Discussion on:
View:
Show:
Everyone knows you have slept with half of the staff and haven't told your significant other. Quit being a slut. You gossip more than you work and everyone is tired of hearing you speak.
C'mon, kids; that was funny! He said what we all thought when we first saw the title.
A lot of humor can slip past people who are burning up their 'linear-logic circuits' at the time; hours later (during Happy Hour) they get it. Your deadpan delivery helped stump them, I think.
"6. You spin the truth"
Everyone spins the truth. It is a requirement for survival. It you tell the unvarnished truth 100% of the time, you'll be hitting the bricks right quick like.
Management, by definition, is "spinning the truth." That's what they do.
Everyone spins the truth. It is a requirement for survival. It you tell the unvarnished truth 100% of the time, you'll be hitting the bricks right quick like.
Management, by definition, is "spinning the truth." That's what they do.
"Spinning the truth" means nobody is going to believe you or trust you. It your position relies on this kind of"divine deception", your customers won't trust you either. Go work for the CIA.
I am very big on credibility, without credibility you have to spin the truth all the time. I worked for a company that was moving and I had to lay off 160 staff. They wanted me to keep quiet and let the staff work until the last minute in case it effected sales. I went straight out and told them all it was their last week and drummed up enough hoo-rah to set almost record sales numbers.
I then gave them all a job two blocks away with a new company I had partnered in. Credibility goes a long way, I had earned their trust and faith and they showed me. In essence, I made the last week a real time interview for their next job and they were working to be superstars and get the supervisor roles with the new company. Instead of deception ,I created drive because they trusted they'd have a brighter future.
I then gave them all a job two blocks away with a new company I had partnered in. Credibility goes a long way, I had earned their trust and faith and they showed me. In essence, I made the last week a real time interview for their next job and they were working to be superstars and get the supervisor roles with the new company. Instead of deception ,I created drive because they trusted they'd have a brighter future.
Fundamentally disagree about "everyone spins the truth".....that is incorrect and that attitude is too prevalent in US industry........the unfiltered truth is what is required
but a fundamental part of human nature is seeing the world and situations through our own perspectives. This, in and of itself, is going to cause some skewing of "The Truth." It's inevitable. We can, however, do our best to stick to the truth as we see it, to listen to others and how they perceive events, and to find the closest thing to truth within the threads.
OK, philosophically we'll never get to the final ultimate truth. But on a day-to-day level, we all know what it means to be honest in describing a situation, or what it means to put a spin on it to serve our or the company's interests. Honesty works. Admitting your own mistakes follows from honesty.
Introduce an average autistic person into the work-place and see how far that notion that "unfiltered truth is what is required". People who don't know when to keep their mouths shut -- to smooth over disagreements, keep confidences and respect privacy -- are not welcome in most work-places.
Being honest does not imply blurting out every truth you are aware of. It seems to me that many of these comments are people trying to come up with indirect ways to justify lying.
At least not for me. I am one of the most honest people in my work place and I certainly believe that covering up fault and skewing facts intentionally does no good for anyone involved.
However, I also have come across and been involved in conflicts that arose from differing perspectives of a situation. Both parties honestly believed they were telling the truth, but they were doing so with lack of facts or through the filter of personal perspective. We should not jump to the conclusion that someone is being dishonest without open dialog and understanding. That's my point. Rash judgement is easily as much of an issue as dishonesty.
(Edited for typo)
However, I also have come across and been involved in conflicts that arose from differing perspectives of a situation. Both parties honestly believed they were telling the truth, but they were doing so with lack of facts or through the filter of personal perspective. We should not jump to the conclusion that someone is being dishonest without open dialog and understanding. That's my point. Rash judgement is easily as much of an issue as dishonesty.
(Edited for typo)
I agree, frankness is different to unfiltered honesty! Frankly I am offended by the comment that "everyone spins the truth". There are, of course, times when tact is needed, but tact and spin are worlds apart. One is motivated by a wish to improve or maintain good relationships, the other is much more about manipulation and getting your own way. If we can't tell the difference then maybe its time to look at our emotional maturity and see what we can do about improving our tact.
