Small signals of appreciation have a decisive influence on the output and quality of the work of employees. A field experiment of KIT (Karlsruhe Institute of Technology) economist Petra Nieken and two colleagues revealed that a combination of performance-oriented piece wage and motivating words increases the performance by 20% and reduces the error rate by 40%.
"Our results are relevant to entrepreneurial practice," Nieken emphasizes. She holds the Chair for Human Resources Management of KIT's Institute of Management. How can staff members be motivated? Theory lists two instruments: Financial incentives, such as bonuses or piece wages, and the capability of executives to motivate their staff members. The question whether and how these two instruments complement, strengthen or weaken each other, however, is not clearly answered by theory. That is why this question was in the focus of the study performed at Bonn University.
(Score: 2) by SanityCheck on Thursday October 22 2015, @03:22PM
The beatings will continue... until morale improves.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 22 2015, @03:23PM
This isn't necessarily old news.
At one end of the spectrum, if I'm making a half-million a year as a test subject for an ongoing experiment on the psychological effects of extreme torture, I'd say the money wasn't worth it.
At the other end, if I'm making next to nothing but I'm relaxing in a nice air-conditioned office with free television/internet/coffee, I'd say the intangibles weren't worth it.
Somewhere in between there's a balance between money and "job lifestyle," and by isolating money, the experimenters ignore the fact that people who pay well tend to also include some measure of intangible benefits--they can be artificially divorced from one another, but not entirely.
HR cost cutters take this and run with it in a cynical direction: lower salaries that can partially offset the cost of free donuts in the break room, hoping that we'll be distracted by the sugar and ignore the fact we're not getting raises (again) this year.
No thanks.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 22 2015, @03:39PM
edit: This isn't necessarily new news.
(Score: 3, Informative) by srobert on Thursday October 22 2015, @05:04PM
"HR cost cutters take this and run with it in a cynical direction"
It reminds me of the way that Stephen Covey's book "The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People" struck me as incisive before human resources people discovered it and turned it into a workplace cult.
(Score: 1) by turgid on Thursday October 22 2015, @07:23PM
I tried to read that book once. It was so sweet, sickly and conceited that I didn't make it past the introduction. I've had the misfortune to work for "successful" managers that were impressed by such books.
Can you summarise it in a sentence or two?
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 4, Interesting) by WillAdams on Thursday October 22 2015, @03:25PM
>It is by no means enough that an officer of the Navy should be a capable mariner. He must be that, of course, but also a great deal more.
>He should be as well a gentleman of liberal education, refined manners, punctilious courtesy, and the nicest sense of personal honor.
>
>He should be the soul of tact, patience, justice, firmness, kindness, and charity. No meritorious act of a subordinate
>should escape his attention or be left to pass without its reward, even if the reward is only a word of approval.
>Conversely, he should not be blind to a single fault in any subordinate, though at the same time, he should be quick
>and unfailing to distinguish error from malice, thoughtlessness from incompetency, and well meant shortcomings
>from heedless or stupid blunder.
>
>In one word, every commander should keep constantly before him the great truth, that to be well obeyed, he must be perfectly esteemed.
>
>---Augustus C. Buell (who attributed it to John Paul Jones)
(Score: 4, Informative) by Runaway1956 on Thursday October 22 2015, @03:49PM
You heard much the same thing in the Acey-Deucey lounge, and the Chief's quarters. "It's your job to brag on your men. If your men shine, you shine. If your men look like shit, you look like shit. If you're not promoting your men, you're obviously not doing your job." "Promoting" is not to be taken as advancement in rank, but offering words of encouragement, congratulations, and, literally bragging about your men while among your peers and your superiors.
Only junior petty officers (third class PO's) can get away with constantly badmouthing their juniors. And, such 3rd class PO's seldom make 2nd class. They learn, or they just don't get promoted.
And, then, we are thrust out into the civilian world, where every dog wants a bite out of you. Morons who can't motivate their own children to attend school pretend to be "managers", in companies large and small.
