture or subculture, the things they love doing, whatever makes them human.
  - harvey9 2mo ago
    As long as it's a subculture that is tacitly approved by the group and by management.
    - ruszki 2mo ago
      For example? Because usually, people who say this have something in their mind about which they should rightfully be ashamed. Like people who want other people to have lesser rights.
      - GoodDreams 2mo ago
        Ethical non-monogamy is one example.
        deleted 2mo ago
        [deleted]
      - 9x39 2mo ago
        Anything class, caste, race, gender, etc. clustered can draw fire if they aggravate group harmony and conformity enough to someone. For example, I currently deal with the knife and gun collector crowd, hunting fans, weed guys, even genz sneaker aficionados bring the ire of various classes or camps that are more dominant at workplaces.
trhway 2mo ago
absolutely. I learned by example early on from our manager what one should say during something like a "vulnerability-trust exercise." : it should be something like "i'm too detail oriented", "i put too much time and effort into my job" or, max, "i trust/expect people to be similarly overly-diligent, etc.". For an exec to talk about therapy - that is allowed only to the top dogs, like CEO, who can pass any personal crap upon his reports.
bsimpson 2mo ago
"Bring your whole self to work" was HR virtue signaling to the people favored by DEI, when it was still en vogue.
- sssilver 2mo ago
  I always observed that as "bring your whole self, as long as your whole self exhibits the exact same behavior and demeanor as every other corporate employee, ideally wrapped in uniquely colored skin for beautiful decorum".
  - AlexeyBelov 2mo ago
    I've always understood it as talking about your hobbies sometimes, and where you had your vacation, what you did there, etc. If you're racist or passionately hate such and such people, obviously that's not what was meant. Nobody wants this.
- watwut 2mo ago
  I remember a "beer test" as a hiring practice recommended on HN and blogs. And pointifications about how culture fit is important. And effectively mandatory games playing after work. And "united meritocracy" slogan bullshit. So, go outta there with complains about hr slogan and dei.
  - sethammons 2mo ago
    Yes, beer test: would I have a beer with them / did they order a beer at lunch like everyone else This was a practice that our company had to be explicitly coached away from. Early 2010s. Def before DEI was popular, which feels more like later 2010s.
s1artibartfast 2mo ago
There's a huge difference between being yourself and not having a filter. I absolutely think people should be themselves at work. In my mind this generally means not acting like a robot or treating other people like toasters. It is psychologically crushing to operate in a they're all workplace where people do that. The best managers I've ever had were those I could discuss my emotions or that of my team with. That said, there are clear lines about workplace decorum. It's one thing to say " I find this new Direction very frustrating for reasons x y and z, and the team morale is low", but another thing to say "i think the new leader is a dipshit idiot" For some reason people think being yourself means having no filter
- Lutger 2mo ago
  Exactly. The 'whole self' also includes a deliberate thinking mind. People often equate feeling free and being yourself with losing all inhibitions and restraint. That may free great for a while, to unburden yourself, but its a strict subset of your capabilities.
- ikr678 2mo ago
  I'm now in a team where I don't particularly like any of my coworkers due to all the things they have shared over the years which has accumulated in a persistent ick about all of them. I can work with them fine, I just don't want to share any part of myself with these people and invite commentary from people I do not respect.
- Archer6621 2mo ago
  You are still not being yourself though, if you have to suppress the tendency to call someone a dipshit idiot. It is arguable whether the "self" in that case needs some work or not, but the idea about "being yourself" is being able to express yourself freely without giving it any conscious thought. Think of the setting where you are with close friends, and let the conversation flow freely. Having to filter yourself is the opposite of that. In reality, you can never truly be yourself in an environment that you do not own without risking dire consequences or opposition (even when you own it, this eventually becomes the case). So I think not being yourself is a good and necessary compromise for harmonious functioning within an organ, and there is no need to soften this by saying that having a filter is different from not being yourself. The real challenge lies in properly tuning the strength of this filter, being deliberate with it and knowing what can be said, and what cannot be said. The people who act like robots err on the side of extreme caution, and are unwilling to invest time and effort into tuning and developing this filter. They also don't realize that this makes it impossible to connect with people, to their own demise.
dlcarrier 2mo ago
It's more likely incompetence than malice. There's a reason people don't share everything about their personal lives at work, and sometimes leaders think forgetting that will make everyone better off.
unwise-exe 2mo ago
>>> bring your whole self to work This one always seemed like an "invitation" to demonstrate that you have the correct life experiences and attitudes. Like those holistic admissions essays that sprung up when universities got banned from explicitly treating applicants differently based on race.
kotaKat 2mo ago
> "let us pay for a personality test so we can know each other better" CliftonStrengths, home of the Corporate Autism Test. Just which of those 35 Signature Themes(tm) will be the ones that get pulled out that look like the giant autistic red flag? laughs in Ideation, Connectedness, Belief, Intellection, and Input
busyant 2mo ago
I don't have any shocking story, but I also was once made to participate in a day long group bonding exercise. one activity was for each member of our department to grade the overall "personality" of our department using several personality dimensions (e. g., kindness, competitiveness, etc.) what I think i learned was that each of us projected our dominant personality traits onto the whole group. eg, the hyper competitive climber said our department was cutthroat. the guy who avoided conflict said it was a happy department with few disagreements. etc. beyond that insight, I didn't learn much.

