On Jul 30, 1:36�am, Greg Berchin <gberc...@comicast.net.invalid> wrote:> On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 17:23:33 -0700 (PDT), Manny <mlou...@hotmail.com> wrote: > >And if the "high level" dude chose to override the > >"low level" dude's judgement, it tells you a thing or two, doesn't it? > > Yes. �It tells me that you need to re-read the final sentence in my description > of option (6). > > >That said, there are > >certain things that I could stall and go and do with the Asians while > >completely operating within the law and the professional code of > >conduct. > > I can only conclude that you don't "get it".I am doing research on something. And by definition, everything I come up with is mine AND is in the public domain. -Momo
advice on course of action - a techie's retribution
Started by ●July 29, 2010
Reply by ●July 29, 20102010-07-29
Reply by ●July 29, 20102010-07-29
On 07/29/2010 03:38 PM, Manny wrote:> Hi, > > I just gave a talk to a mixed audience comprised of what they term > "high level" and "low level" people on what I've been developing over > the past 3 years. > > I'd thought initially - judging from the immediate response I got from > the "low level" people - that things went down well. Now I've just > discovered to my dismay (understatement) that the "high level" people > who hold sway over my bread think otherwise. And although they liked > what I'm proposing, they take on me my "lack of clarity" in explaining > shit for them. Consequently, they stated that "we don't give jobs to > people who lack clarity."Is it possible that you spun your talk for the 'low level' guys, and failed to appreciate the points that the 'high level' guys would have wanted to hear about, and/or allowed yourself to get sidetracked? Business people -- even the ones that are ex-engineering -- don't want to hear about bits and bytes and fatigue cracks and the relative merits of FET-input opamps vs. bipolar input op-amps. They want to know how much it's going to cost, how long it's going to take, and how much money it's going to make. People who are doing active engineering can listen to a low-level talk in their own discipline, and they can get an idea of the first two "hows" above, and if they've been around the block and rub elbows with Sales they may even have an idea of the third. A person whose actively engaged in your discipline who can't get two or all three of the "hows" just isn't on the ball. But someone who's been out of it for a while needs to be spoon fed the information "this is going to cost $500000, it's going to take 14 months, and Bill in Sales thinks it'll make $1000000 just next year". So they don't want to hear how wide the data paths are (unless Marketing thinks it'll make for cool advertising), they don't want to hear how many CLB's it'll consume, etc. They want to know what it'll do for them, and how much it'll cost. Dumping a bunch of detail on them, without the summary, could certainly be seen as a "lack of clarity".> What has conspired is that I found myself arguing for something > potentially doable on top of what I've already delivered on and they > kept not getting what I was alluding to. That has - according to my > supervisor - screwed up the natural momentum/karma/shit of the talk > and left behind only lasting dissatisfaction.Are you saying that in addition to talking to the wrong interest group (the people signing the checks are _always_ the right interest group) you also allowed your talk to get sidetracked? If the question isn't germane to your main point it's often a good idea to say "Wow! That's a cool question, but it seems awfully specific -- bring it up after I'm done here!". Look at your manager as you do, so he can tell you whether to answer it or proceed on your previously planned agenda.> I'm not pissed off like hell and contemplating one of the below: > (1) keep my mouth shut, turn the other cheek, and pray for better > days. > (2) take my time to plan an exist strategy from my current work and > keep my mouth shut until then. > (3) be my father's son and give everybody the finger and quit. > (4) REALLY be my father's son, give everybody the finger, burn down > everything I've developed, and quite. > (5) REALLY REALLY be my father's son, give everybody the finger, burn > down everything I've developed, disappear under the guise of the > night, and go do it all over in Asia. One way ticket to Asia clearly > making the my case that if you failing to understand in 20 minutes > what I've been saddled with for the past three years and holding me > responsible for scratch my ego.I don't see (6): "Figure out what I did wrong in the talk so that I could avoid doing it again". Talk to your manager, or maybe some of the senior engineering staff. See if someone's willing to help you figure out how you could have done a better job. Don't be sullen with your manager either. I'd go for "I guess I screwed up -- can you help me not do it again?". Even if you're contemplating (1) through (5), you should do this, so that when you leave a smoking hole in the ground wherever you are and move to Asia, you won't have to do it there, too. Remember, there are only seven continents, and it's damn hard to get work in Antarctica. -- Tim Wescott Wescott Design Services http://www.wescottdesign.com Do you need to implement control loops in software? "Applied Control Theory for Embedded Systems" was written for you. See details at http://www.wescottdesign.com/actfes/actfes.html
Reply by ●July 29, 20102010-07-29