(Score: 2) by tathra on Friday October 23 2015, @03:32AM
part of a military leader's job is training his subordinates to do his job. so yes, you should be pushing for them to advance in rank, teaching and delegating to them to help them grow and become capable leaders themselves.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday October 23 2015, @02:13PM
Very true - but that meaning of "promoting" doesn't fit into the context of this discussion. That fits into a closely related, but separate discussion, regarding financial incentives, in addition to yet another discussion about delegating authority. (you cannot delegate responsibility, you're still responsible after you've delegated all the authority possible to delegate)
On topic, people will follow you far more readily if you praise their efforts, toss them a few perks, and show them the respect they have earned. Many people will work even harder when you hand them more responsibility. But, keeping the above caveat in mind - you are still responsible for whatever you have handed to that junior person.
No NCO, and precious few officers, have the authority to unilaterally give an enlisted man a pay raise. In the civilian world, we see that frequently. Especially in a shop run by nepotism.
(Score: 1) by nitehawk214 on Thursday October 22 2015, @08:52PM
"The first duty of every Starfleet officer is to the truth, whether it's scientific truth or historical truth or personal truth! It is the guiding principle on which Starfleet is based! And if you can't find it within yourself to stand up and tell the truth about what happened, you don't deserve to wear that uniform!" -Captain Picard
"Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Thexalon on Thursday October 22 2015, @03:38PM
Sure, if you treat your employees well, they're more likely to be happy with their work environment, which will make them more likely to like their jobs, which will in turn make them more likely to make the effort to do a good job. Also, by establishing by example a cultural rule of "No Jerks!", you make it more likely that employees will cooperate well with each other and will thus get useful work done without even being directed to do so by management.
But unfortunately, you can be darned sure that the way this will be applied is for HR drones to train their managers to use the right "motivating words" as a way of avoiding having to give out raises. These days, the art of management (at least in the US) is seen first and foremost as a matter of reducing the cost of employees despite the fact that in the long run that tends to hurt businesses (via staff turnover and costly mistakes) more than it helps.
And if I had to give just one concept to management that would make a world of difference, it would be this: Your employees all have lives outside of work. Some of that they may talk about at work, some of that they will never tell you about. For you, your work may be the most important part of your life, but for a lot of your people it will be the thing they do to make the money they need to have the life they want - and that's perfectly OK. Do everything in your power to avoid imposing on their life outside of work if you want to maintain good relationships with your employees, and if you do impose on that make damned sure you are experiencing what they're experiencing. If you demand they go to the office at 10 AM on the Sunday of a holiday weekend while you stay at your party, if you demand that they answer alerts at 3 AM on a regular basis while you never take your turn on call, if you demand that they accept invasions of their privacy that you never would allow for yourself, they will remember that as the insults they are and act accordingly.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by termigator on Thursday October 22 2015, @05:32PM
One thing that annoys me is the idea that everyone needs to be friends at work. Management tends to push this, which enchroaches on personal-vs-work boundaries. At work, all I expect is people to act professionally. Liking you is secondary. Don't expect me to goto work parties and other gatherings outside of work hours, that is my time.
I have noticed that managers that worry too much about everyone "getting along" have little clue on what is best for the products and services the company offers. They are deluded in believing that if workers are not BFFs the company will fail.
There are people I do not personally like, but do not mind working with them because they are competent and can act professional. There are people I like personally, but dread having to work with them because they are incompetent. Do not equate compentency with friendliness.
(Score: 2) by Tramii on Thursday October 22 2015, @07:11PM
Don't expect me to goto work parties and other gatherings outside of work hours, that is my time.
Exactly. Everyone seems confused when I decline attending all the company work parties. Hey, I have better things to do than continue to hang out with my co-workers. I mean, I already spend 8-10 hours with them every day. The *last* thing I want to do is to give up some of my personal time to hang out with them for even longer. No, I don't care that there will be free booze, I have my own at home. I have family and friends I would like to see, so no thank you, I am going home now. If you really wanted to reward me for a job well done, you would have scheduled the party *during* work hours. Trying to guilt me/threaten me to attend your weekend party is just pissing me off.
I seriously think the people that do attend all the work parties are either serious alcoholics or literally have no life outside of work. Do you people really have nothing else better to do???
(Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Thursday October 22 2015, @07:46PM
More like, they're afraid to say no.
I attended 2 or 3 such events. I forget what they called them, something like "manager's club". They certainly were educational, just not in good, honest, sincere ways. After a few such after work parties, I felt I'd seen enough, learned what little there was to learn. It wasn't that I couldn't guess what they'd be like, but it seemed prudent to restrain my cynicism and try to view the events without preconceived notions, just in case they somehow weren't what I was expecting. Nope, they were.
