Another aspect besides not recognizing everyone from your company is like this- even if someone knows for sure that a person from a different company is helping themselves to snacks, people are may avoid pointing it out. People may prefer to avoid conflicts or make someone else look bad. They are more likely to act if they see someone stealing from their desk, home, etc. That's kind of their domain.
Also, a few other things may also be there- people won't make noise if someone steals snack packets, but they may make noise if someone steals laptops.
Also, if one person steals it may get pointed out more than if a lot of people steal- where stealing is culture, etc.
I agree with the detachment part but when I write about technology, books, ideas/ thoughts, etc. I generally find it 'easier' to imagine as if I am talking to someone in front of me and write in a conversational style. I liked that a couple of my favorite fiction writers used this style and sort of followed it.
1. For a non-manager, an indication that there is good management (project, process, etc.) in place is that the management aspect sort of seems to disappear/ moves into the background.
2. Communication becomes efficient or smooth.
How is it achieved?
1. High level goals and metric. And incremental upgrades to those. I think people/ teams need to get comfortable with one set of those before you want to improve better those metrics. Jira story points and velocity are not good metrics.
2. A manager acts as a buffer. A manager absorbs some shock and filters some data/ emotions which would otherwise flow between one (ideally more) pair of layers: one above them and one below them.
3. One kind of non-sense (from many kinds) is that people- junior or senior- are 'trying to prove their value'. This is why some people speak unnecessarily in meetings, emails go back and forth, senior management chimes in on low level issues, etc. A couple of good managers I saw were able to limit that- over a period of time.
Thanks. Any intrusion of privacy, threats, bribes, etc. like they show in some movies? Does the experience test your preconceptions, morals, ethics, etc?
Nope, nothing remotely along those lines. It was quite straightforward and fact-based. We were told what the questions of law were, what facts would make the verdict go one way or another, and we decide the facts based on arguments, evidence, and testimony. Those facts are applied to the instructions form the judge, and you have a verdict. Very dry and analytical, to tell the truth. The prosecutor either proved their case or not.
I did not post this earlier because what the post says and what I am going quote are not exactly same. Time on Progress-craft/ Problem Solving. But maybe at some level of abstraction, the idea is same.
Quoting from 'The Road Less Traveled' by M. Soctt Peck.[0]
Section on Problem-Solving and Time:
> At the age of thirty-seven I learned how to fix things. Prior to that time almost all my attempts to make minor plumbing repairs, mend toys or assemble boxed furniture according to the accompanying hieroglyphical instruction sheet ended in confusion, failure and frustration. Despite having managed to make it through medical school and support a family as a more or less successful executive and psychiatrist, I considered myself to be a mechanical idiot. I was convinced I was deficient in some gene, or by curse of nature lacking some mystical quality responsible for mechanical ability. Then one day at the end of my thirty-seventh year, while taking a spring Sunday walk, I happened upon a neighbor in the process of re-pairing a lawn mower. After greeting him I remarked, "Boy, I sure admire you. I've never been able to fix those kind of things or do anything like that." My neighbor, without a moment's hesitation, shot back, "That's because you don't take the time."...
> The issue is important, because many people simply do not take the time necessary to solve many of life's intellectual, social or spiritual problems, just as I did not take the time to solve mechanical problems...
> And this is precisely the way that so many of us approach other dilemmas of day-to-day living. Who among us can say that they unfailingly devote sufficient time to analyzing their children's problems or tensions within the family? Who among us is so self-disciplined that he or she never says resignedly in the face of family problems, "It's beyond me"?...
> Actually, there is a defect in the approach to problem-solving more primitive and more destructive than impatiently in-adequate attempts to find instant solutions, a defect even more ubiquitous and universal. It is the hope that problems will go away of their own accord.
>Problems do not go away. They must be worked through or else they remain, forever a barrier to the growth and development of the spirit.
Also, a few other things may also be there- people won't make noise if someone steals snack packets, but they may make noise if someone steals laptops.
Also, if one person steals it may get pointed out more than if a lot of people steal- where stealing is culture, etc.
reply