> Is it possible that you spun your talk for the 'low level' guys, and > failed to appreciate the points that the 'high level' guys would have > wanted to hear about, and/or allowed yourself to get sidetracked?Mixed audience always hard to satisfy and I got sidetracked.> Are you saying that in addition to talking to the wrong interest group > (the people signing the checks are _always_ the right interest group) > you also allowed your talk to get sidetracked? �If the question isn't > germane to your main point it's often a good idea to say "Wow! �That's a > cool question, but it seems awfully specific -- bring it up after I'm > done here!". �Look at your manager as you do, so he can tell you whether > to answer it or proceed on your previously planned agenda.Perhaps should've done just that. But things were serious and this could've been interpreted like me dodging something I can't answer. And it was more of a serious interview. You live and learn.> I don't see (6): "Figure out what I did wrong in the talk so that I > could avoid doing it again".There is no again. It's over, final, and the verdict is out.> Even if you're contemplating (1) through (5), you should do this, so > that when you leave a smoking hole in the ground wherever you are and > move to Asia, you won't have to do it there, too. �Remember, there are > only seven continents, and it's damn hard to get work in Antarctica.I know I know. There I will keep my head down, and keep bowing back. I now have to tell my lady this; one out 6 more to play for. Thanks for the thoughts. -Momo
Reply by ●July 29, 20102010-07-29
Manny, I would have said about the same things as Tim. It really pays to ask: "Who is the audience?" In this case, it appears it was the high level guys - whether you had that figured out up front or not. That is, their reaction appears to have hurt you (real or imagined) and it's not clear that the low level guys could have done that. - He who pays is the audience. - He who buys is the audience. - He who can hurt is the audience. Having identified THE audience, the next step is how to communicate with them in words they can understand (as Tim points out): - What do they want? - What do they need? - How can you help them achieve their needs and wants? Then do a skillful job of blending your message with their needs and wants. If you find a strong mismatch then you have the wrong product for that particular audience. It's nobody's fault - it just is. But, lack of clarity should not be allowed to be a reason to fail. In your case now you need to be the picture of clarity. Use the KISS principle. My own deepest frustration was trying to communicate with a boss who I *thought* would value a progress report but who seemed to *need* a report of completion and nothing in between. And this was at a point in my career when I had already learned to communicate at all levels pretty darned well. I don't understand why you're giving up. But then, I'm sure there's a lot I don't understand. Is there no way to convey pieces of the message here and there, now and then until it becomes *their* idea, their need so that they come to you? And, in the process be Mr. Clarity? Once upon a time I was given the head management role over a group that included small capability in in-house DSP chip design - but was really focused on building processor systems. The chip design piece was something that my boss had nurtured and developed and was part of a broader corporate strategy (because we also owned chip fabs). One day I told him that we had no business designing our own DSP chips in the face of TI and others doing their thing in a much more comprehensive and efficient way. Can you imagine that he didn't buy it when I suggested this!! But, 2 months later, he was on board. I guess I had given him enough food for thought that it made sense after the emotional reaction had cooled. So, time can be an ally. And that gives you time to consider what the messages have to be and to deliver them. Delivering them doesn't have to be in front of a room or in front of a group....... And, one of your messages may be that Manny can express things very clearly. I must say, doing this doesn't come without a bit of effort. It does appear that you're on the inside still, eh? If it's in Power Point or similar form, you might share for some critique. Right how it's all pretty vague. Or, should I say: "lacks clarity"? :-) Fred
Reply by ●July 29, 20102010-07-29
On Jul 30, 3:09�am, Fred Marshall <fmarshall_xremove_the...@xacm.org> wrote:> It really pays to ask: "Who is the audience?" �In this case, it appears > it was the high level guys - whether you had that figured out up front > or not. �That is, their reaction appears to have hurt you (real or > imagined) and it's not clear that the low level guys could have done that. > - He who pays is the audience. > - He who buys is the audience. > - He who can hurt is the audience.With the benefit of hindsight, I know have a better grasp of the inner workings of the organization. The difficulty is that the godfather whom I was trying to impress is a techie. Turned out he leaves small matters to be managed to less senior people and I don't think he interferes too much with their decisions. End of the day, I'm just a number. So it all went wrong from here and all the colour-coded adaptation plots turned out to be "a failure to abstract away the detail."