vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
"A huge problem in the world are naturally born ""leaders"", or people who learned the tricks of being ""leaders"", but should NEVER EVER be leaders to anyone or any company. Bad leadership is rampant everywhere with horrendous and catastrophic results. Am I right?  On the other hand fewer people of great wisdom, great intentions, great ideas, great plans are prevented from being leaders. They are the ones who should be leaders.  Why is that? Because of centuries of fake ""leaders"" training people that charisma and good presentation skills are a must for a leader.  A good example is Steve Jobs. Despite all the ""admiration"" people have for Steve Jobs, he had terrible ideas, was terrible with other people and even his own family, egoist with major failures (Lisa, Next, Newton, original Macintosh) and he caused Apple to fail twice and even lost his control over Apple.  The bottom line: Steve Jobs took advantage of Steve Wozniak and the work of many other true innovating and capable people. I have no doubts in mind that if Steve Wozniak and the true people behind the iPhone were put in charge, they would have been better leaders than him."
Well, when it comes down to it, it's not so much class, demographic, or belief system, as it is people I like. I'm certainly less likely to 'like' certain types of people, but I would rather be surrounded on a daily basis with people I'm comfortable with, and who I respect.   In a business setting, it would also be nice if they were effective at their job.
&gt; At our place, we have visual management things on TV screens so everyone knows what's going on, metrics etc. People are constantly trying to improve the performance of system without management pushing for it.   While I agree, that kind of system is not without pitfalls as it lends itself to metrics gaming unless you really know what you're doing and consider every aspect of your business in your metrics.
"It happens in private too.   In addition to rarely ""putting their name on it"", my management will often given tasks out a wheel barrow load at the time. By saying they want it ALL done - they're not actually held responsible for any of it getting done.   The defense becomes ""well I told em'"".."
This seems heavily opinion based but I think there are some generic answers.
In addition to what @HartCO and @rocketman wrote, being a successful landlord either takes a lot of either:
Put bluntly, if you do a couple extra lines of code, the company isn't going to notice a difference in revenue. If a salesman sells a few more RGU's, the company makes a bit more money.  They are more valuable than you are. It's just that simple.
You're spot on. I'm coming in because he thinks nobody else is doing a good job, and he's hoping we can turn things around.   Everyone will know who I am, complete with family gossip. The existing culture will NOT be helpful.    Perhaps a softer teamwork approach would be best in this instance? Slowly work up and earn respect and assume responsibility.
"I have worked for a number of assholes and the bottom line was this: there was no room for error. There was no ""he/she will understand that I'm human and just made a mistake."" Couple that with brilliant product ideas and you get brilliant products. But rest assured it sucked if you weren't one of the best at what you did."
There are no politics, no jealousies or rivalries because everybody knows they’ll be acknowledged for their contribution and more importantly, they understand their job is to acknowledge others’ contributions. A Lean culture is a generous environment. It’s generous in giving credit to others, generous in respect, generous in offering ideas, support and help.* *The Lean leader has an ego strong enough to solicit and welcome ideas from absolutely every person involved and will recognize everybody’s contribution as valuable. In fact, a Lean leader gets excited by the prospect of unleashing all that untapped creativity and problem-solving genius that lies dormant in most organizations.* *While many people will be shy and not so forthcoming at first, it is a universal human desire to be validated and respected.*"
&gt;Written communication... raises accountability.   In my current workplace, I often think that my managers don't write intentionally exactly because of that.  As opposed to economy, that unfortunately does trickle down.  And we're **not** talking public sector here 😉.
I work with plenty of older guys who have never seen Office Space.  They express the same sentiments as others of us who have.  Generally it keeps getting worse too as roles move from technical to tracking.  The last thing we need is more bosses that just track shit.
Creative workshop leaders aren’t just chirpy, arty people with a head full of ideas. It’s a lucrative business where they need to constantly innovate and manage people, time and resources. Here are simple tips to make the most of it all.
It can be. The problem is that the poor performers either are good at playing the game, or are yes-men to the idea of all of the layers of bureaucracy. Some corporations have high levels of backstabbing and the backstabbers don't like it when you risk messing up their cushy desk jobs that pay $20+/hr
I'm a native English speaker and managed a team of Hungarian developers. Ranged from 15 people to 22 at our biggest, I think. I was not quite fluent in Hungarian at the time, and I found it was actually much easier than you would expect to manage the team.  The majority of them had at least a little bit of familiarity with English, but only one or two were fluent.  So, for the most part, the team liked to help me find the right words/phrasing for what I was trying to say. It became a collaborative effort, rather than me telling them what to do.  Plus, the unintended hilarity of saying entirely the wrong thing always broke the tension.  Being not fully fluent also required us all to keep our communications and thoughts rather basic. So we couldn't get mired in jargon, or go off into the weeds on some bit of esoteric nonsense. We kept it simple.  And if something complex needed to be expressed, then I could talk in detail with one or two of the guys that spoke English well, and they could translate for the rest of the team.
Sorry they're not respecting you just because of your age. The same thing happened to me when I managed a frozen yogurt shop at 18. It's a tough situation to be in. The only appropriate option is to stay as professional as possible. But your info has been really helpful thank you much! You seem like a great leader for your team.
"Let's not get too hung up on job titles. People hiring you are not interested in (or hoodwinked by)job titles.  Call yourself The Grand Poohbah for all I care - what I want to see is what you were doing in that role, and how well you were doing it!  Call your self ""Do It All Man"" or something silly. Believe me, looking at Resumes is the worst job in the world.   When I was hiring people, I will give you my process.  I open a gigantic envelope, take out a huge pile of paper. Try to find the application letter. OK - found it - great. Tear off everything except the first piece of paper, and chuck in the rubbish. If you sent an application letter which is less than one side of one page, your application automatically goes into the list of ""possibles"".  Next, I find the CV, and I take the top sheet, and chuck everything else in the trash.  If you can't convince me, using ONLY two pieces of paper, and ONLY one side of each: one applying for the job, and the other showing your relevant experience, THEN YOU NEVER EVEN GET AN INTERVIEW.   If you want to spend 10 pages telling me about everything you've ever done - and you start at age 17 on page 1, then I will never get to know what you did after delivering milk at age 19, *because I threw the rest in the trash already*.  OK, I got side-tracked. Sorry. Job titles mean diddly squat."
Leaders really are important because they provide direction to their team members. But it is also important that a leader possess the knowledge and skills needed to be able to fulfill his responsibilities. With leadership training, one can become an efficient as well as effective leader.
"True!   And I assume that by ""attitude"" you mean ""bad attitude"".  So, yes, bad attitudes, also back stabbing, stepping on others, flattering and ass-licking of thos higher, ""social skills"", in many cases (not all) is more important than skills and talent."
"No system is going to be perfect, especially one that is totally inflexible. But it is a lot easier to say no to someone when you can back it up by saying ""I think this is going to take 2,000 hours and the CEO has only granted you 1,000 hours. Figure out what you can live without and get back to me."""
After this all went down it came to light how absurdly neurotic and specific his fears were, down to badmouthing my wife for being controlling or something because I wanted to discuss my portion of the buy-in with her before I paid it, when he'd never even met her. Anyway, I've had actual adult bosses like this and they invariably find ways of bringing people down over little personal disagreements regardless of how well they're performing. The paranoia and ego driving things for that personality type can be hard to see at first because they're invariably charismatic and on-message and capable of really looking like they're taking the whole of the picture into account before making reasoned suggestions, and you need somebody with these skills for top leadership positions. I do have a measure of pity for these people, as they seem to live in a state of really subtle but profound internal dissonance that nobody else really gets a look at. The main problem here is that it's easy to conflate image with substance, as you have to have a fair amount of knowledge about the topic being discussed to parse their behavior, and especially once a large power structure entrenches around the guy the aura of infallibility can really build which makes it tough to distinguish between a well-reasoned interpretation of reality and a specious one articulated well. Our last meeting with the new structure was great and we're more excited than ever about getting started with less baggage!"
Yeah I'm exaggerating for effect.  I'm certain that most places aren't as bad as I'm making them out to be...but *one place*, wherever that is, is much, much worse. Someone is always running an absolute disaster of a key business program(s) out there.
"saying that someone is ""the CEO of their product"" (and the variants: for sales: ""the CEO of their territory"", for any one else: ""the CEO of their valuestream"") is idiotic and wrong.  It's a simple-minded nonsense perpetuated by unimaginative line managers.  It's downright insulting when directed at individual contributors."
Again, you need to find better jobs. I've had 100% engineer retention since I started the company five years ago. Every single engineer I've hired is still with the company. We've also just won an award for our workplace culture. I guarantee you that all of us could be making more money elsewhere, but we're here because of bigger reasons.
I have never worked at Wal-Mart.  Additionally, the employees under me loved working for me. Nights when I would close, when I came in, workers would ask if I was the only once closing and be very happy when I was. I never received a single complaint and once I left, many of them have since contacted me to hang out in off work hours. I treated them all with respect.  As far as the pay itself, I worked for a major corporation so at the store level, you don't have much say in what was a very structured pay-raise scale.  You can treat people with respect while also demanding that they do a good job. In fact, I think workers don't respect those bosses that allow shitty work. I know I don't.