I've dabbled in the unfiltered before and you know where it got me? The unemployment line. There's a reason some people are at the top. They know how to play the game. Management, especially middle management with an agenda, is not concerned with how well you do your work or whether things are done correctly and on time, or hell, correctly at all.
As long as you can ********, you're golden. Unfortunately I wasn't born with a silver tongue and cannot seem to develop one, and not for lack of trying. I've worked in many, many places over the years and it's exactly the same situation at companies large and small. Though in smaller companies it's much harder...
As long as you can ********, you're golden. Unfortunately I wasn't born with a silver tongue and cannot seem to develop one, and not for lack of trying. I've worked in many, many places over the years and it's exactly the same situation at companies large and small. Though in smaller companies it's much harder...
The "truth" (as we see it) can be filtered without lying. Sometimes it is better to say nothing.
Liars and BSers will always be exposed in the end anyway.
Liars and BSers will always be exposed in the end anyway.
I've known a autistic guy that was a pathological liar. Autism doesn't make people honest, it may make them younger than their years in which case they are often very innocent and honest to a fault at an older age, but that doesn't mean that they don't attempt to lie and manipulate to get what they want. Especially when mislead or if they find that bending the truth gets better results.
Truth, yes. Unfiltered, not necessarily. Most of the time, when the "unfiltered truth" comes up, the context is bad news of some sort. There are a myriad of articles on how to bring up bad news so as to keep focus on the news and not on the people.
It may well be that John or Joan is an incompetent dolt, but flat out saying so is not helpful. Dispassionate analysis of an objective failure (project delivered late, not at all or full of bugs) will make this clear, but not look like an attack on the person.
One never tells a child that he/she is stupid; what the child did was ill advised, dangerous to him/herself or others, out of line with the family's morals or ethics, but it's the act, not the person. If you can't come up with something more constructive than "stupid" when discussing someone else, you're applying the term to the wrong person,
It may well be that John or Joan is an incompetent dolt, but flat out saying so is not helpful. Dispassionate analysis of an objective failure (project delivered late, not at all or full of bugs) will make this clear, but not look like an attack on the person.
One never tells a child that he/she is stupid; what the child did was ill advised, dangerous to him/herself or others, out of line with the family's morals or ethics, but it's the act, not the person. If you can't come up with something more constructive than "stupid" when discussing someone else, you're applying the term to the wrong person,
It sounds more like a Parent/Child, Teacher/student or Supervisor/dumbass employee relationship.
Aren't we talking about trust among *co-workers*?
Aren't we talking about trust among *co-workers*?
I've seen this in the workplace way too many times! For a number of years I worked in an industrial environment where tact was something used to determine how sticky something was, and was not part of the manager to employee vocabulary!
As you move up the food chain and out of the garbage, the language changes, sometimes not by much, but it does change. I saw a big difference going from manufacturing to engineering, and then later on to MIS. Different worlds really do exist.
Sometimes you do need to be blunt, and unfortunately it's not always politically correct, but it needs to be done. I've been in a situation where an former manager was supposed to cover for me. To be honest, and I told his manager the CEO, that he was useless because I had 3 times the work to do when I got back to work. It probably wasn't nice, but he got the axe a few weeks later. No loss as far as I'm concerned.
As you move up the food chain and out of the garbage, the language changes, sometimes not by much, but it does change. I saw a big difference going from manufacturing to engineering, and then later on to MIS. Different worlds really do exist.
Sometimes you do need to be blunt, and unfortunately it's not always politically correct, but it needs to be done. I've been in a situation where an former manager was supposed to cover for me. To be honest, and I told his manager the CEO, that he was useless because I had 3 times the work to do when I got back to work. It probably wasn't nice, but he got the axe a few weeks later. No loss as far as I'm concerned.
My dad always called me stupid when I was growing up. If I messed up, I was stupid. If I didn't practice the piano enough, I was stupid, etc.
After awhile this does have an psychological effect. You get to a point where you're afraid to do anything that's out of the ordinary, because you don't want to get yelled at!
After awhile this does have an psychological effect. You get to a point where you're afraid to do anything that's out of the ordinary, because you don't want to get yelled at!