Of course one sees all the sycophants working their egg sucking and brown nosing skills. What I didn't expect was the CEO so openly displaying his stupidity. It's as if he was daring anyone to call him on it. No one did though, no one cared enough and had the guts to risk their job.
Those parties will never get better while the balance of power remains so lopsided. If people were better positioned to tell employers to shove their miserable jobs, if employers actually had to try to find and keep good employees, it would do wonders. As it is, most employees aren't in a strong enough position to do any boat rocking, not with high unemployment and jobs so hard to get and keep, not with labor so cheap.
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Thursday October 22 2015, @11:17PM
My basic rules for office parties:
1. Do not get drunk under any circumstances. Make sure you have fewer drinks than those above you in the pecking order. (Also, getting them drunk may allow you to gain some advantageous information and/or blackmail material.)
2. You have 2 ears and 1 mouth. Use your ears more than your mouth.
3. Make a reasonable attempt to participate in whatever nonsense activities they've come up with. No matter how stupid. Don't try to win any contests really, but do make what appears to be a good-faith effort.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 22 2015, @09:20PM
I dunno. One of thoes outings where they do "team building" at a paintball facility, after a few beers, can get interesting.
(Score: 1) by nitehawk214 on Thursday October 22 2015, @08:53PM
Sure, if you treat your employees well, they're more likely to be happy with their work environment, which will make them more likely to like their jobs, which will in turn will make management more likely to underpay them, which in turn will make your employees want to quit.
"Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
(Score: 3, Informative) by Whoever on Thursday October 22 2015, @03:49PM
Herzberg proposed this very idea [wikipedia.org] decades ago.
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Thursday October 22 2015, @05:36PM
Empirical Verification of Theories is a key component of science.
(Score: 3, Informative) by srobert on Thursday October 22 2015, @04:15PM
I get paid a very good salary, so I'm not complaining about that. My employer had never had layoffs until last year. It was only then that we found out that the policies in the employee handbook indicating that seniority would be a major consideration were nothing but lip service. For the past year I've been having nightmares about it. I might be developing an ulcer. I'm getting a bit too old to go look for another job. At least I don't think I'd find one with out taking an enormous pay cut. Yet I'm still many years from being ready to retire. Tenure should count. It's really difficult to collaborate without it. People are trying to protect themselves here by hoarding knowledge. I'd take a substantial pay cut right now, if I knew that management wasn't going to pull the same crap in the future. And I know I'm not the only one who feels that way about it.
(Score: 2) by srobert on Thursday October 22 2015, @04:59PM
That second to last sentence should have read:
I'd take a substantial pay cut right now, in exchange for knowing that management wasn't going to pull the same crap in the future.
(Score: 3, Informative) by turgid on Thursday October 22 2015, @07:35PM
Indeed, and it never works like that. I've worked for three very large "big name" companies now, and when the down-sizing starts as a one-off for the first time, the do it just once more, and just once more again, and then again...
Eventually critical mass is lost (loyalty, senior staff, institutional knowledge) and the whole thing gets wound up. Maybe not the whole company closes, but the department or office might.
They only stop the madness when the wheels finally fall off the wagon, but then it's too late because everyone's either gone, going or worked themselves sick.
If they introduce stack ranking, where everyone is ranked in order against their peers, run for the hills. It never ends well. Morale plummets, team work goes out the window, good people get fired just because they need someone to fit the arbitrary bell cure.
The investors demand a return on their investment, and we've got to keep paying our investors, they say. Well, fine. But if slowly starving the goose that's laying the golden eggs is the only trick they have left, run.
It's hard work in terms of time, effort and stress finding a new job, and these days it happens far too frequently. But don't be too despondent, it is possible, it just takes time. Start looking early and get some practice in. And never take a pay cut.
I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent [wikipedia.org].
(Score: 3, Insightful) by darkfeline on Friday October 23 2015, @12:46AM
>I'm getting a bit too old to go look for another job.
The market has decided that you are not needed. Aren't you happy?
Long live the current economic system!
