deimtee at optusnet.com.au
Mon Aug 23 23:49:25 UTC 2004
Adrian Tymes wrote:
> --- David <deimtee at optusnet.com.au> wrote:
>>However, I was originally referring to temporary
>>losses of performance
>>being supported by team-mates, whereas in most other
>>support consists of warnings to "look busy 'cause
>>the boss is coming".
> Ah. Although, would not permanent deficits - like
> the honest lack of knowledge as to how to do a task -
> also be supported? "You don't know how to do this,
> yet you must or we'll all suffer. So let's all figure
> out how your task can be done."
Certainly, if a deficit can be remedied by training or
by adjusting the way the work is done it will be. From my
own relatively limited experience in these environments
I think that the people involved differentiate between
"can't do the job due to inherent inability (mental or
physical)" - in which case training/support/re-adjustment
are applied to work around the problem - and "won't do
the job properly because he/she is a lazy arsehole"
- in which case the co-workers will actually drive them
out of the company.
>>Hmm. Another thought about fixing others - it may be
>>that many things
>>that need "fixing" are not necessarily broken, but
>>may be just
> Many, certainly, but I wonder if this is or is not
> the majority - as opposed to cases where things truly
> are "broken", in this case defined as a condition
> where the same or a similar problem would be faced no
> matter who the "broken" person worked with (aside from
> extreme cases, like those who would simply do that
> person's job in order to negate the "malfunction").
> The anecdotal evidence of my own career suggests that
> most of the time, when difficulties erupt, it is
> because people truly are "broken" in that manner,
> although usually this can be taken care of through training.
I too have only anecdotal evidence :-)
I have at times worked where there have been people
who could only have been described as actively malicious.
For some reason they seem to be able to play the system
so as to discredit others, while sucking up to the bosses
to the extent that management considers them a valuable
asset. These arseholes are the ones who don't survive
in the team environment. And by getting rid of them I
would say that you would get not only an increase in
productivity, which is a marginal gain, but also a
decrease in "spoilt work" which is actually much more
beneficial to the company.
More information about the extropy-chat