It'll never happen. We are a litigious society, and we don't have "loser pays" court system.
Anyone can (and DOES) sue anyone else for anything. And since we are not automatically "loser pays," even if I prevail in the lawsuit, I still have to pay the fees, etc. incurred to defend myself.
So, it would help if one didn't go around hollering "you suck" even if "you" do, even if it is the unvarnished truth. One MUST spin it, or one must hit the bricks.
Anyone can (and DOES) sue anyone else for anything. And since we are not automatically "loser pays," even if I prevail in the lawsuit, I still have to pay the fees, etc. incurred to defend myself.
So, it would help if one didn't go around hollering "you suck" even if "you" do, even if it is the unvarnished truth. One MUST spin it, or one must hit the bricks.
It is and insult, not an objective assessment of one's faults. It is an accusation of homosexuality. It is an expression of personal hatred and distaste. It is most likely spoken by someone who cannot express himself well, and may not even understand the root of the problem.
Perhaps "you suck" could be replaced with more reasonable and meaningful language. Then maybe an ugly confrontation and litigation could be avoided.
Perhaps "you suck" could be replaced with more reasonable and meaningful language. Then maybe an ugly confrontation and litigation could be avoided.
and there is truth. If your team members are jerks, smarter than you, not smarter than you, sleeping with a Rottweiler, or just a plain pain to be around, you have to spread the varnish to keep a working environment going.
If you've got a co-worker cooking the books, jerking around customers, or falsifying reports just before bonus time comes around... you can't let that slide. If you're one of the people a little shy in the ethics department yourself, for your own self-preservation you can't take a risk in getting caught up in shenanigans.
If you've got a co-worker cooking the books, jerking around customers, or falsifying reports just before bonus time comes around... you can't let that slide. If you're one of the people a little shy in the ethics department yourself, for your own self-preservation you can't take a risk in getting caught up in shenanigans.
Every one of your points works equally well and, for the consultant, more significant from a CASH FLOW point. Not just your coworkers.
>"avoid micromanaging. Instead, give your co-workers the latitude to put their full talents to work."
Who's co-worker and who's supervisor here?
My perception of a "co-worker" is someone who is on the same level as you, not someone who is waiting for you to give your permission of approval. Frankly I was expecting to see help on lateral relationships rather than the supervisor/subordinate interaction.
After twenty years of service I very suddenly lost the trust of my *co-workers*, and was hoping to get some idea what I had done wrong. This article is not the help the title implies.
Who's co-worker and who's supervisor here?
My perception of a "co-worker" is someone who is on the same level as you, not someone who is waiting for you to give your permission of approval. Frankly I was expecting to see help on lateral relationships rather than the supervisor/subordinate interaction.
After twenty years of service I very suddenly lost the trust of my *co-workers*, and was hoping to get some idea what I had done wrong. This article is not the help the title implies.
"My perception of a "co-worker" is someone who is on the same level as you, not someone who is waiting for you to give your permission of approval. Frankly I was expecting to see help on lateral relationships rather than the supervisor/subordinate interaction."
A co-worker is someone who works with you -- if you treat people as subordinate -read "inferior"(regardless of reporting levels here) then they are bound to not trust you. Unless you are in the military or a para-military function, pulling rank on a daily basis puts you in the "not to be trusted" zone.
A co-worker is someone who works with you -- if you treat people as subordinate -read "inferior"(regardless of reporting levels here) then they are bound to not trust you. Unless you are in the military or a para-military function, pulling rank on a daily basis puts you in the "not to be trusted" zone.
Pulling rank on a day to day bases in the military will get you in the "not to be trusted" zone as well. If you have to pull rank all the time then you just have to have your way all the time. Rank is about making decisions and leading not forcing people to do what you want.
Bill
Bill
I don't like it at all, but it seems to be popular among some supervisors, and is not limited to the military.
In fact, it will be found in many personnel and P&P manuals. It was in the employees guide for my former employer (local government). When I was hired, nobody seemed to worry about it much. Even our supervisors were more like co-workers. We worked well and we got along well.
But new administration came along with a completely different attitude. We were *definitely* underlings then. I retired.
