IT Employment

How to deliver criticism to a sensitive employee

Employees who are prone to get emotional in the face of criticism are often hard to deal with. Here are some tips for making this easier for you and for them.

If you've managed teams long enough, you're bound to come across an employee who doesn't take kindly to constructive criticism. Whether that person is prone to tears or angry outbursts, it's a behavior that makes it more difficult for a manager to do his or her job.

I once knew of an employee on another team who would consistently make things difficult for folks on my team because of her lack of attention to detail. When I asked her manager if she was aware of this, she said she was but every time she tried to talk to her about this, the employee would cry. So, like a bad Pavlovian experiment, the manager began to avoid the discussions altogether, allowing the problematic behavior to continue.

Here are some of my tips for delivering criticism to an employee who is never in the mood to receive it.

Meet face-to-face and prepare a written doc

It's very easy to misinterpret what someone says when you're in the throes of some emotion like sadness or anger. Be sure to write down exactly what you say to the employee so there is no question or "That's not what I thought you meant"s to deal with later. And on this point, it's important to:

Have the employee repeat what he or she is hearing

Having the employee say back to you what it is he or she thinks you're saying helps to clarify matters and also enforces the behavior you want to see. I once had to tell a tech writer that he missed so many deadlines that I was considering putting him on probation. To soften the blow, I said that he was a very good writer just not very timely. When he repeated back what he heard me say, he said, "You said I'm a good writer." He had some kind of turbo-charged defense mechanism going that allowed him to glean only the good stuff I'd said.

Criticize the behavior, not the personality

There are going to be some employees who are more emotional than others. You will never be able to change a personality but you can affect the outside behaviors that result from it.  You may have a support pro whose outgoing personality serves him well in his job. It's when that quality causes him to extend individual jobs longer than preferred that it becomes an issue. Then you simply make him aware that jobs have to be dealt with in a shorter span of time.

Give smaller burst of feedback (both good and bad) more frequently

You don't want to drop a major criticism on any employee at one time-whatever the temperament. It's much easier to deal with small examples of undesired behavior. And giving positive feedback helps an employee feel like it's not just about the errors. Also, employees won't dread coming to your office as much.

Don't enable the emotions

If the employee starts to cry or gets angry, stop the conversation and ask if she needs a moment. Don't end the conversation and schedule it for a later date. If you do that, you're only allowing the employee to think that the outbursts "work" to deflate criticism. Allow the employee to get it together and then resume the conversation.

About

Toni Bowers is Managing Editor of TechRepublic and is the award-winning blogger of the Career Management blog. She has edited newsletters, books, and web sites pertaining to software, IT career, and IT management issues.

112 comments
shikshan
shikshan

A sensitive person could feel criticized even without being criticized. A sensitive employee, in addition, would cringe, cry mutely and develop uncalled for antagonism on mere approach, as a stronger reaction, fearing job insecurity. Human sensitivities are essentially a plus in progressive interpersonal transactions, when within the limits of sensibility. It is this limitation that differentiates innate sensitiveness and inculcated sensitivities. The former characterizes a person, whereas the latter defines a personality in toto. This is where, the term 'Emotional' gets wrongly thrown in, as an opinion. It is essentially negative by implication, is a shortcoming and not a faculty and has no place in constructiveness of interaction. A communication displays rationality and discretion(at least it should) as against anticipated antagonism and/or cerebral stupor due to emotionality, as in a quarrel or an argument. Thus emotionality is 'Confused Sensitivity Reaction' and your present blog actually begins with and refers to problem solving in the case of an emotional employee, who could get worked up even before a dialogue begins, as you have rightly observed and described. Therefore, if your thrust is towards emotional character of an employee, preparing a 'Written Doc(ument)' might help, provided it is not ignored by the respondent. However, in a confrontation, if you do desire an effective change in the employee's perception and mean speedy business in the face of tantrums, what is also necessary, when 'Face to Face' with the subject, is keeping ready a 'Hidden Doc(tor)' for medical emergency. In the context of the foregoing, I would like to request you to write for the readers' benefit, supplementary blogs on employees endowed with due sensitivities(the do-gooders) as well as the insensitive ones(the blockers). You will appreciate that these two catagories of humans, constitute the primary chunk of operatives in Organizations with only sprinklings of the emotional type(the psychos). If undesirable emotional characters among employees had not been sprinklings as contended by me, you would not have felt the need for, 'Thinking aside', to classify them as problem cases and suggest remedies by way of your present blog. Assuming for the moment that a do-gooder is not a problem but a promoter of the interests of an organization, the insensitive blocker being an island, a zombi, is certainly another problem and can harm others as against the self-damaging, nervous, emotional element of this blog.

