RE: RE: Make [up] work (was RE: Unsubstantiated and/or falseallegations(was RE: Nobody reviewed the manuals)

Subject: RE: RE: Make [up] work (was RE: Unsubstantiated and/or falseallegations(was RE: Nobody reviewed the manuals)
From: "Butler, Darren J CTR USAF AFMC 584 CBSS/GBHDB" <Darren -dot- Butler -dot- ctr -at- Robins -dot- af -dot- mil>
To: "Gene Kim-Eng" <techwr -at- genek -dot- com>, "Keith Hood" <klhra -at- yahoo -dot- com>
Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2010 15:50:57 -0400

Point taken, guys, but my theory comes from years of observation and
experience.

Some organizations realize that chasing and squashing every single rumor
is like putting toothpaste back in a tube, so management accepts that
"some" rumors are just part of the culture on the "factory floor". In
many cases it depends on the nature of the rumor and who's spreading it.
Yes, false reports such as "Dude, I heard that your job is being shipped
to Southern Elbonia next week and Morgan Fairchild is going to be our
new CEO" are destructive but they typically spur someone to grab the
nearest manager by the Blackberry and not let go until they confirm or
deny such information thus elevating it out of the realm of rumor.
Sometimes an organization will hint at good news before an official
announcement is made in order to keep employees from jumping ship too
early. This is often true when hundreds of jobs are depending on a large
contract renewal. I've worked for an office that allowed a rumor of
"possible impending doom - but you didn't hear that from me" to spread
for just a couple of days. This was because the higher-ups forbid
1st-level supervisors form telling their crew the "ugly truth" which
would cause a mass exodus leaving nobody to work on the current
contract. That was a welcomed exception to my "ignore
management-initiated rumors" rule.

Corporations - like governments - understand that the skillful
management of internal information is an essential operating tool. It
doesn't matter if you call it break room rumors, corporate spin or
government leaks; it's all data that can be feed to useful idiots for a
desired outcome/outcry.

Feel free to quibble with the details of my theory or revamp my entire
formula (lol to Keith H.), but my assertion still stands; If you want to
know how you should react to a work place rumor, just watch how
management is/isn't handling it.

BTW - Managers aren't as insulated to employee rumors and gossip as one
might think - especially if it's negative. They might be blind but
they're not deaf!

ex: A shipping clerk gossips to the shop supervisor that she's
dating that corporate HQ just sent a large shipment of out-processing
packets. The shop supervisor gossips to the IT Chief that she might want
to hold-off purchasing more work stations. The IT Chief mentions it to
her VP, who quickly puts together a list of "must keep" employees
and-so-on and-so-on....

-Darren



-----Original Message-----
From: Gene Kim-Eng [mailto:techwr -at- genek -dot- com]
Sent: Friday, June 11, 2010 2:12 PM
To: Butler, Darren J CTR USAF AFMC 584 CBSS/GBHDB; techwr -at- genek -dot- com
Cc: techwr-l -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
Subject: RE: RE: Make [up] work (was RE: Unsubstantiated and/or
falseallegations(was RE: Nobody reviewed the manuals)

Offhand, I can't think of any company that would be content to let a bad
news rumor run free even if it's totally false. Bad rumors and false
reports have a life of their own that can dog a company for years even
after they've been disproven. If a corporations's management seems
content to let bad rumors of any kind run free, the only conclusion I
might draw from that is that they've already concluded that the company
is doomed and aren't responding because they're too busy strapping on
their golden parachutes and networking their next career moves.

Gene Kim-Eng





------- Original Message -------

On 6/11/2010 5:08 PM Butler, Darren J CTR USAF AFMC 584 CBSS/GBHDB
wrote: >If man agement is content to let the rumors run free, then the
rumors are either way off base and/or management initiated. Start
ignoring them.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Gain access to everything you need to create and publish documentation,
manuals, and other information through multiple channels. Choose
authoring (and import) as well as virtually any output you may need.
http://www.doctohelp.com/


- Use this space to communicate with TECHWR-L readers -
- Contact admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com for more information -


---
You are currently subscribed to TECHWR-L as archive -at- web -dot- techwr-l -dot- com -dot-

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
techwr-l-unsubscribe -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com
or visit http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/options/techwr-l/archive%40web.techwr-l.com


To subscribe, send a blank email to techwr-l-join -at- lists -dot- techwr-l -dot- com

Send administrative questions to admin -at- techwr-l -dot- com -dot- Visit
http://www.techwr-l.com/ for more resources and info.

Please move off-topic discussions to the Chat list, at:
http://lists.techwr-l.com/mailman/listinfo/techwr-l-chat


References:
RE: RE: Make [up] work (was RE: Unsubstantiated and/or falseallegations(was RE: Nobody reviewed the manuals): From: Gene Kim-Eng

Previous by Author: RE: Make [up] work (was RE: Unsubstantiated and/or falseallegations(was RE: Nobody reviewed the manuals)
Next by Author: Grammar tools online
Previous by Thread: RE: RE: Make [up] work (was RE: Unsubstantiated and/or falseallegations(was RE: Nobody reviewed the manuals)
Next by Thread: HR Pubs and Policies & Procedures Manuals


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:

Sponsored Ads


Sponsored Ads