1. Company makes unpopular decision (cuts a benefit, partners with someone unpopular, enforces some tedious process to make management life earlier)
2. Next poll season comes round
3. Shock, results are down
4. Declare an aggregate engagement measure as an action item which incorporates both the happiness metric but others such as understanding of company strategy
5. Declare the problem with this metric are line managers not conveying company direction well enough
6. Declare you're taking action by measuring line management on this metric
7. A bunch of ensuing makework on something execs think is important (at a certain size, a singular company vision is just too generic for line employees to care), yet they sell it as taking action
I always try to keep this in mind, Valve which famously has a completely flat structure, ended up turning into an environment where things like popularity and ability to dispense resources defined the practiced org structure. Be careful what you wish for.
On the contrary! Good personality traits evolved because they make for good leaders.
…which makes me depressed about being on the spectrum because it means I had to accept I could never be a “leader”.
(Well, I am a technical lead, it’s in my job-description, but that’s only because I get -Wpedantic on peoples’ code - and not because I can inspire people)
Do adults have judgement of pre-pubernecent 14 year olds? I mean, maybe some do, but...
What happens is that we learn to "hide" our impulses in more social acceptable behavior.
We didn't have that many bully's when i grew up but most of them are just slightly more polished version of themselves.
But when they are drinking or emotions are high they revert back. (which is bad since 2 of them are cops now)
I am not saying that person cannot change his life and ways around. I know some that have done that. But most people (in my expirience) don't
It’s especially noticeable when you’re not one of the in-crowd.
Zero days per week in the office was not presented as an option.
(A) Seven in office
(B) Six in office
(C) Five in office, seven evenings plus two days WFH
(D) Please replace me
Will be interesting to see if this choice happens.
"Look, we have a two-years contract where we pay X thousand dollars a month for 100 desks and we have on an average day 3 developers in our office. After one year of lockdowns, we know our developers work at least as well from home as from the office, but higher ups ask us why we pay so much for an empty building, so we will force you come back to the office as soon as we can, even if we don't save any money with that and most likely decrease our efficiency and employee satisfaction."
I live in Germany and that's more or less what's happening at my company as we speak. Nobody complained about our performance or said they wished the company would enforce "work from office" rules, yet, they already try to slowly increase the days where we need to work from the office.
In my opinion, once a month in the office is great for chatting and connecting with people, but when it comes to work output, it doesn't move the needle, it's actually a day lost to the business.
There was this one org that had a few floors of a building for their use, but most of the desks sat empty most of the time. This came to the attention of a different org that was hard up for space. That had 2 people per desk at many desks. They got the "space manager" to take a look, but the target org got wind of what was going on and they called everyone to be in during that time. Those floors were overflowing with people when the space manager showed up.
(actual employees in our case)
I wholeheartedly agree. It's come to the point where if a company mentions that they participate in those surveys during the hiring process, that's a yellow flag.
That being said, I find it hard to believe my company is the only one doing that, I even called Gallup about it and they did not seem to care. At all.
Imagine what the real numbers look like.