undefined | Better HN

0 pointssalawat3y ago0 comments

Oh heavens. An executive being held accountable for the negative externalities their incessant nudging is trying to push on other employees?

Unthinkable. That sort of accountability is only for those plebian workers.

0 comments

3 comments · 1 top-level

ncr1003y ago· 2 in thread

> accountable ... negative externalities .. incessant .. plebian

Yikes - as opposed to these hypothetical concerns, the employee neatly doxxed a coworker, and complained about an un-raised (as far as we know she did not ask for a cost-of-living-adjustment) internal grievance in a public forum. Reality is she behaved unethically, in my view.

salawatOP3y ago

Reality is, management, by virtue of their possession of Director titles, are already often public information available to investors. Number 1.

Number 2: Nudge theory is absolutely a thing, and barring a technical reason for RTO, it is 100% a powerplay by management. I have been in on meetings where those types of measures are discussed.

Poor response by management types to laborers naming and shaming is generally a very good signal that someone was relying on worker discretion or control of the flow of information to get something past the radar.

Newsflash:

People can, and absolutely should talk. Half of being a leader or person in management is ensuring that you keep your nose clean enough that the people below you don't feel the need to speak out, and if they do, that you're ready for the fallout.

It ain't hard to do that if you're being ethical, and are equipped with real, valid reasons other than narcissistic upper management dictat to back up why the company is doing X.

If you don't have that, then maybe you need to reevaluate whether or not you want to be in that spot.

ncr1003y ago

Fantastic reply, @salawat. Thank you for taking the time to continue the conversation.

I think I am getting where you are coming from and have a better sense of the value of talking-back, and of unethical management being in competition with non-management.

I tend to work around others' faults (instead of challenging) - and I may be projecting that attitude in my position.

Here I still feel bad for the singled-out exec - though that could simply be me denying the intentionality and tactics of a person in a "powerful" position.

So while I may want to defer to the dominant paradigm, to work within the bounds, I see the value of changing it - of ensuring all workers have safe avenues for communicating dissent.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse