undefined

points

[-]

> I'm sure it's my fault, somehow - but I'm a damn good writer; I just don't know how to communicate with people who won't put forth the effort to engage with detail.

I used to put effort into those people. It was a waste of time. Now I just do everything I can to ignore them, work around them, etc.

Knowledge workers who won't engage with the material are just like ditch diggers who won't touch a shovel. They're dead weight, and organizations that fail to cull them are doing it all wrong.

Sadly, that's most of them these days.

by bsenftner2 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

I realize this may sounds like a lot of effort, but I find telling stories of how a person would use the system, with theatrics of confusion and failure, tend to penetrate the dull unwilling to think participants I must engage to get my work completed. I'm not an actor or a good speaker, I grew up with a severe stutter, and I find I have to "put on a show" to generate the dawn of comprehension in others.

by eszed1 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Funnily enough, I am (was) an actor. Public speaking and telling stories are my jam. So... I do all that. I love making wacky analogies to help people understand complex systems.

Higher-level decision-making, I find, isn't so much like that. Sometimes it's just tradeoffs: "if the company's going this direction, then A is better; but if that, then B". But they haven't even recognized the this and the that - and don't want to think them through transparently - so I've got to choose the A or the B in the dark. Actually, it's worse than that, because some people have (by implication) already committed to the this, and others to the that, but neither side wants to talk about either, because that would create conflict. So, the best (job- / career-wise) choice for me is to predict which of A or B best satisfies whichever side will be most influential when the bill for A or B comes due. Either could be (technically speaking) correct, but the choice is never made on a technical basis.