July 29, 2015 at 1:26 pm
Chris Wooding (7/29/2015)
"Getting on" with people is an important skill, but it's not defined by being able to socialise outside work. I'm currently in a small(ish) department of about 30 people and there are half a dozen of us that go for a beer on a Friday lunch-time; that doesn't mean the rest don't fit (or that we don't).I've also worked in a team where the project manager forbade a particular business analyst and a particular programmer from talking to one another (they had table-thumping arguments that distracted the whole office). He insisted they communicate only via me (thanks). Could the team function without either one? No.
My point is that a good team is made of people with different skills, interests and personalities. The manager's job is to make sure they don't kill one another until the project has been delivered.
yes
July 29, 2015 at 1:27 pm
kiwood (7/29/2015)
Instead of seeking someone who will "fit in" companies should seek people with whom others like to work (or don't mind working with).Truth is that no matter how good at a job a person is, if everyone else loathes having to see that person the team will suffer. But that should not be mistaken for someone I want to go hang out with after work. I have had some great work buddies that I never spent time with outside of work.
Basically, ideally you find a person who doesn't make others feel awkward and gets the job done well. I would have to say that I consider leadership way more important than who I am working with.
What you're describing is fitting in. It isn't same-ness, or similarity, but working within the culture that others have.
July 29, 2015 at 1:28 pm
below86 (7/29/2015)
ZZartin (7/29/2015)
Lynn Pettis (7/29/2015)
below86 (7/29/2015)
Lynn Pettis (7/29/2015)
below86 (7/29/2015)
Not to be to political, but people 'hired' George W. Bush because 'He was someone I could see having a beer with'. That turned out to be a horrible 'hire'.Not to stay political, but Obama is better??? :sick:
Why yes it is. 🙂 Economy is a lot better, getting out of wars we shouldn't have been in. I could go on, 'Where are those weapons of mass destruction"? 😀
And the complete attack on our privacy, liberties, and way of life. No, I can't agree!
Wasn't the patriot act bush?
Why yes it was, seems the 'right' wing always forget that.
Yes, it was Bush era but the Democrats controlled the Senate and could have kept the bill from being passed, so don't put all the blame on the Republicans.
Also, I don't consider myself "right" wing but a Conservative Constitutional Republican that has been disenfranchised by the current Republican Party.
July 29, 2015 at 1:32 pm
Wow, at some point this discussion really skidded off the tracks ... :ermm:
The workplace is no place for debating issues about partisian politics. I think that good corporate culture and diversity isn't necessarily about what we choose to embrace, but rather what we put aside when we show up for work.
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
July 29, 2015 at 1:34 pm
Also, I don't consider myself "right" wing but a Conservative Constitutional Republican that has been disenfranchised by the current Republican Party.
As the Yanks would say, 'Awright, I'll bite':
1. What is a 'Conservative Constitutional Republican'?
2. 'Disenfranchised' means the right to vote has been removed. Are you saying the 'current Republican Party' forbids you from voting in public elections?
I'm not sure what this has to do with Steve's editorial (which I thought was quite interesting and made a number of good points), but since I like to learn about most anything, I hope the membership will forgive me for the questions. Thanks.
July 29, 2015 at 1:37 pm
The workplace is no place for debating issues about partisan politics.
True, but this isn't the workplace. And as a few posts already pointed out, politics has impinged upon the issue of data gathering, which is something we really should discuss.
July 29, 2015 at 1:43 pm
GoofyGuy (7/29/2015)
Also, I don't consider myself "right" wing but a Conservative Constitutional Republican that has been disenfranchised by the current Republican Party.
As the Yanks would say, 'Awright, I'll bite':
1. What is a 'Conservative Constitutional Republican'?
2. 'Disenfranchised' means the right to vote has been removed. Are you saying the 'current Republican Party' forbids you from voting in public elections?
I'm not sure what this has to do with Steve's editorial (which I thought was quite interesting and made a number of good points), but since I like to learn about most anything, I hope the membership will forgive me for the questions. Thanks.
I believe that Constitution of the United States must be interpreted based on the language and writing at the time it and each of the Amendments were written. It is wrong to reinterpreted it based on changing meanings of words over the years. Consider the word faggot for one. I am sure that there are people that when they see that word will instantly take offense, but look at the definition of the word. At one time it referred to a cigarette or a bundle of wood.
