My boss conducted a talk — jokingly dubbed as a brainwashing session — to us new hires on the team principles. It wasn’t much of a brainwash for me though since for most parts (if not all), I pretty much agreed with what he said. Either that, or I had been brainwashed. In this post I’ll just do a brain dump on three principles that were discussed: Responsibility, Integrity, and Contribution.
Responsibility - For me, this means taking ownership, doing what you’re supposed to do, and inversely, not doing what you aren’t supposed to do. A new phrase I picked up from the talk is “being cause in the matter”. I like how it goes against learned helplessness and the feeling of being victims of circumstances. Sure, you’re up to your knees in shit, you’ve cursed the world, you’ve vented. But don’t leave it at that. Do something about it. Don’t leave it all up to chance and wait till some deus ex machina gets you out of the mess that you’re in. You’re only as stressed (busy, troubled, etc) as you’d allow yourself to be.
During the talk, I was reminded of something my father told me when I got into a really bad situation in college. Pa advised: “Huwag ka magpadala sa problema. Dalhin mo yung problema.” Using Google Translate, that’s “Do you send the problem. Bring the problem.” which doesn’t quite capture it. Roughly it translates as you shouldn’t let your problems take control of you, and that you should take command of your problems or the situation instead.
Integrity - Two quotes always come into mind when this topic is brought up. First is say what you mean, mean what you say. Second is on how integrity is doing the right thing even when no one’s looking. With respect to being in a mess, this means no cover-ups and acknowledging your misses when you’re at fault.
Contribution - One of the bullet points listed was on helping vs. making a contribution. This then reminded me of a saying about a hungry man and some fish. I can’t remember the exact words but I thought that giving him fish was akin to helping whereas teaching him how to fish was the real contribution. Well, that wasn’t how it was discussed. It was more of instead of thinking of someone or something as flawed, regard it as “perfect” (this might be more challenging for a tester) and just think of how you could add more value to it.
Some related blog posts to these principles and on feedback (also discussed in the talk):
Here’s a video I stumbled upon a couple of weeks ago. It’s a talk by Dan Pink with awesome art work and some interesting points. For one, it clarifies the notion that the carrot-and-stick approach only works for mechanical tasks. Include tasks that require even rudimentary cognitive skills and the rewards-and-punishment scheme just doesn’t work as well anymore. It also highlights what would be an effective use of money as a motivator: Pay people enough to take the issue of money off the table. This way they won’t be thinking about the money, they’ll be thinking about the work. The talk then moves on to discussing the three factors that science shows to lead to better performance and personal satisfaction: Autonomy, Mastery, and Purpose.
The same guy had a very very similar TED talk (and it has an interactive transcript). A snippet from the said transcript (emphasis mine): “And the good news about all of this is that the scientists who’ve been studying motivation have given us this new approach. It’s an approach built much more around intrinsic motivation. Around the desire to do things because they matter, because we like it, because they’re interesting, because they are part of something important. And to my mind, that new operating system for our businesses revolves around three elements: autonomy, mastery and purpose. Autonomy, the urge to direct our own lives. Mastery, the desire to get better and better at something that matters. Purpose, the yearning to do what we do in the service of something larger than ourselves. These are the building blocks of an entirely new operating system for our businesses.”
“Praise in public, chastise in private.” — I can’t recall exactly where I got that but the idea sort of stuck. It just made perfect sense to me. I reckon I’m not quite needy when it comes to external validation i.e., I don’t crave for having my good work publicly lauded. I’d appreciate it and it does give me a nice, warm, fuzzy feeling. But it’s just not my main motivation. I guess I like it better when I get good feedback when I least expect it. Say when a colleague leaves me a thank-you note, or when someone tells me that another colleague liked having worked with me. But that’s just me. Other folks might actually prefer the public recognition, so it wouldn’t hurt to give it when it’s deserved.