In fact, it will be found in many personnel and P&P manuals. It was in the employees guide for my former employer (local government). When I was hired, nobody seemed to worry about it much. Even our supervisors were more like co-workers. We worked well and we got along well.
But new administration came along with a completely different attitude. We were *definitely* underlings then. I retired.
In there you delegate authority, not responsibility, pretty much the exact opposite of corporate land.
someone who knows the other side of things, but is willing to help you find your bearings in the matter.
I think usually being on the level (and not on the defensive) will achieve good results. People often would prefer to get along, but sometimes it will take some work to make that option seem viable.
I think usually being on the level (and not on the defensive) will achieve good results. People often would prefer to get along, but sometimes it will take some work to make that option seem viable.
You can attempt to micromanage a co-worker and depending on their personality they may even do what you ask even if they don't like it. I think the article has a lot of good points about why co-workers don't trust, but I am pretty certain that it's not comprehensive. I'm certain there are a lot of good books out there that can help. You might try looking at the books that Toni recommended in the article. I haven't personally read them so I don't know if they are any good or not.
Bill
Bill
I once was told this. "I won't ever lie to you. I might tell you the truth 4 or 5 different ways, but I won't ever lie to you"
It kind of goes with the "always tell the truth, but you don't have to tell ALL the truth" approach.
It kind of goes with the "always tell the truth, but you don't have to tell ALL the truth" approach.
that you were giving me an opportunity when you laid me off?
Or was it when you decided I was going to make a significant contribution to the company's success by talking a pay cut?
Possibly it was to hold my hands up and admit I was responsilble for THE failure so I could then show that I'd learnt something from it.
It's a technique that only works on the naive and the supid, so the attempt will backfire in most circumstances and you might as well just have spat it out.
Or was it when you decided I was going to make a significant contribution to the company's success by talking a pay cut?
Possibly it was to hold my hands up and admit I was responsilble for THE failure so I could then show that I'd learnt something from it.
It's a technique that only works on the naive and the supid, so the attempt will backfire in most circumstances and you might as well just have spat it out.
I prefer to be ethical and tell the truth but many times i have found out that the truth hurts too much and ends me up on the bad side of coworkers or in the unemployment line. I dont intend or want to hurt people, but the hardest lesson i am sometimes still having trouble with is when to just STFU and stay off the radar, when my intent is to help, i only end up hurting myself.
For the most part I could care less what people think of me, but in order to stay employed sometimes it is best to not say whats on your mind even if you are certain you are correct...sad but true
For the most part I could care less what people think of me, but in order to stay employed sometimes it is best to not say whats on your mind even if you are certain you are correct...sad but true
But you should tell them when their practices are impairing others in performing their job, or wasting money, running off business, et c. You tell them before the boss does. If you *are* the boss, you should know how to handle it. If the truth hurts them, *they* have a problem. Adults should be able to handle embarrassment. Children would shoot you the bird and run away.
I was working as a swing shift computer operator. I was second-senior in the department and we had a couple of new hires. One of them did a terrific job and was up and running without any issues. The other guy sadly didn't seem to care. I told him very nicely that he has to do something about his attitude otherwise he'd be canned. He kept coming in late, messing up the jobs, and even killed some data off of a sever once all because he didn't use his head. I even told him that I was saying this as a "friend" who cared, and he should see about doing better before the manager came down on him.
So after having our peer-to-peer talk, he went off and whined to the manager instead of taking what I said and work with it instead. A few weeks later he was canned. He never did learn a stinking bloody thing from our conversation.
Children will shoot you the bird and run away. This is exactly what he did.
So after having our peer-to-peer talk, he went off and whined to the manager instead of taking what I said and work with it instead. A few weeks later he was canned. He never did learn a stinking bloody thing from our conversation.
Children will shoot you the bird and run away. This is exactly what he did.
I always arrive late for meetings and if what happens at work is anything to go by I always will.
As people say I'll be a Decade Late for my own Funeral and it's true. I just don't have enough time to stop working to go to meetings particularly when it's been promised by the people running the meeting that I'll have whatever repaired and working properly "Immediately."
Some people are very free giving away my time and have to accept the consequences of doing so.
Col
As people say I'll be a Decade Late for my own Funeral and it's true. I just don't have enough time to stop working to go to meetings particularly when it's been promised by the people running the meeting that I'll have whatever repaired and working properly "Immediately."
Some people are very free giving away my time and have to accept the consequences of doing so.
Col
Those 7 reasons for mistrust are the earmarks of almost all the managers I've ever had. Matter of fact, the very worst ones came from the "Big" accounting firms!
I have never seen any management trust a coworker.
They are not in the same click.
I have seen coworkers rehab a managers home to keep a job.
Go out with his family and follow him around like a puppy at work..
All for a job he is more than able to do.
This is the truth in the USA today....
No limits for top management and not many for middle either..
They are not in the same click.
I have seen coworkers rehab a managers home to keep a job.
Go out with his family and follow him around like a puppy at work..
All for a job he is more than able to do.
This is the truth in the USA today....
No limits for top management and not many for middle either..
And yet you STILL insist on calling it the UNITED states, no matter how divided the people. Super Power? mind boggling!
The people that fit the description are also the type that would fail to recognize any of these failings in themselves. Their #1 characteristic is finger-pointing and deflection.
Okay this was the last place I thought to discuss this subject. It is prudent to know and understand the neccessities of being valued for your word as well as action. In the cases where I have seen the occassional "truthage slip," I always ask myself to what advantage does a co-worker pursue through these actions? Will it get them "Brownie Points"? If that is the case I'd rather not climb the food chain in the manner of defeating moral integrity. In reality, it exists in more ways then we would like to admit because all to common shallow awareness has become the new "Depth," in our society. " Know nothing and despise those that do," is a common accepted theme in some circles. It is the reverse evolution of a Higher Awareness. The dumbing down of all complex models is suppose to spread the knowledge wealth to those in deep need, but many times it only fuels the inner Id of Egocentric mentality. Paranoia is not an affirmation and I believe many of the ones that obsess over the mistakes that others make are legitimizing their own persona of dysfunction. I know that it sounds like I skirted the purpose of this discussion, but that's because I feel real Talent and Skills do not fret over approval. Take for Instance Jobs, Steve wasn't known for his like-ability or aloof-ness, but it didn't stop him from standing out. success breeds eccentric behavior because it doesn't try to play by somebody else's Rules! So, have I been in violation of any of the the Deadly 7? Maybe! I am not Perfect and wouldn't consider somebody else's misfortune to imply my professional behavior is a direct reflection of my worth. That is the problem as I see it and when we start to admit this superficial entitlement behavior doesn't necessary equate success, we will all be on the same page.
Jobs did stand out indeed, but it was a large group of engineers and other talented folk that helped him become the God of Apple. Please spare us your comparisons. Success is what you are, not what you become... especially from being a scumbag...
...is of concern to your company.
Your *worth* is of concern to your family and friends.
Your professional success will affect your *net worth* in dollars only.
Your *real* worth will affect your success as a person.
Steve pushed his people hard and expected real achievement, not efficiency reports. Did he lie to his staff? I don't think so. I doubt he would have found it advisable. Did his staff lie to him? I'm sure they would regret it, and quickly.
Those with the talent and skills are not always recognized especially by those who have "other types of skills". Thousands of highly talented people are discharged for exposing truths which management or executives would try to suppress, ability not withstanding.
Your *worth* is of concern to your family and friends.
Your professional success will affect your *net worth* in dollars only.
Your *real* worth will affect your success as a person.
Steve pushed his people hard and expected real achievement, not efficiency reports. Did he lie to his staff? I don't think so. I doubt he would have found it advisable. Did his staff lie to him? I'm sure they would regret it, and quickly.
Those with the talent and skills are not always recognized especially by those who have "other types of skills". Thousands of highly talented people are discharged for exposing truths which management or executives would try to suppress, ability not withstanding.
It's funny. This list describes a lot of our elected officials here in the US. Even more so those now serving in the state of IL.
We were given or developed the ability to lie for a reason. Survival. Use it wisely.
- Keyboard Shortcuts:
- Prev
- Next
- Toggle