MsMishere
MsMishere

With the diversity in the workforce (both in the USA and where I work now, in Australia), an effective manager must consider the cultural background employees come from, as part of the dilemma in correcting behaviour, sorry behavior. E.g. is English their first language? Are they from a higher 'emotional' culture, such as Italy? Are they from an Asian country, where opinions aren't as freely given? And beyond culture, what age are they? Cultural context - from country/culture of origin to age - are big influencers on a person's behavior, and understanding them can increase your ability to manage effectively, especially when some criticism is required.

1Cat2Many
1Cat2Many

I used to have a boss that would wait until your annual review to dump all his criticisms on you. Totally unconstructive. If the boss really wanted change he would have addressed issues as they occurred, not wait to ambush you until months and months later. Just pointless bullying.

markholland
markholland

If the employee starts to cry or gets angry, stop the conversation and ask if she needs a moment. Shouldn't that be, "ask if they need a moment"?

GetSmartEditing
GetSmartEditing

'Subordinate', 'Employee', 'PC crap', 'need to grow up', 'mamby-pamby let's be nice routine', 'you're only allowing the employee to think that the outbursts work'. It is obvious that there are people here who need to read Robert Fuller's books on rankism. Look closely at how such people place themselves literally and metaphorically above others to feed their voracious egos. Such folk really do not want a smooth-running organization where skills are shared, team mates' intelligence is valued and trusted, and everyone (everyone!) is an idea generator. Instead, they want to be King or Queen of the Mountain. Their inner dialog runs like this: Listen to ME. Do what I say. You're not paid to think. I am judge, jury, and Lord High Executioner. You are of no consequence. While working out who is 'faking' sensitivity and who isn't, they are getting high on the drug of IMPORTANCE. Firing someone can be an orgasmic experience. Like the Alpha Males in a baboon colony, making others cry, making them miserable, seeing them stressed, feels delicious. They attack the soft underbelly of the vulnerable and ecstatically replay the experience over and over. It's ugly, it's small-minded, and it's a form of mental illness. Worst of all, it negates and denies the talents and creativity of thousands upon thousands of gifted human beings. If we could find a cure for this--we'd save the world.

judexy22
judexy22

1. Be shrewd enough to detect the True and the Fake Sensitive Employees. 2. The True Ones will still stay affected after an event. The Fake Ones will regain their self control sooner. 3. The True Ones may develop psychosomatic, that is bodily sickness from mental stress to muscle stiffness, as an example. There is a long list of this kind of mind pain substitution to bodily problems. This is complex enough not to be able in a short discussion. I kept my Teams happy always because I always told them of all the mess I created when I was younger, and from that I gained a lot of good experience that gave me strength in many ways. Errors, mistakes and positive training during work are normal. I dislike Training Sessions but I like training during actual work. Special Training Sessions may stress the Sensitive People.