On the other hand, when I make a boo-boo, I think I pretty much give myself a hard enough time already. There’s the feeling of guilt or inadequacy, and the feeling of being so sorry for messing up. From there, I’d like to bounce back and think of how to keep the problem from recurring. I’d like to be able to turn things around and work on the problem. For my case, I don’t think publicly scolding me or telling me off would help me in bouncing back. And I suppose that also goes for other people. Public humiliation is an unnecessary evil. It gives off too much negative energy just to achieve something which can be accomplished with an open, straightforward chat.
So there… Praise in public, chastise in private. The praising part seems easy enough. As for chastising, well, I’d like to do away with it altogether but sometimes there’s just no going around it. Anyway, I stumbled upon a post (which I wish I found sooner) and it lists out some ideas on structuring feedback (link):
It must be given soon after the behavior or event occurs. Don’t wait until a behavior becomes a pattern to discuss it.
It must describe precisely what occurred, with enough specificity for the person to have no trouble recalling the behavior or incident.
It should be limited to one issue at a time. People are more likely to become defensive if a list is presented rather than just addressing a particular issue or behavior.
Language must be non-evaluative when delivering the message. Do not ascribe attributes, motives, attitudes, or intentions.
Give feedback only related to the useful, actionable information. If a person has no control over the behavior, it may not be appropriate to give feedback about it.
Feedback should establish an opportunity for growth and/or change. Focus on the future desired state to underscore your ongoing investment in the relationship.
And I think the three steps to keep minds open when speaking up also helps. I got it from Egonomics and previously posted it before (link):
Establish permission — Just as you knock before entering, you establish permission before you speak up. You don’t want to come in uninvited.
Make your intent clear — Instead of having others think the worst, just be outright with your intentions. You don’t want to be misinterpreted.
Be candid — Just be straight to the point. But of course, exercise tact. You don’t want to bore people with details nor be rude.
It’s a bit ironic that I’ve become friends with a fellow tester only when she was about to leave the company. We still get to have dinner occasionally and I get to find out about the training and learning activities her new company offers. For instance, she’s got some training lined up on Perl. They also have book reviews with the costs for the books and for reading them shouldered by their company. I think the last book they’ve read was on scrum which I find interesting since I would like to have some experience with Agile methodologies. Their upcoming book for review is on Agile testing, which made me blurt out, “by Lisa Crispin?” and just left me with my mouth agape. Lucky lucky lucky!
As for where I work, well, the last official training I received was way back in 2007. It wasn’t even testing-related. It was an upgrade training on CMMI version 1.2. Some books on software development and testing were purchased last year (or was it the year before). We don’t have time allowances for reading them though. You can, but it would just have to be on your own time. That’s fine, but only if the workload and schedules given to you afford for you to have your own time.
Anyway, the lack of training offered isn’t — and shouldn’t be — an excuse for turning stale. It sucks if you aren’t provided training to keep you up-to-date. But it will still be your fault if you let that stop you from picking up new things altogether. With social media on the rise, one can turn to blogs and testing networks for materials. Web sites covering Agile methodologies, offering programming lessons, giving testing tips also abound. Online shopping has also made it possible to buy books from overseas, but it’s just too heavy on the wallet.
Unavoidably, there are things that impede or limit us — financial constraints, lack of time, no internet at work, lack of available training (although this one’s expected to change soon), etc. But what is important is that we don’t limit ourselves. We can learn if we want to. We can train ourselves. We can seek mentorship outside the confines of our workplace. The potential to grow is there.
Quite aptly, I received a text message from my friend: Obstacles don’t have to stop you. If you run into a wall, don’t turn around and give up. Figure out how to climb it, go through it, or work around it.
At work, we’ve got this server called Kurosagi in our local network which provides some collaborative tools e.g., WordPress blogs, Laconica microblog, Trac, a CMS, etc. The most recent addition to Kurosagi is the imageboard where one can post photos and comments on those photos. Inevitably, word of it got out. Then one morning, a co-worker posted in the microblog that there was suddenly a lot of posts in the imageboard. I took a very quick look and found it peppered with trolls. I didn’t chance upon anything explicit or obscene; just a lot of useless/pointless posts that I reckon are a waste of space. It did get Renz pretty riled up though and he posted a stern warning on how the imageboard should be used. And Daniw, the current Kurosagi moderator, immediately took to cleaning up the mess.
Below’s a couple of sayings that echo my thoughts on the trolls:
You give an inch, and they’ll take a mile.
Hanlon’s Razor: Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.
It’s a sorry thing that Renz and the other decent imageboard users had to point out what should have been common sense i.e., since it’s in the office network, the posts ought to be kept appropriate for the office network. But then again, as I often remind myself, common sense isn’t altogether that common.
A friend just shared a link over at twitter to a blog post by Scott Berkun — The magic numbers of project management. The part on “What to do instead” just made me nod in agreement… especially at the part below (emphasis mine).
The best way to think about estimates is that it’s a culture, not a formula. It’s no accident better teams are better at staying on schedule. They ask better questions and care about things most people on projects ignore. What are those things? You discover them for your kind of projects by going back and studying. Focus leadership attention on the dozens of factors that contribute to scheduling, note some basic and fundamental things you missed, and consider applying that knowledge, as a team, the next time around. Don’t fight the last war, but make sure to learn from it.
It also reminded me of something I’ve read and mentioned in passing to another friend on the bothering to reflect. In the book, it raised two questions: What did we learn? What can we do better? To my friend, I asked the rhetorical questions: What are we doing wrong? What are we doing right? Another colleague raised a question which he thinks not many would appreciate: Are we (as a company) good at what we do?
Asking and reflecting at these kinds of questions, looking into our past project experiences for ways we can improve, introspection — these are things that could help us. Although we sometimes do have project postmortems, yet sadly we encounter the same problems over and over again (a lot of which are classic mistakes but that’s not an excuse). And maybe that’s one thing to do a CAR on — ironically, on why our CARs need to be CAR’d on.
I suppose common courtesy ought to fall under good citizenship. Cockburn wrote that “Good citizenship is a matter of acting in ways that benefit others” (emphasis is mine). Samples of citizenship coming into play that he cited includes getting to meetings on time, answering questions from other people, bothering to mention things that one notices, etc.
Going deeper, I suppose the prereqs of good citizenship include respect and responsibility.
respect for resources that aren’t yours — you clean as you go; you don’t print if you don’t really need it
respect for other people — you don’t go ordering people around esp if you’re not their boss; you don’t leave the pantry messy just because there’s Marlyn and Dendyn who can do the cleaning up
respect for other people’s time — you keep your email concise and direct to the point; you don’t keep a meeting longer than it already is by asking questions on parts that you missed because you were sleeping
respect for your time — you make the most of the hours required at work so you can spend more time for yourself after work
responsible for your tasks — doing what you’re supposed to do, plus doing it right and doing it on time, plus trying to find better ways to do your tasks; you don’t just dump it at the last minute to someone else on a Saturday with an excuse that you’ve got somewhere else to be — as if that someone else doesn’t have a life
responsible for your words — you honor your words even if it’s not in writing
responsible for your growth — you try to keep on learning
I rarely have the need to print, but last week, I had to print a single-page document. After guestimating that the printing ought to be done, I got up from my seat and headed towards the nearest shared printer. But, alas, no printout since no paper was loaded onto the tray. I got several clean sheets, loaded it, and waited for my printout. Once it started printing though, it spewed out several pages of the same functional specs. I checked out the stash of prior printouts, and it turned out to be the same thing. The pile of unclaimed printouts was more or less half-an-inch thick. That was such a waste.
The other thing that bugs me is that whoever made the printouts didn’t even bother to replenish the paper tray. I also hate it when someone uses up all of the paper towels in the pantry without bothering to throw the plastic container and without bothering to get fresh stock from the cupboard. Or when some guy tapped out the water dispenser without bothering to reload it with another water jug. Or when someone uses the pantry sink and leaves traces of the instant noodles that he just had. Or, worse, when someone didn’t quite flush the toilet that you’re about to use. These are petty annoyances, I know. But you’d think that cleaning up as you go or having a shared resource ready for the next user after you’re done using it is already common courtesy. Bummer, like common sense, common courtesy is not that common.
