I arrived at Rick Meon’s article x-mailer looking for the origin and definition of X-mailer, X-mas, and X-everything in mail headers. I found an interesting story with uncanny insight into executive communication and company meetings.
When executives have decided to force down everyone’s throats a decision that’s likely to be unpopular, it’s common — or was, before the economic collapse — for them to schedule time for people to discuss the matter and air their views. This is portrayed as “feedback”, whereby the employees’ views will be taken into account, but in reality is nothing of the kind: It’s actually time allocated for ritual venting, which is known to make subsequent employee resistance less likely — and also lets potential troublemakers be spotted early.It’s therefore never a good idea to take proffered opportunities to “vent” about management faits accompli. Instead, either go with the unpopular position and accept it as part of what they pay you for, or silently subvert it without sending the Powers That Be a telegram that you might do so.
In the story, Rick does not follow his own advice of “silently subvert”, instead he does what I highly recommend. Take the issue one-on-one. Maybe that is what he meant, silent in the meeting, “subvert” one-on-one.
First express your concerns to the person that own the decision if you have rapport. It is almost never a good idea to raise the issue with more than two people regardless of an open door policy, as it quickly becomes a public issue or about their own rapport and respecting the chain of command.
Praise publicly, criticize privately.
technorati tags:word place, office life, bitch time, allocated bitch time, suckers favor, executive decision, policy, decision making, complaining, complain, complaint, unpopular decision, corporate life
Blogged with Flock