Professor8
Professor8

"skills like guiding a conversation, getting a question answered" Yes, good luck with that. Though STEM workers have led the way with tips on how to word questions in such a way as to elicit the specific kinds of information desired. If you don't want them to do something in a particular way, suggest what you believe is a better way, and be ready to explain why you believe it would be better. Be specific, extremely specific. It will clarify your own thinking and be more helpful to them. (No hand-waving or "everybody knows" or "if you don't know I can't tell you" permitted.) Don't say "Be more of a people person.", say "Follow sports or the weather just enough to know what they're talking about, what teams were playing and what the final scores were, for use during idle small-talk.", say "Leave more phone messages. Be persistent if you can't reach me, and don't go ahead with anything until I OK it on this project. It's OK to use your best judgement on these other projects, though, rather than delaying. If I'm holding you up totally, consider moving forward in each of the possible directions until you hear from me; we can abandon some of them. But keep back-ups.", say "We're having Phred give the presentation but giving you credit for the break-through and will ask you up on the stage to take a bow when s/he's done. See, here's the copy for the personnnel file, and here's one for you to have for your records., and Henri and Ivon are getting credit for their parts.", say "I've asked George to take you to the store to get a new suit for the big meeting/conference/convention/trade show next week and we're putting it on the expense account." (Not, your mother/spouse dresses you funny.), say "You're new in town, so here's a good dentist/ endodontist/ allergist..." (not, You've got dragon breath, so we don't want you to get within 100 feet of a customer, but let's get this corrected together.)... I think that more study of the autistic spectrum would very likely be helpful, because quite a few STEM workers are at least high functioning Asperger's or show some characteristics of the autistic in that there are things that others learn at a very young age, or very gradually, that they have not... while B-school bozos have actively avoided learning of any depth at all while focusing on having just the right suit tailored just the right way, how to be obsessive-compulsive enough to keep it wrinkle-free while traveling, manicures, hair-care, being in the right fraternity or sorority, etc.

l_e_cox
l_e_cox

For most people on this planet, the technology for developing social skills like guiding a conversation, getting a question answered, being confident, standing up to a difficult situation without freaking out, persuading someone to do something they think is too hard, raising someone's awareness of a non-optimum habit, etc., is not available. They either somehow learn this from the people they grow up with, or they work it out the best they can by themselves. Some come up with coping mechanisms that are disastrous in a group. There is so much that could be done towards straightening people out socially. And some of the best technology is being actively hidden from us by authoritarian psychology people who think that if they didn't read about it in their peer-reviewed journal, then it doesn't have any value. What I would like to see more of in these "advice columns" are interviews with people who have found successful ways to deal with such problems that are actually connected to a teachable technology, so other people can learn it. A few bullet points about a certain type of situation makes for a cute article. But people need more workable basic understandings of themselves and others. They need both a fundamental theory and workable technologies based on it that are tested and teachable. The only secular program I am aware of along this line is the Hubbard College of Administration. Aren't there others?

Tony Hopkinson
Tony Hopkinson

Obviously if the person you are criticising goes into crying or shouting mode, plan B required, failed, 0/10, you suck. Attack the behaviour not the person is not going to work face to face one on one. Manager to employee, that environment is adversarial on the spot. You can make your criticism impersonal, no way can you get them to divorce it from themselves. You are looking at them. Right in the eye, last week you spelled teh wrong in an email to the boss. Four reactions. Not arsed Hilarity This person is picking on me FU None of these are the reaction you want, none are constructive. Now the misspelling might be trivialising the need for criticism, there again in the employee's eyes maybe what you are adressing is considered that trivial. So the criticism isn't that I spelled the incorrectly, but that the extremely expensive spell checker that I persuaded you and the boss to buy for the entire company wasn't used after my last fox paws..... "You let us all down you useless tosser" is constructive criticism, if the person being criticised agrees. It's validity that will minimise negative responses (sensitivty has`naff all t do with this). It's validity that will make the criticism constructive. It's validity that will get you the desired response. Doesn't matter how correct your criticsm is, if the person you are criticising doesn't agree that it's valid all responses will be negative, even those not made immediately apparent by shouting and crying. So as a manager how is your performance being judged? Criticised. Criticised without employee going postal Amended behaviour.....

kjohnson
kjohnson

Why did you talk to the purportedly inadequate employee's manager, instead of to the employee? What possible good could that have done?

kjohnson
kjohnson

Are you telling me that "You are a corrupt, conniving little sh^t" wouldn't work on a sensitive employee? Or is that only for criticising the insensitive ones?