by rdtsc 2mo ago

jquery 2mo ago

Probably so, but it was incredibly ill advised of Netflix to admit to this. That’s what I find the most shocking, far more than the firing itself. I cannot fathom how admitting “yeah we fired them for going to therapy” plays to their benefit.

bjt 2mo ago
Because at some point their emails about the firing will be subpoenaed, and if they lie about it now it's going to bite them harder later.
- nvme0n1p1 2mo ago
  They still didn't have to outright confess to the crime though. When talking to journalists you're allowed to say "no comment".
- eru 2mo ago
  That's why we got training at Google that more or less told us not to put these kinds of things in writing. Remember: the e in e-mail stands for evidence.
  - Scoundreller 2mo ago
    And the O in RTO stands for Oral-communication-only
  - lukan 2mo ago
    "Remember: the e in e-mail stands for evidence." Were you told this literally?
    - eru 2mo ago
      It's a common joke, but it's not something you would find literally in the Google-internal official material. They ain't that stupid. The joke ain't Google specific, I might have picked it up working in finance. If you bing the phrase, you'll find plenty of hits in published articles.
  - shrikant 2mo ago
    Yeah when I worked at Deloitte Consulting, we had similar training that said something to the effect of "don't put something in an email that wouldn't feel comfortable as a newspaper headline".
    - red-iron-pine 2mo ago
      "assume your mother, and/or the courts, will read it." was the version I heard
  - DonsDiscountGas 2mo ago
    And the s stands for secure

8f2ab37a-ed6c 2mo ago

Please don't bring your whole self to work, the rest of us don't need that from you. Be polite, congenial and professional. You have the rest of your day to let it rip however you'd like.

PepegaRoach 2mo ago
[dead]
ksenzee 2mo ago
Maybe not your whole self, but I'd like the people I work with to feel safe talking about their family, their disabilities, their religion, their culture or subculture, the things they love doing, whatever makes them human.
- harvey9 2mo ago
  As long as it's a subculture that is tacitly approved by the group and by management.
  - ruszki 2mo ago
    For example? Because usually, people who say this have something in their mind about which they should rightfully be ashamed. Like people who want other people to have lesser rights.
    - GoodDreams 2mo ago
      Ethical non-monogamy is one example.
      - deleted 2mo ago
        [deleted]
    - 9x39 2mo ago
      Anything class, caste, race, gender, etc. clustered can draw fire if they aggravate group harmony and conformity enough to someone. For example, I currently deal with the knife and gun collector crowd, hunting fans, weed guys, even genz sneaker aficionados bring the ire of various classes or camps that are more dominant at workplaces.

trhway 2mo ago

absolutely. I learned by example early on from our manager what one should say during something like a "vulnerability-trust exercise." : it should be something like "i'm too detail oriented", "i put too much time and effort into my job" or, max, "i trust/expect people to be similarly overly-diligent, etc.". For an exec to talk about therapy - that is allowed only to the top dogs, like CEO, who can pass any personal crap upon his reports.