I came across a short blog post on coaching whiners which started off with the words “Ban whining.” Being a bit of a whiner myself (especially of crappy elevators), that definitely got my attention. So I continued to read on. Some lessons learned / reiterated by that post:
Possibly behind a whiny complaint is a “constructive, actionable proposal.”
Unloading is good. Sometimes, just having someone listen to you helps.
For the whiner: Make it clear to the whinee* what you expect them to do about your rant. Give the whinee something solid to work with, especially if you expect him to take it up to management. Better yet, learn to take it up to management yourself.
For the whinee: Find out what the whiner expects from you. Goad the whiner to come up with something solid to work with and to take some accountability for the complaint. It’s his problem after all.
For the whinee: Don’t say this unless you mean it — “I’ll see what I can do about the problem.”
Whining could be a symptom of a legitimate problem. Too much of it though, and the whining (and the whiner) becomes the problem.
If it can’t be helped, then it can’t be helped. Breathe in, breathe out. Place your energies somewhere more productive and/or fun.
Note:
* – “whinee” being the person hearing the whiner out; NOT the thing being whined about.
—
[Edit] The post on Coaching Whiners is also available in the author’s website at this link.
An employee typically begins a new job excited to be part of the team and pleased to be making a living. Those who promote the need to motivate would certainly agree with that, but they also seem to believe that something must change over time, making it necessary to “remotivate.” This, however, should be unnecessary. Our species’ fundamental desire to do quality work does not change.
The common problem facing employees at all levels is not their own motivation. It is work environments that demotivate.
When work environments consistently fail to provide the direction, resources and respect employees require, their innate desire to achieve is suppressed or redirected. They experience frustration and a kind of learned helplessness. They become motivated to retain their jobs rather than to perform them in a way that delivers optimal value to the organization. This is a common and predictable problem. Once employees escape such a discouraging work environment, their motivation to deliver optimal value for their organization reemerges– sometimes as they go over to a competitor.
…
There are, in sum, two key steps to staying on top of motivation and demotivation.
First, hire and keep on your team only people who are motivated to do their jobs well. As Jim Collins, author of Good to Great, says, “Get the right people on the bus.”
Second, understand that if they become demotivated, it is because of the environment in which they work. Strong and courageous leaders recognize that such an environment is their own failure. Understanding that can prevent you from misdirecting resources into unnecessary efforts to motivate staff.
We need a new leadership paradigm for the 21st century, with leaders taking a more realistic and enlightened view of the people who work for them. We need to create and maintain work environments that protect employees from the demotivation that has become endemic in modern business.
Morale isn’t something that can be bought. The work environment has to provide people with opportunities to sucess [sic], to do their best, to be trusted, to be valued, and to be respected. Then morale and productivity can take place.
…
Years ago, David Berlo suggested the phrase “I mean you no harm” as advice to management regarding the type of work environment that is conducive to high performance. The phrase came from trainers at Sea World who, when asked how long they swam with new whales in the pool before the training began. replied, “Until the whale knows we mean it no harm.” They know that, once whales believe that they are in an environment of no harm, they will relax and perform. This concept seems so fundamental and obvious. Perhaps it is because of this that we so often overlook the signs of harm that work life can communicate to employees.
…
Managers need to adopt an approach to managing people that says, “I mean you no harm.”. This is the foundation for motivation and desire at work. The manager’s creed should be to never do personally anything that will destroy trust, suggest favoritism, show discrimination or disrespect to people or their jobs, or communicate insincerity.
…
The motivation to perform comes from a work environment that allows people to be productive, to achieve, and to participate in a meaningful manner… performance motivation (satisfaction) comes only with the presence of the ability to achieve, challenging work, increased responsibility, opportunities for growth and development, and recognition for accomplishment.
…
Let’s be clear, there is nothing wrong with a beer bust and softball game; it just doesn’t motivate people to perform well. Why? It’s ineffective because its absence is not the reason that motivation to perform is lacking. When a motivating environment is created, people enjoy a party or get together, of course, but as a “thank-you” or a “breather.” However, when the party is used to get something from employees, it not only fails to work, but it usually backfires, making things worse.
Roughly it translates as you shouldn’t let your problems take control of you, and that you should take command of your problems or the situation instead.
