TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: Like long hours? From:Andrew Plato <gilliankitty -at- yahoo -dot- com> To:"TECHWR-L" <techwr-l -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com> Date:Thu, 8 Aug 2002 11:09:35 -0700 (PDT)
--- Bruce Byfield <bbyfield -at- axionet -dot- com> wrote:
> At the same time, I do think it's important to recognize that most of
> these companies are taking advantage of employee's enthusiasm and
> dedication. Too often,they promise pie-in-the-sky in the form of stock
> options or future benefits that never materialize.That's a form of
> hypocrisy, and hypocrisy deserves debunking.
It can be hypocritical. But it is also natural for a new company or has a new
idea for the executives to be very optimistic about the results. Hence, they set
expectations high. They want to encourage the employees to join in on their
optimism. And some people are willing to do that. If they believe in it, they
will commit to it.
But sometimes it doesn't always work. And everybody gets hurt. Thats business.
Not every new thing works. Some do. If you get into something that does work, all
that hard work and sacrifice can pay off in the long run. But, the majority of
new ventures will fail. And anybody who walks into a new company has to accept
environment suits their needs.
> Personally, I try to take this responsibility. However, I would be
> mistaken if I assumed that, because I can, that everybody else can or
> will. Necessity constrains a lot of people.Many, too, are unaccustomed
> to take such responsibility, afraid to take it, or even aware that they
> can take it.
Therefore, the ideal situation would be to help empower those individuals with
the education/training they need to negotiate and analyze their work situation.
> I don't believe that most employers consciously cause low morale among
> their employees. Yet, if they act only in their own short-term interest,
> low morale may very well be the result.An employers' long-term interest
> is best served by being aware of employees' interests, and being aware
> that they will sometimes conflict with the company's.
Yes. I would completely agree with that. But when employee and employer have a
conflict of interest, the default answer is not "its the employer's fault."
> I agree. The balancing act is difficult. But too many managers aren't
> even aware that it's necessary.
Its not their job. They are busy balancing their own lives. Why should they also
be tasked with balancing your life. I believe it is an individual's
responsibility to handle the balance in their life and work with their employer
to get an arrangement that suits that balance.
> In particular, from my experience as a university instructor and as a
> sometime executive, I've observed a very basic fact: people hate taking
> orders. As they mature, they learn not to let this resentment rule their
> actions, but the resentment is there. Too many people in management are
> unaware of this fact. Some even act as if employees are a different
> species that won't react the same way that managers would.
> Obviously, a manager can hardly avoid giving orders. Yet giving too
> many, or giving them at the wrong time or (worst of all) giving orders
> than can't be carried out is usually self-defeating.All these mistakes
> only rouse that dormant basic resentment.
Again, I think this is mostly a personality issue. Some managers are not very
adept at delivering expectations and orders to their employees. And as such do so
in a clunky and sometimes demoralizing manner. That really becomes a function of
a bad management.
> Yet an employee who works over-time is arguably equally deserving of
> those perks. An employee's contribution may be different from an
> executive's, but it's at least as necessary.
Not necessarily. A single well-placed, capable executive can motivate and drive a
company to much greater profits. A single executive can bring in customers from
previous jobs and business relationships. The average employee rarely can affect
the company in this way.
Do You Yahoo!?
HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs http://www.hotjobs.com
Save up to 50% with RoboHelp Deluxe. Get 2 great products for 1 low price!
You'll get RoboHelp Office PLUS RoboDemo, the software demonstration tool
that everyone's been talking about. Check it out and save! http://www.ehelp.com/techwr-l
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot- Visit http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.