caryna
caryna

I am one of those that tends to cry. Trust me when I say it is NOT intentional. My tears are words that my heart is unable to openly express. I am very good at what I do and I genuinely care about doing the job well. I have noticed that managers and supervisors sometimes are not fully aware of the details and tears come because I don't want to have let anyone down. It is difficult for me when brought "to the table" when there is a perception or pre-conceived opinions(from information they have received) that I have failed in some way. I take incredible pride in my work and I am human and sometimes my emotions get the best of me and tie my tongue and make it difficult to deal with the situation effectively when put on the spot. For me it would be best if I was given more feedback, more often, (both positive and negative) in the form of supportive "feedback". I THINK BLARMAN IS SPOT ON!!!! I want to work for someone like him/her. It is uncomfortable when I am "called to the table" because I know it is always because of something negative. Even if they try to sugar coat it with some positive info before letting the negative information come forth. If I had regular contact with my superior, and it was an open forum on both sides, it would be more conducive to a two-sided relationship - and would be more of a discussion than only having the superior's attention when someone is upset with something. And when you have to give me negative feedback - Give me some time to digest what is being said and/or perceived and an appropriate amount of time to research/find appropriate documentation/formulate an intelligent "not on the hot seat" response. Thanks for listening.

dlthompson
dlthompson

Hey, Toni, I like your article. It's actually good advice for both those who are sensitive and those who aren't. Regular feedback, criticizing behavior instead of personalities, etc., help make criticism more palatable and ease the tension a bit for anyone For example, I try not to spring anything on an employee during their annual review. Rather, I give them verbal feedback quarterly, so if undesirable behavior continues at review time, they should already be expecting it to be documented. I have a question about the last section about not enabling emotions. Our HR folks actually tell us that if an employee becomes emotional, allow him to get himself together and meet again later. HR doesn't view it as enabling--rather, they believe it's diffusing. The manager's stance doesn't change between the first and second meetings. Could you point me to research or something about not enabling employees emotionally? If HR hasn't considered important points about this that's revealed in research, I'd certainly like to bring it to their attention. Thanks again for the article!

Fred.Alvarado
Fred.Alvarado

Since you pointed it out - no. Unless the nuns in school were wrong, the word "they" is a plural pronoun used to reference a plural noun. "She" is a singular pronoun, and it refers to the singular noun "employee" mentioned earlier in the same sentence. Using a plural pronoun to substitute a singular noun is incorrect, though it happens so often most people forgive it (like writing "snuck" instead of "sneaked" - Google that sh!t). The article's author was probably trying to be politically correct and use a combination of "he" and "she" throughout the piece, instead of picking one pronoun and using it exclusively. Unfortunately, her quest to be "PC" has earned her an accusation of being politically incorrect - irony, or coincidence?

premiertechnologist
premiertechnologist

It isn't a form of mental illness: It is a mental disorder -- narcissism to be precise. Of course, this doesn't really complete the picture because it goes beyond narcissism: A lot of managers are sociopaths with no empathy and a conditional conscience (a conditional conscience is one wherein there are rigid definitions of how you treat a particular class of people, but feel free to do anything you want to everyone else: The Mafia is a good example of this, as is the Federal Government and some religions like Scientology [constructed entirely from recycled science fiction by L. Ron Hubbard, published, for the most part in Amazing which later became Analog -- an embarassment to everyone in the SF community, as expressed by Isaac Asimov]). Many work environments, especially corporate ones, prefer psychopaths to be in management: "It's just the sort of person we were looking for!" (for further information consult "Snakes in Suits: When Psychopaths Go to Work" by Dr. Robert Hare and Dr. Paul Babiak). For the most part, these days, there are no rules. Consensus is to do exactly what your manager tells you to do. With the amoral smarmy Boomers, it's total chaos, with no expectation of any kind of integrity ("Let's do lunch" means we never will). They lie, they steal, they take credit for what you do, then when they criticize you for something you did not do (or you did well and showed them up) to make a public statement to embarass you, you are expected to take it with good grace, because, darn it all, if you point out their crass rubbish, the next person you talk to with is some lying @#$%!^ from HR. At least that's the experience of many.

Tony Hopkinson
Tony Hopkinson

Leaving aside the 'erm somewhat dubious assumption that whatever criticism is valid and necessary. So now it's all about delivering it without the recipient blowing up? 1st there's an assumption in there that a blow up is an expected reaction... 2nd theres an assumption that no blow up, means recipient took message on board.... 3rd there's an assumption that criticism is the correct way to ellicit a change of behaviour.... Now given the above three and the carefully sidestepped primary assumption, I have absolutely no problem with the article, given this is about getting your point across without having to go to the expense of sound and damp proofing the meeting rooms....

santeewelding
santeewelding

Save for your subordination to Robert Fuller, and your exhortation that we do the same. Heal thyself, priest.

hippiekarl
hippiekarl

Secular?! The Scientology of Administration........hahahahahaha.

scoffbelly
scoffbelly

If as a manager you make someone cry in a meeting, you have failed and you are nothing more than a bully. Wise up to the lessons learned from the past.

ttsquare
ttsquare

Well, if she wanted to start a turf war, that would have been the way to go. But it is usually inadvisable to start reprimanding people you do not supervise. Plus, their supervisor needs to be aware of the situation. Were you suggesting this is not the other supervisor's responsibility to manage their employee?

a1strategist
a1strategist

Cutting out the manager on another team leaves that manager unaware of your concerns as manager of your team. That manager needs to be in the loop so that there is both a respected communication protocol and the ability of that manager to monitor that employee's performance. Imagine some other manager confronting one of your team members and the shoe may not be so comfy.

g01d4
g01d4

That goes for everyone. However, management needs to have its full say in one meeting. A response can either be emailed and/or another meeting requested.

blarman
blarman

I wish more bosses would give at least quarterly feedback. For those that don't, why not? How do you expect your employees to improve if you don't point out to them what they are doing well and what they can work on? When you wait until the annual review, all you are doing is signaling your own distaste for the review process. You aren't signalling your interest in that person's future career and benefit to the company.

g01d4
g01d4

In the original post means take a few minute break in the meeting and not reschedule. One assumes that emotional outbreaks occur well into a meeting. Rescheduling means going over all the same issues again. Also as the original post states there's the risk that the manager will drop the ball. If an employee can't compose him or herself in a few minutes, without any other mitigating factor, then there's another item to add to the list!

AnsuGisalas
AnsuGisalas

of using he and she in an alternating pattern is frequently used in scientific writings, but usually with a mention in the preamble. I think it's more proper to use "they" in the news delivery genres - in these, reporters don't have space for preambles. And they is absolutely acceptable in anaphoric reference to a referent of either gender (or of general/common gender).

Scalloway1
Scalloway1

"They" has a long history as a singular pronoun used to denote an individual of either sex, going back to Chaucer.

santeewelding
santeewelding

That your own sensitivity can sustain a hit. In that, you are nowhere to be found. Toni, in her piece, and to her advantage, laid it out as a matter of her direct experience. She is local, up front, her hands on. Who better an authority to speak of her experience than she? Contrariwise, you speak removed, and with no authority. The swath of human experience you lay on us is not your own. You ride that of others: Hare and Babiak? Uncritically, too, it seems from here. How else do you justify your lead obscenity -- "[b]You are so wrong[/b]"? That lead, like "the experience of many", needs be shoved right back up where it came from. In this case, your own ass. .