> Then do a skillful job of blending your message with their needs and > wants. �If you find a strong mismatch then you have the wrong product > for that particular audience. �It's nobody's fault - it just is. �But, > lack of clarity should not be allowed to be a reason to fail. �In your > case now you need to be the picture of clarity. �Use the KISS principle.Guess it's a swift act of fate after all. But what really really gets on my nerves is how by placing the bar low, you actually do better than trying to do something genuinely true. Rationale here is that the impact of 3 small pieces of mediocre work is definitely greater that trying to come up with something new, and if anything an incentive to keep things average at best riding the tide of the common sense. This is what really hurts me, the dreadful thought of having wasted the last 3 years of my life. Again you live and learn.> I don't understand why you're giving up. �But then, I'm sure there's a > lot I don't understand. �Is there no way to convey pieces of the message > here and there, now and then until it becomes *their* idea, their need > so that they come to you? �And, in the process be Mr. Clarity?Because my time expires soon and everything I've been doing has been deemed cool, but unclear! The people I work with have agendas and it's all to do with maximizing perceived output. I only realized this now. I'm not trying to victimize myself here, I'm simply unwanted I guess.> If it's in Power Point or similar form, you might share for some > critique. �Right how it's all pretty vague. �Or, should I say: "lacks > clarity"? � :-)I just angry with the excuse they came up with; clarity. Pretty symbolic comes across to me and was directed more at me as an individual rather than at my work as evident by the phrase "we don't work with people who lack clarity." I.e. they never said: "alright, if you convince us you'r in." More like: "it's over and don't try again." Ah. Thanks Fred for your post. -Momo
Reply by ●July 30, 20102010-07-30
On 7/29/2010 6:38 PM, Manny wrote:> Hi, > > I just gave a talk to a mixed audience comprised of what they term > "high level" and "low level" people on what I've been developing over > the past 3 years. > > I'd thought initially - judging from the immediate response I got from > the "low level" people - that things went down well. Now I've just > discovered to my dismay (understatement) that the "high level" people > who hold sway over my bread think otherwise. And although they liked > what I'm proposing, they take on me my "lack of clarity" in explaining > shit for them. Consequently, they stated that "we don't give jobs to > people who lack clarity." > > What has conspired is that I found myself arguing for something > potentially doable on top of what I've already delivered on and they > kept not getting what I was alluding to. That has - according to my > supervisor - screwed up the natural momentum/karma/shit of the talk > and left behind only lasting dissatisfaction. > > I'm not pissed off like hell and contemplating one of the below: > (1) keep my mouth shut, turn the other cheek, and pray for better > days. > (2) take my time to plan an exist strategy from my current work and > keep my mouth shut until then. > (3) be my father's son and give everybody the finger and quit. > (4) REALLY be my father's son, give everybody the finger, burn down > everything I've developed, and quite. > (5) REALLY REALLY be my father's son, give everybody the finger, burn > down everything I've developed, disappear under the guise of the > night, and go do it all over in Asia. One way ticket to Asia clearly > making the my case that if you failing to understand in 20 minutes > what I've been saddled with for the past three years and holding me > responsible for scratch my ego. > > Any thoughts before it's too late are highly appreciated.If your command of language is accurately reflected in what you wrote, I have a bit of sympathy for the high-level people. They should see past that to what you actually mean, but some people can't see beyond what you say. Why not clarify what you mean -- maybe in writing, then try again before getting too drastic. "What has conspired ..." should probably be "What has transpired ..." Say "What happened ..." if big words sometimes trip you up. "I'm not pissed off as hell ..." Did you mean that? There's more, but I aim to raise your awareness, not to embarrass you. Jerry -- Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get. �����������������������������������������������������������������������
Reply by ●July 30, 20102010-07-30
On 7/29/2010 8:39 PM, Manny wrote:> On Jul 30, 1:36 am, Greg Berchin<gberc...@comicast.net.invalid> > wrote: >> On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 17:23:33 -0700 (PDT), Manny<mlou...@hotmail.com> wrote: >>> And if the "high level" dude chose to override the >>> "low level" dude's judgement, it tells you a thing or two, doesn't it? >> >> Yes. It tells me that you need to re-read the final sentence in my description >> of option (6). >> >>> That said, there are >>> certain things that I could stall and go and do with the Asians while >>> completely operating within the law and the professional code of >>> conduct. >> >> I can only conclude that you don't "get it". > I am doing research on something. And by definition, everything I come > up with is mine AND is in the public domain.Only if you didn't draw a salary for doing it. If you were paid, everything you come up with belongs to whomever paid you. Jerry -- Engineering is the art of making what you want from things you can get. �����������������������������������������������������������������������
Reply by ●July 30, 20102010-07-30