"&gt;  the business class replace engineer/programmer-managers.  This is more true than you know. As someone who has worked at Microsoft and talked to many senior executives, the leadership doesn't really ""get"" technology the way they used to. It's been happening for a while, and the best example of it was probably the Gates/Ballmer transition. Microsoft, at best, will eventually become another GE - a company that develops technology, but no longer a company driven by technology and innovation. Of course, nothing is changing in the short term though, not as long as Windows and Office keep printing money."
Welcome to Reddit, where everybody *knows* that they're smarter than their boss, and if they were in charge they'd get everything fixed up right quick!  Nobody ever considers, just for a second, that there might be a reason for the madness - or that executives might not *all* be drooling idiots concerned with nothing but office politics.
Sure! I can't go into too much detail about my work directly, but I'll outline what I thought was successful for me.  * Find common ground non-work related - especially if you have a direct report, this is important. Being Indian means I have a lot more to talk with my report, but I know another co-worker who bonded with his Indian team over cricket (he's south african)  * Time zones - this sounds silly, but timezone differences actually result in more issues in communication than anything else. I always offer to meet my night / their morning when needed, and our team there works shifted hours (they start in the afternoon through their night), which allows for more face/phone time.  * Set clear expectations -  &gt; * Being polite (can you please do something) is not viewed as being polite and may be misconstrued as being an option. Make sure this is explicitly addressed. &gt; * Change resistance - there's a desire to keep doing things the way they've been done in the past; if you need something done differently you should refer to the old way explicitly and mention that you want to do something different. &gt; * Detail / Ambiguity / Managerial approach - Uncertainty isn't taken to well (and I blame the very rigid educational system for this); expect to spell out what you want and expect a desire on their end for closer review and support. Regular check-ins are especially helpful. &gt; * Desire to not disappoint: Admitting not knowing how to do something is often viewed as a sign of weakness. After you ask them for something, ask for them to play it back so that you can be sure that they really understand what you're asking of them. &gt; * Time management - Deadlines are often viewed as guidelines rather than set in stone. It especially helps to check in on regular intervals to make sure things are progressing as you'd like them to.   If I think of more I'll edit them in!
They don't need to know how to actually write code, but they should understand the process of writing code. I don't expect a CEO to understand each line in the chain of the distribution centers but I do expect them to understand the process enough to make a logical decision.  CEO's don't need to be able to write code, but they should understand what it takes to get that code to a production environment and what risks are involved with different types of code pushes.
&gt; An employer also needs somebody to show up on time  A college diploma does not guarantee being timely.  You can find out in few days or weeks if an employee shows on time.  Look, for certain roles, you need somebody who graduated from college with good grades. No questions about it.  But for being a teller in the bank, you don't (one example).
I work for a punlically traded company. There are plenty of people who work very hard and are smarter than a lptbofbthe executives I know. He could be a cyborg, butbifbhe is the cfo by 29, he had to jump a fuckton of hurdles to get there.
I wonder what they would say if there was a clause preventing tax breaks from going to management? It doesn't seem like a terrible idea, but would screw over middle-management and the supervisory positions an incentive like this could create.
&gt;They have somewhat of an idea of what to do, they just can't seem to get it done.  I've seen this first-hand, the car's driving off the cliff and you have the entire executive team at the wheel. They all see it coming, but with all the hands pulling at the wheel the car just goes straight ahead.  The problem isn't that they don't know what to do, it's the questioning and second-guessing of all the decisions being made. There should be a flow of debate-decision-execution in the boardrooms but instead it's debate-decision-debate-decision... until there's no more time and the executive team bails out of the car to save their own skin.
It is subjective of course, but when I hire people I'd rather see a shit job for two months than nothing at all.  Not that I'm planning to give the prospective employee shit work, just that they're not lazy.
While that's more true, I find as a person you're going to be much more happy and successful if you find a way to work without allowing another to be the block over you. I do not expect it of myself and do not expect it of others. You can function as your own block outside the pyramid.
"&gt; So basically, you think they are all bullshiters and don't understand anything.   A significant number (or perhaps more correctly, the vast majority) of them are.  And this is not just something that has only happened with recent ""digital"" technology or computers.  &gt;So really, the idea of any of them understanding technology would be practically impossible.  No, it is certainly *possible* for them to understand technology... it's just that for most people, well... they just don't *want* to put in the mental effort; they don't want to comprehend the how/why something works (i.e. the underlying fundamentals) they generally want to get away with whatever minimal a level of ""training"" that allows them to achieve their immediate goals.  When it comes to a lot of the C suite level people for the most part they are only concerned with *appearances* and motivating controlling others -- that usually means familiarity with and faking competence via jargon &amp; buzzwords --their ""people"" are supposed to deal with the pesky little details of reality.  And then (especially) when you get to businesses that are almost entirely about ""marketing"" -- well, appearance &amp; perception are 90% (if not 99%) of the product."