'Disenfranchised' does not mean that my right to vote has been removed. It means, in this case, that the Republican Party no longer believes in the things it did when I first became eligible to vote and registered as a Republican.
July 29, 2015 at 1:55 pm
I believe that Constitution of the United States must be interpreted based on the language and writing at the time it and each of the Amendments were written.
Interesting. My country (the United Kingdom) doesn't even have a constitution, at least not a single written document. It's what we say is 'unwritten' or 'uncodified', and is based upon statutes, court decisions, treaties, the thinking of learned legal authorities (Coke, for example - no, not the soft drink, I mean Edward Coke, the eminent 17th Century jurist).
So the British 'constitution', such as it is, is a very different creature from the American one you would have; it's an 'organic' one, which grows, adapts, and changes with the times, whilst remaining anchored in ancient and cherished principles of individual freedom and liberty ...
July 29, 2015 at 2:24 pm
GoofyGuy (7/29/2015)
The workplace is no place for debating issues about partisan politics.
True, but this isn't the workplace. And as a few posts already pointed out, politics has impinged upon the issue of data gathering, which is something we really should discuss.
OK, we're not in the workplace, or at least our present virtual conversation isn't, even if our physical butt is. 😉
But the topic is "Hiring for Culture" not "The Poltics of Data Gathering".
"Do not seek to follow in the footsteps of the wise. Instead, seek what they sought." - Matsuo Basho
July 29, 2015 at 2:27 pm
... the topic is "Hiring for Culture" not "The Poltics of Data Gathering".
Topic? We have a topic? 😉
July 29, 2015 at 2:29 pm
Eric M Russell (7/29/2015)
GoofyGuy (7/29/2015)
The workplace is no place for debating issues about partisan politics.
True, but this isn't the workplace. And as a few posts already pointed out, politics has impinged upon the issue of data gathering, which is something we really should discuss.
OK, we're not in the workplace, or at least our present virtual conversation isn't, even if our physical butt is. 😉
But the topic is "Hiring for Culture" not "The Poltics of Data Gathering".
True, but someone other than myself opened the door. As long as we can keep it civil, I don't see an issue.
July 29, 2015 at 2:30 pm
GoofyGuy (7/29/2015)
... the topic is "Hiring for Culture" not "The Poltics of Data Gathering".
Topic? We have a topic? 😉
How often do we see topics go off on tangents? It happens.
July 29, 2015 at 2:33 pm
True, but someone other than myself opened the door. As long as we can keep it civil, I don't see an issue.
Well, exactly right.
July 29, 2015 at 2:34 pm
Lynn Pettis (7/29/2015)
Eric M Russell (7/29/2015)
GoofyGuy (7/29/2015)
The workplace is no place for debating issues about partisan politics.
True, but this isn't the workplace. And as a few posts already pointed out, politics has impinged upon the issue of data gathering, which is something we really should discuss.
OK, we're not in the workplace, or at least our present virtual conversation isn't, even if our physical butt is. 😉
But the topic is "Hiring for Culture" not "The Poltics of Data Gathering".
True, but someone other than myself opened the door. As long as we can keep it civil, I don't see an issue.
We all have SSC, at least we can agree on one thing. 🙂
Sorry for opening the door. :hehe:
-------------------------------------------------------------
we travel not to escape life but for life not to escape us
Don't fear failure, fear regret.
July 29, 2015 at 2:37 pm
GoofyGuy (7/29/2015)
I believe that Constitution of the United States must be interpreted based on the language and writing at the time it and each of the Amendments were written.
Interesting. My country (the United Kingdom) doesn't even have a constitution, at least not a single written document. It's what we say is 'unwritten' or 'uncodified', and is based upon statutes, court decisions, treaties, the thinking of learned legal authorities (Coke, for example - no, not the soft drink, I mean Edward Coke, the eminent 17th Century jurist).
So the British 'constitution', such as it is, is a very different creature from the American one you would have; it's an 'organic' one, which grows, adapts, and changes with the times, whilst remaining anchored in ancient and cherished principles of individual freedom and liberty ...
I tend to think of the constitution like the bible, as something that was designed to put force some general guidelines for how to behave but not something to be taken literally. For example crazy gun nuts like to use the second amendment as a justification to have any weapon they want, and taking the constitution literally they would, and while some states go way way to far with gun control fortunately we also have legal systems that prevent it from going way to far the other way 🙂
Viewing 15 posts - 46 through 60 (of 87 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply