Why is the burden of “not letting the team down” always placed on overworked employees, instead of on management to hire enough people?
-
Why is the burden of “not letting the team down” always placed on overworked employees, instead of on management to hire enough people?
@Strandjunker because
profits -
Why is the burden of “not letting the team down” always placed on overworked employees, instead of on management to hire enough people?
@Strandjunker But the coach is part of the team, not so?
A manager should be a facilitator, not a punisher. -
@Strandjunker But the coach is part of the team, not so?
A manager should be a facilitator, not a punisher.@Strandjunker @bouriquet Theoretically that's correct, but in a large corporation you have the team manager being given a nearly impossible assignment by the branch manager, who did that because he in turn was given a nearly impossible assignment by the sector manager who told the corporate manager he could pull off the impossible. The result ain't pretty. -
Why is the burden of “not letting the team down” always placed on overworked employees, instead of on management to hire enough people?
@Strandjunker Being managed implies that you are still considered as an asset but it is unclear if you are classified as one-time-use goods or not
-
Why is the burden of “not letting the team down” always placed on overworked employees, instead of on management to hire enough people?
Why is the burden of lost jobs placed on workers instead of the management who can’t manage?
-
Why is the burden of “not letting the team down” always placed on overworked employees, instead of on management to hire enough people?
@Strandjunker A speech I give to new members of my team on the regular:
"I don't get to tell you how to use your time off any more than I get to tell you how to spend your paycheck. You earned that; it's yours. If your taking time off — to visit your family, see a new country, or just catch a breather — leaves me with scheduling problems, that's not a *you* problem, that's a *me* problem, and *I* need to figure out how to keep the joint running." -
Why is the burden of “not letting the team down” always placed on overworked employees, instead of on management to hire enough people?
@Strandjunker
Because in Merika we don't want our poor bosses to not be able to afford the big house or the yacht. That would be such a shame if that happened. So instead we must all work ourselves sick. -
@Strandjunker You could be like me and point out the "common point of failure," which is "management not managing people or projects effectively." But then the management gives you a poor review despite you scoring "beyond expectations" on all the line items of the review...
Well, that's too fucking familiar. Glad I'm retired.
-
Why is the burden of “not letting the team down” always placed on overworked employees, instead of on management to hire enough people?
@Strandjunker insufficient unions
-
Why is the burden of “not letting the team down” always placed on overworked employees, instead of on management to hire enough people?
@Strandjunker Because management is rarely willing to watch its own head roll.
-
@Strandjunker Because management is rarely willing to watch its own head roll.
@Strandjunker @crazyeddie That, too, sounds like the old Motorola under the Gavin family. Bingo. -
Why is the burden of “not letting the team down” always placed on overworked employees, instead of on management to hire enough people?
@Strandjunker It's framing. If sick employees call in sick, they are lazy. If management hires a bare minimum, it's lean staffing.
The former is a morale failure, the latter a virtue.
It's toxic management and leadership practise paired with deeply internalized self-deprecation.
Also the *only* way to enable constant growth on the shoulders of workers. -
J jwcph@helvede.net shared this topic