AnsuGisalas
AnsuGisalas

*Krrhhhm* [b]How to deliver criticism to a sensitive manager Freely adapted from Toni Bowers Takeaway: Employers who are prone to get emotional in the face of criticism are often hard to deal with. Here are some tips for making this easier for you and for them. If you've been working long enough, you're bound to come across an employer/manager who doesnt take kindly to constructive criticism. Whether that person is prone to tears or angry outbursts, it's a behavior that makes it more difficult for employees to do their jobs. I once knew of a manager of another team who would consistently made things difficult for folks on my team because of his lack of attention to detail. When I asked this manager's team members if they were aware of this, they said they were but every time they tried to talk to him about this, the manager would cry. So, like a bad Pavlovian experiment, the team began to avoid the discussions altogether, allowing the problematic behavior to continue. Here are some of my tips for delivering criticism to an employer or manager who is never in the mood to receive it. *Meet face-to-face [i]and[/i] prepare a written doc It's very easy to misinterpret what someone says when you're in the throes of some emotion like sadness or anger. Be sure to write down exactly what you say to the manager so there is no question or [i]That's not what I thought you meant[/i]'s to deal with later. And on this point, it's important to: [i]Have the manager repeat what he or she is hearing[/i] Having the manager say back to you what it is he or she thinks you're saying helps to clarify matters and also enforces the behavior you want to see. I once had to tell a VP that he messed up so many projects that we were considering banning him from the cubicle floors. To soften the blow, I said that he was a very good little VP, just not very clever. When he repeated back what he heard me say, he said, "You said I'm a good VP". He had some kind of turbo-charged defense mechanism going that allowed him to glean only the good stuff I'd said. *Criticize the behavior, not the personality There are going to be some managers who are more emotional than others. You will never be able to change a personality but you can affect the outside behaviors that result from it. You may have a support manager whose outgoing personality serves him well in his job. It's when that quality causes him to extend individual support techs working hours longer than preferred that it becomes an issue. Then you simply make him aware that jobs have to be dealt with in a shorter span of time. *Give smaller burst of feedback (both good and bad) more frequently You don't want to drop a major criticism on any manager at one time - whatever the temperament. It's much easier to deal with small examples of undesired behavior. And giving positive feedback helps a manager feel like it's not just about the errors. Also, managers wont dread you coming to their office as much. *Don't enable the emotions If the manager starts to cry or gets angry, stop the conversation [i]right there[/i] and ask if he or she needs a moment. Don't let them end the conversation and reschedule it for a later date. If you do that, you're only allowing the manager to think that the outbursts work to deflate criticism. Allow the manager to get it together and then resume the conversation.[/b] Ahh! I haven't done a TR rewrite in a while... I think last time Santee asked me what I had been smoking :D :D :D What do you think?

AnsuGisalas
AnsuGisalas

Also instigated by Ron El of K'ruptjon [i]The Sea Organization is the actual nexus that controls the scientology empire. Sea Organization personnel are authorized to take over and control scientology organizations and to demote personnel, move bank accounts and run the corporation as if the SO personnel were employees or representatives of that corporation but they are not.[/i] :part of an affidavit by a former Sea Org member. Our Mr. Cox here may be some kind of thetan, judging by his words : [i]And some of the best technology is being actively hidden from us by authoritarian [b]psychology[/b] people who think that if they didn't read about it in their peer-reviewed journal, then it doesn't have any value.[/i] -emphasis added. That there's a sure tell.

Tony Hopkinson
Tony Hopkinson

and it is. Wiki article makes it look like a diploma mill..... If you wanted to study business in a church, go with the RC boys, they've got more money than God....

tamonet1
tamonet1

I am one of those sensitive employees who cries far too easily. Usually it has more to do with this just being the 'last straw' of the day/week/month than with the particular behavior in question. Yes, if you don't communicate with me on a regular basis, giving me positive feedback as well as negative, you may be a bully. If you don't ask for my view of the event or behavior and try to understand my point of view, you may be a bully. But just because I start to cry in a meeting, don't assume I'm weak or that you're wrong. Accept that I need to collect myself and then continue the discussion in a manner that shows you care about more than just numbers and your ego.

Tony Hopkinson
Tony Hopkinson

I've cried in a few meetings, after I realised there was another sh t sandwich coming my way. They taste awful.... :( There are no past lessons in corporateville. The whole point of it is look good now, so you get promoted before anyone checks why nobody else thinks much of the buffet...

LocoLobo
LocoLobo

That statement will be true sometimes but not all the time. Not a manager, but I've seen people cry at work a few times. Some people hit their breaking point and don't hold it in. I'm not blaming them but I'm not blaming the manager either.

kjohnson
kjohnson

Yes, I am, and I'm right about it. Dropping another employee into the sh^t by complaning about her work to her manager is sheer spite. If you have a problem with me, tell me about it first.

kjohnson
kjohnson

My dad's a policeman so I will tell him about you and THEN you'll be sorry.

blarman
blarman

Please elaborate. You're making it sound as if it is management's responsibility to limit contact with an employee to one meeting.

santeewelding
santeewelding

Goes to show how, when we speak, we say more of self than subject. I would go further. I would say those fixed on subject have no idea how alarming their nakedness.