"It's actually really hard to know anything about how skilled your friends are, unless you have a lot in-depth work discussions with them and you are in the same field.  And then there is the ""My dad plays golf with the CEO"" kind of who-you-know"
But there's a difference freelancing for your craft and managing people to so similar tasks.  Sometimes you just want the flexibility of working for yourself and you enjoy mastering the craft.   Not everyone's end game is more money.   If marketing and sales are not your strengths, yet you still have a steady stream of future clients, or can pick some up when you need to...why over complicate things?  When I first started out many moons ago, there was a contract programmer working at one of my first jobs.  He worked 6-9 months a year, and then traveled and relaxed the rest.  The summer I met him he was going to complete visiting every National Park in the US; sounds like a nice goal to me :)
Lol yeah tell that to all my teachers and professors over the years.   Anyway, your line of reasoning doesn't necessitate CEOs stick around long. Also it's factually incorrect based on all the google studies you still haven't looked at.
"&gt; She worked 14 years in security because she has no interest?  With at least 98% certainty, her getting a job in Computer Security at Equifax, despite a Musical background, is because she knows someone, or someone at Equifax knows her. Further, she got a fat salary, so why not work in this area despite having no interest in it?  Worse: no self respecting real Computer Security experts will work for her. Can you imagine a real expert disagreeing with Susan about technical things? She will get rid of him/her in 2 seconds.  Are you surprised to hear that many managers get their jobs just because they know someone or are very good in politics and back stabbing and no other talent? Without a doubt, a high percentage of managers are terrible, clueless about the area they manage and the how to manage people. Try to get rid of a manager who's obviously terrible.  **As for me, many people work for me, people I interview and decided to hire. I will NEVER hire a someone with a Music background for an IT position unless they have experience and know the job they are hired for. And even for an entry level IT position, not much experience is required, I will not hire a Music major, because, clearly, their interest is not IT. I will only hire a person who studied IT.**  Definitely, a veteran with military background is much more qualified for a security work than someone with a high school or even a bachelor degree in Music or ""Communication"".  Finally, to show you how great Susan was at Security, read below what she has to say about Information Security. Then tell me, do you really think she has any talent in that area.  [http://archive.is/6M8mg](http://archive.is/6M8mg)  &gt; Susan: “There are a lot of things to consider with that. One school of thought says that when you put corporate assets into the cloud, they are more secure because you know exactly what you have there. You have an exact inventory, you know exactly who has access to that data, and how it is controlled.""  **This is so dumb and so incorrect and untrue.**"
"just one of my personal examples:  in a national sales contest, me against every man/office coast to coast, I came in first.  not only first, but nearly 3x better than the second placer  I was fired at year's end  reason:  ""wannabe2good, you just don't fit in"""
She was cruise director Julie. Anybody with reasonable dedication could have done that job. Anyone who was ever a successful camp counselor.  Her lack of depth and ability was exposed - painfully - at yahoo. Way out of her depth. And yeah, given the same lottery ticket I think I could have done much better. Most anyone who ever ran a company for real  would have.
"&gt;For example, typically in IT management loves the idea of RAD, but what it often means is that they want to start before they understand the scope of the problem, let alone the requirements.  Let alone the most efficient &amp; effective solution.  &gt;It tends to be the big projects that end up being screwed up. Smaller stuff is easier, but it takes a lot of skills to manage the production of large and complex systems or pieces of engineering.  Spot on.  I've seen so many companies piss away countless dollars and years of ""work"" (sometimes in the *million$* and more) in ""big project"" attempt #1 ... then, again, in ""BIGGER better"" attempt #2 ... until they finally realize that there will be no ""silver bullet"", and so attempt #3 finally figures out what REALLY needed to be done and moves ahead to do it. (Of course that is in the companies that managed to survive attempts #1 &amp; #2, and didn't completely FUBAR everything in the process.)"
Yeah, I'm introverted &amp; have social anxiety... I love what I do and from my 3 years of experience I think I seem to be really good at it, but I don't like the being managed aspect... I haven't had a chance to do a two way flexwork gig or anything, just on call vacations and mandatory office presence, emergency work from home, unpaid OT...  I should note we live in Canada. This is from job postings here. I have had recruiters contact me but I am skeptical, nobody seems to even look at my skills. None of my work projects are public and I was the company's only developer for 2 years so it kind of sucks.
Nice. Well it looks like you are pretty setup. Get that LinkedIn profile setup. Start trying to connect with executives in your industry (hard) and then grind it out. It's very unlikely you will get a C level at your current employer so get ready to make a transition and make it . Most of the C levels I have spoken with either grew with a small company over 10 years or more. OR they jumped from one company to another to get the title