> If your command of language is accurately reflected in what you wrote, I > have a bit of sympathy for the high-level people. They should see past > that to what you actually mean, but some people can't see beyond what > you say. Why not clarify what you mean -- maybe in writing, then try > again before getting too drastic. > > "What has conspired ..." should probably be "What has transpired ..." > Say "What happened ..." if big words sometimes trip you up.Only when I'm wound up. Goes to tell me that I should keep my mouth shut more often.> "I'm not pissed off as hell ..." Did you mean that? > > There's more, but I aim to raise your awareness, not to embarrass you.Roger. Thanks. -Momo
Reply by ●July 30, 20102010-07-30
On Jul 30, 5:14�am, Jerry Avins <j...@ieee.org> wrote:> On 7/29/2010 8:39 PM, Manny wrote: > > > > > On Jul 30, 1:36 am, Greg Berchin<gberc...@comicast.net.invalid> > > wrote: > >> On Thu, 29 Jul 2010 17:23:33 -0700 (PDT), Manny<mlou...@hotmail.com> �wrote: > >>> And if the "high level" dude chose to override the > >>> "low level" dude's judgement, it tells you a thing or two, doesn't it? > > >> Yes. �It tells me that you need to re-read the final sentence in my description > >> of option (6). > > >>> That said, there are > >>> certain things that I could stall and go and do with the Asians while > >>> completely operating within the law and the professional code of > >>> conduct. > > >> I can only conclude that you don't "get it". > > I am doing research on something. And by definition, everything I come > > up with is mine AND is in the public domain. > > Only if you didn't draw a salary for doing it. If you were paid, > everything you come up with belongs to whomever paid you.Yes. But whatever I was compensated for didn't call for an average of at least 10+ hours a day. And according to people, I've exceeded the target for deliverables. So I might as well leave something for me to tinker with later. I'll get all the legal matters clarified by a professional. Thanks for the note. -Momo
Reply by ●July 30, 20102010-07-30
On 07/29/2010 07:44 PM, Manny wrote:> On Jul 30, 3:09 am, Fred Marshall<fmarshall_xremove_the...@xacm.org> > wrote: >> It really pays to ask: "Who is the audience?" In this case, it appears >> it was the high level guys - whether you had that figured out up front >> or not. That is, their reaction appears to have hurt you (real or >> imagined) and it's not clear that the low level guys could have done that. >> - He who pays is the audience. >> - He who buys is the audience. >> - He who can hurt is the audience. > With the benefit of hindsight, I know have a better grasp of the inner > workings of the organization. The difficulty is that the godfather > whom I was trying to impress is a techie. Turned out he leaves small > matters to be managed to less senior people and I don't think he > interferes too much with their decisions. End of the day, I'm just a > number. So it all went wrong from here and all the colour-coded > adaptation plots turned out to be "a failure to abstract away the > detail." > >> Then do a skillful job of blending your message with their needs and >> wants. If you find a strong mismatch then you have the wrong product >> for that particular audience. It's nobody's fault - it just is. But, >> lack of clarity should not be allowed to be a reason to fail. In your >> case now you need to be the picture of clarity. Use the KISS principle. > Guess it's a swift act of fate after all. But what really really gets > on my nerves is how by placing the bar low, you actually do better > than trying to do something genuinely true. Rationale here is that the > impact of 3 small pieces of mediocre work is definitely greater that > trying to come up with something new, and if anything an incentive to > keep things average at best riding the tide of the common sense. This > is what really hurts me, the dreadful thought of having wasted the > last 3 years of my life. Again you live and learn. > >> I don't understand why you're giving up. But then, I'm sure there's a >> lot I don't understand. Is there no way to convey pieces of the message >> here and there, now and then until it becomes *their* idea, their need >> so that they come to you? And, in the process be Mr. Clarity? > Because my time expires soon and everything I've been doing has been > deemed cool, but unclear! The people I work with have agendas and it's > all to do with maximizing perceived output. I only realized this now. > I'm not trying to victimize myself here, I'm simply unwanted I guess. > >> If it's in Power Point or similar form, you might share for some >> critique. Right how it's all pretty vague. Or, should I say: "lacks >> clarity"? :-) > I just angry with the excuse they came up with; clarity. Pretty > symbolic comes across to me and was directed more at me as an > individual rather than at my work as evident by the phrase "we don't > work with people who lack clarity." I.e. they never said: "alright, if > you convince us you'r in." More like: "it's over and don't try again." > > Ah. Thanks Fred for your post.Some observations: Sometimes the boss is a saint, sometimes he's an asshole. The bigger the company gets, the more divorced from reality it _can_ get and still survive. Sometimes, no matter how well you do, it's all in the luck of the draw. The one big company that I worked for, if you screwed up you could just duck and cover for a year or so, then folks would forget. Or you could wait out the @#$%'s, because whatever management book they've been reading _today_, they'll be reading different one _tomorrow_. Or find another company. I like smaller companies, because when you do well it's more noticeable. -- Tim Wescott Wescott Design Services http://www.wescottdesign.com Do you need to implement control loops in software? "Applied Control Theory for Embedded Systems" was written for you. See details at http://www.wescottdesign.com/actfes/actfes.html