Kaasya
Kaasya

Other languages, like Spanish, use the male plural to refer to a mixed group of male and female. Why can we not just use "he", when refering to a single person whose identity (male or female) is not necessary for the example being presented. I never understood why some people feel disenfranchised just because "their" gender isn't mentioned, or think it doesn't mean them, too, when general statements are made like "Man does not live by bread alone."

AnsuGisalas
AnsuGisalas

but what I did was compact what he said... making no specific judgment on his aim ;) Here's to next week... once we get past monday.

AnsuGisalas
AnsuGisalas

This is the madhouse. We - its top dogs. Still on the table remains to distribute the hats; who gets to be Napoleon; who is Emperor Norton; who is Ludwig II... may I suggest the ancient rite of Rock, Paper, Spoon? (No scissors allowed in the madhouse).

santeewelding
santeewelding

Of the lines on my screen delineating who said what to whom, I see one leading directly back from your instant post to that of [b]GetSmartEditing[/b] (hence, I take it, the allusion in your first sentence to "mental illness"). It does not lead back in response to Ansu (his comment a delight to me as well). I erred in not following the line from your comment up far enough. It appears left-outboard, but one critical step in, which I now appreciate. It does not lead up to the top -- to what Toni wrote. It leads back down to, mental illness.

premiertechnologist
premiertechnologist

After your brilliant post. Oh well, we all have our off days and it's so easy to get sidetracked by nim nulls. The good thing is that we all have another chance next week....

premiertechnologist
premiertechnologist

I thought the comment by AnsuGisalas (We need a rewrite from the other side) was brilliant and I was responding to that comment with hilarious irony. So hhere you are santeewelding, you missed who the response was to, missed the tone of it and are totally stupid for assuming I was talking to Toni. I, in fact, support Toni enthusiastically. What AnsuGisalas did was write a brilliant satire. I responded in kind and wrote a satire of her satire. If you are so stupid you don't get the discussions, maybe you shouldn't post here. For you, it is like explaining rainbows to earthworms -- an impossible task even on a rainy day. You also make unwaranted assumptions. I've been a manager for some time in major misfortune 500 companies. I am also more deserving of my moniker of "Premiertechnologist" than you may think, although in the scheme of things, that's arguable, a matter of taste. You can judge for yourself with the technology present on my site at DNArefutesBI.com but be warned, besides web master skills (and I'm not bothering to give you a glimpse into my aspx.net skills), I have also been an IBM Mainframe Systems Programmer, a Project Manager and a whole host of other advanced Technological skills I won't mention. At the age of 12, I built my own 24 Volt DC regulated power supply, designed the circuits, and built a binary counter with a rack of relays scrounged from the AT&T microwave tower they had tossed. I've written a book, "Assertive Incompetence -- An Introduction to Management Malpractice". I have a number of advanced hobbies I'm now pursuing. You entirely missed the point, but given what we've seen of you thus far, it's doubtful that you have the expertise to divine your own incompetence and need a lot of hand holding until you acquire enough competence to discern your own incompetence.

AnsuGisalas
AnsuGisalas

Don't just slap at them with herrings. Pull out the yellowfin that is your self.

AnsuGisalas
AnsuGisalas

... you know, some people just don't want to be fixed :D

hippiekarl
hippiekarl

At what point do you offer them (last week's) management brownie!? Yet another use for the Universal Tonic: ameliorating criticism/feedback's ego-damage ;) The list is growing..........

Tony Hopkinson
Tony Hopkinson

Thank Cthulu, you haven't got hold of the one for higher management on how to criticise employees with middle management roles! Oh no (insert sound of hands wringing here). Be careful my boy, keep it secret, keep it safe.... :p

AnsuGisalas
AnsuGisalas

you do the research. I hadn't even thought to check his profile... :D

hippiekarl
hippiekarl

"Scientologist, 25yrs Sea Organization" according to his TR profile. I guess the plug for failed sci-fi writer Hubbard's 'school' does inform his comment on psychologists' conspiracy. Like I was saying, "Hahahahaha!".

Editor's Picks