Human Malfunctions #1: Arrogance

[Faust]

I'm sure I do this a lot but only with the management above me, I rely on the knowledge and expertise of my team, because they are the ones who know where the cracks are when all I can see is the overall design.

If you have a trained crew and you don't use "mission tactics," you aren't really managing.  Also, any metric that is more than one step away from "getting the job done" is automatically garbage.

Going to expand on this: 

I have seen companies where inside personnel who will NEVER meet a customer face-to-face must wear a tie and jacket (Nalco used to be infamous for this), or face disciplinary action.  This was supposed to aid professionalism.  What it actually aided were "the resumes of all the competent people going into the fax machine".

That dress code was a metric that did not aid "getting the job done," which almost always means "actually inhibited the job getting done."

This was a direct result of authoritarian management tactics.  All their skilled folks moved to other offices, and Nalco went into a decline that they are still addressing badly.

The modern push for ISO seems to be to put barriers between the goal and how to accomplish it, all it cares about is process and meaningless paperwork to demonstrate the process without any thought for quality.
The worst part is it does expose a goal driven mentality, but the goal is to have that box ticked so the company can apply for tenders for people who require that box ticked, it says "Our goal is money, and we will ruin a companies culture to get it"

Uniforms or a dress code in anything other than face to face with customers or a kitchen is a controlling overbearing gesture that says "we dont trust you to be able to do your job"

[chaotic neutral observer]

The modern push for ISO seems to be to put barriers between the goal and how to accomplish it, all it cares about is process and meaningless paperwork to demonstrate the process without any thought for quality.

S'truth.  My employer is ISO-blah-blah-blah certified, and we have periodic internal and external audits to that effect.  All this compliance means is that we have documented processes, and that we document following those processes.  Although some of the processes, in principle, could improve quality, they have enough documented loopholes to be ineffective, and middle management treats them as a problem to be worked around, rather than a useful tool.

Our quality assurance department, as far as I know, has never been involved in actual testing of either developed systems or shippable product.  Their function appears to be limited to the curation of said process documents, and occasionally playing pool in the break room.  I would have thought a QA department should have a more adversarial relationship with engineering and manufacturing (adversarial in the sense of "we found an issue with the design" not "why haven't you filled out pre-development plan template S23 yet").

[Doktor Howl]

The modern push for ISO seems to be to put barriers between the goal and how to accomplish it, all it cares about is process and meaningless paperwork to demonstrate the process without any thought for quality.

S'truth.  My employer is ISO-blah-blah-blah certified, and we have periodic internal and external audits to that effect.  All this compliance means is that we have documented processes, and that we document following those processes.  Although some of the processes, in principle, could improve quality, they have enough documented loopholes to be ineffective, and middle management treats them as a problem to be worked around, rather than a useful tool.

Our quality assurance department, as far as I know, has never been involved in actual testing of either developed systems or shippable product.  Their function appears to be limited to the curation of said process documents, and occasionally playing pool in the break room.  I would have thought a QA department should have a more adversarial relationship with engineering and manufacturing (adversarial in the sense of "we found an issue with the design" not "why haven't you filled out pre-development plan template S23 yet").

As you say, ISO has one selling feature:  It requires established procedures.

For us, it has one additional selling feature.  The big boys cannot buy from anyone who is not ISO, so our competitors who don't have deep enough pockets to waste a shit ton of labor and money on paperwork cannot even bid.

This allows us to be slobs with good paperwork, charge what we like, and still get contracts.

[Doktor Howl]

Uniforms or a dress code in anything other than face to face with customers or a kitchen is a controlling overbearing gesture that says "we dont trust you to be able to do your job"

It actually says "You are a replaceable cog, and we can in fact replace you at any time, and nobody will smell the difference."

[Doktor Howl]

Huh.

https://eand.co/this-is-how-a-society-dies-35bdc3c0b854

[altered]

Huh.

https://eand.co/this-is-how-a-society-dies-35bdc3c0b854

Very good read. Damn.

[The Johnny]

Huh.

https://eand.co/this-is-how-a-society-dies-35bdc3c0b854

Dok, how well versed are you on China? Everyone in their right minds must get goosebumps thinking about their totalitarian tendencies BUT, how well do they take care of their own? How do they compare to the USA in that matter?

I mean, Cain or anyone else for that matter, does anybody know?

[Faust]

Huh.

https://eand.co/this-is-how-a-society-dies-35bdc3c0b854

Dok, how well versed are you on China? Everyone in their right minds must get goosebumps thinking about their totalitarian tendencies BUT, how well do they take care of their own? How do they compare to the USA in that matter?

I mean, Cain or anyone else for that matter, does anybody know?

China was not developed, it's emergent, they have horrible human rights violations and a poor standard of living.
The US chose that.

[Utmost Roast Beef]

You're allowed to be arrogant only if you're competent, and one of the most important markers of competence is ability to recognize your mistakes, admit them, and correct them.  Unsurprisingly, this makes arrogance and competence a rare combination.

When was the last time you saw someone screw up spectacularly, own their mistake with grace and confidence, and keep on going?  It probably wasn't in politics.

My thinking is that "being right now" is far more important than "never being wrong".  So, if your idea is better than mine, I will demonstrate my superiority by stealing it, and then loudly giving you credit for it.

The best way to be

Many individuals seem to think that if they made a mistake they have to wrap their mistakes up in their identity. They begin to identify their mistakes as their flaws, and then they identify with those flaws in turn. They are afraid of losing a part of themselves by acknowledging they are fallible people. When you put a lot of time and money into knowing things, you begin to see the things you learned as immovable objects instead of making sure your hunger for knowledge is an unstoppable force. Or some other cheesy statement like that.

People in science fields are prone to this because they'd like to believe our understanding of reality and of our own existence within it is something we can pin down to computer generated atom counts and offer to our lady of perpetual flow charts. But I don't think legal professionals have as hard of a time understanding that their line of work is still a practice. Law doesn't usually fall into that same category of meticulous ass blowery because the individuals involved usually exclusively get through law school on free food, perserverence and hatred. Law students taking the flying leap off of asshole mountain when they begin to view their work as boundaries to test. It stops being about proper litigation and turns into a test of will. No one goes to law school if they dislike arguement, and lawyers get pedantic as fuck about debate when they start to become bored with their profession.

Also, the funny law facts do rot the brain a bit. It's frankly unavoidable.