bsimpson 2mo ago

"Bring your whole self to work" was HR virtue signaling to the people favored by DEI, when it was still en vogue.

sssilver 2mo ago
I always observed that as "bring your whole self, as long as your whole self exhibits the exact same behavior and demeanor as every other corporate employee, ideally wrapped in uniquely colored skin for beautiful decorum".
- AlexeyBelov 2mo ago
  I've always understood it as talking about your hobbies sometimes, and where you had your vacation, what you did there, etc. If you're racist or passionately hate such and such people, obviously that's not what was meant. Nobody wants this.
watwut 2mo ago
I remember a "beer test" as a hiring practice recommended on HN and blogs. And pointifications about how culture fit is important. And effectively mandatory games playing after work. And "united meritocracy" slogan bullshit. So, go outta there with complains about hr slogan and dei.
- sethammons 2mo ago
  Yes, beer test: would I have a beer with them / did they order a beer at lunch like everyone else This was a practice that our company had to be explicitly coached away from. Early 2010s. Def before DEI was popular, which feels more like later 2010s.

s1artibartfast 2mo ago

There's a huge difference between being yourself and not having a filter. I absolutely think people should be themselves at work. In my mind this generally means not acting like a robot or treating other people like toasters. It is psychologically crushing to operate in a they're all workplace where people do that. The best managers I've ever had were those I could discuss my emotions or that of my team with. That said, there are clear lines about workplace decorum. It's one thing to say " I find this new Direction very frustrating for reasons x y and z, and the team morale is low", but another thing to say "i think the new leader is a dipshit idiot" For some reason people think being yourself means having no filter

Lutger 2mo ago
Exactly. The 'whole self' also includes a deliberate thinking mind. People often equate feeling free and being yourself with losing all inhibitions and restraint. That may free great for a while, to unburden yourself, but its a strict subset of your capabilities.
ikr678 2mo ago
I'm now in a team where I don't particularly like any of my coworkers due to all the things they have shared over the years which has accumulated in a persistent ick about all of them. I can work with them fine, I just don't want to share any part of myself with these people and invite commentary from people I do not respect.
Archer6621 2mo ago
You are still not being yourself though, if you have to suppress the tendency to call someone a dipshit idiot. It is arguable whether the "self" in that case needs some work or not, but the idea about "being yourself" is being able to express yourself freely without giving it any conscious thought. Think of the setting where you are with close friends, and let the conversation flow freely. Having to filter yourself is the opposite of that. In reality, you can never truly be yourself in an environment that you do not own without risking dire consequences or opposition (even when you own it, this eventually becomes the case). So I think not being yourself is a good and necessary compromise for harmonious functioning within an organ, and there is no need to soften this by saying that having a filter is different from not being yourself. The real challenge lies in properly tuning the strength of this filter, being deliberate with it and knowing what can be said, and what cannot be said. The people who act like robots err on the side of extreme caution, and are unwilling to invest time and effort into tuning and developing this filter. They also don't realize that this makes it impossible to connect with people, to their own demise.

dlcarrier 2mo ago

It's more likely incompetence than malice. There's a reason people don't share everything about their personal lives at work, and sometimes leaders think forgetting that will make everyone better off.

unwise-exe 2mo ago

>>> bring your whole self to work This one always seemed like an "invitation" to demonstrate that you have the correct life experiences and attitudes. Like those holistic admissions essays that sprung up when universities got banned from explicitly treating applicants differently based on race.

kotaKat 2mo ago

> "let us pay for a personality test so we can know each other better" CliftonStrengths, home of the Corporate Autism Test. Just which of those 35 Signature Themes(tm) will be the ones that get pulled out that look like the giant autistic red flag? laughs in Ideation, Connectedness, Belief, Intellection, and Input

busyant 2mo ago

I don't have any shocking story, but I also was once made to participate in a day long group bonding exercise. one activity was for each member of our department to grade the overall "personality" of our department using several personality dimensions (e. g., kindness, competitiveness, etc.) what I think i learned was that each of us projected our dominant personality traits onto the whole group. eg, the hyper competitive climber said our department was cutthroat. the guy who avoided conflict said it was a happy department with few disagreements. etc. beyond that insight, I didn't learn much.