Seriously speaking though, yes, the market has decided that a large proportion of the population is not needed. The current economic system has decided that the people who are not needed can go and starve. The people with money have decided that they don't care. The government has decided to listen to what the people with money say. Such is modern unprogress.
Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 23 2015, @03:41AM
The people who are really to blame are the morons who keep voting in representatives who not only don't represent them but actively work to harm them, economically and otherwise. I'll never understand why anyone who isn't a multi-millionaire would vote Republican.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Snow on Thursday October 22 2015, @04:19PM
I used to really like my job. I got (and still get) paid pretty decent. I ran/run the systems for one of our areas of business. Everything from the back end servers, to interfacing into SAP, to the front end software. I felt a real ownership of the environment and it was like my baby. I would improve things, and make things better just because I could. I would dig deep into problems, and work them through to completion. I actually gave a shit.
Now, I don't. I got a 'team lead' who is more like a Team Boss who doesn't like to actually solve problems, but rather dumps them onto me. They get to take the credit when things go well, and then if things so wrong, it's my fault (because I developed, tested and deployed everything). So, now, I don't care anymore. If I'm not on call, don't fucking call me because my work phone is turned off. I don't care if the entire place is gong up in flames - call the useless team lead.
Even though I no longer give a shit, every new fix, every new deploy plan, everything that actually requires skill, is figured out by me. I then document it so the rest of the team can fix it next time. I'm the only person that actually knows how the back end software works (and believe me, I have spent hours and hours trying to train the other members). I'm the only member of the team that can actually use a command line to do something useful.
So, now I'm working on getting a MCSA SQL certification with the hope that I'll land another job. I'm pretty bitter, and the money is barely a factor in that. I'm bitter because there is no benefit from actually dong a great job. Instead, I sit around until I am asked/told to do something, and then I will do only what I was told. There is no reason to be proactive anymore.
The worst part of this is that it spills over into my personal life. I used to have passion for my job, now it's a drag. I sometimes feel like my life is missing something. I think its missing passion. I've started backpack camping, and I'm hoping that can be my new passion.
I think that my employer screwed up. If I got even a little appreciation and recognition, my passion would probably still be my job, and as a result I would produce better (and more) work. Now I waste my days here.
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 22 2015, @04:30PM
HR Appreciation gives me such a thrill
But that's not going to pay my bills,
I want your money (that's.. what I want)
I want your money (that's.. what I want)
I want your mon-mon-mon-eee
It's money that I want
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 22 2015, @05:33PM
This is one inane piece of ... whatever you call this sorta thing. So some wet-behind-the-ear management consultant will go around, citing this as a "scientific" research, to tell management to do x, y, z. Having paid fat sum for such uncanny wisdom, the management will cook up and pass down some obtuse policies for the worker bees to comply with, to be forgotten within six months, of course.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 22 2015, @07:12PM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 22 2015, @08:19PM
Dream on - it will be layoff, stock price jumps, and execs pocket fattened bonus.
(Score: 2) by jimbrooking on Thursday October 22 2015, @07:14PM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 2) by Hyperturtle on Friday October 23 2015, @01:54AM
My personal experience with this concept (aside from believing it to be true and generally using it as a yard stick for how badly or well things are going for me) has actually lead to my explaining who the good doctor was and what he did. To some executives. It didn't end up improving the situation, unfortunately, but did reveal to me that the management never heard about any of any of this because everyone is motivated by money. I wonder what they teach in fancy business schools these days, or even in high school psychology? Granted, you have to take and remember the class to have any lasting benefit from it.
As an aside, i suggest everyone pick up a 101 psychology book. It will teach you things that no how to be a better whatever book can do; it'll teach you to understand people to some extent which you just don't understand otherwise prior to gaining insight. (And really, you should, because with all the data harvesting, MIT already has their software for sale to figure you out already, as promoted in the other post. You won't even the score but at least you'll improve your odds)
And that new knowledge and the acting upon it may enable you to focus on your own improvements again. You might have a better understanding overall of how other people work, even if it doesn't tell you everything... most people can be lumped into a bucket of some kind (yes I am complicated but you already have me in a bucket so don't knock the terminology I am making up) and that default bucket won't be the crazy bucket after you finish an intro psychology book--instead you may be able to tolerate those crazies even more, and that makes it easier to get ahead yourself when they are less able to drag you down due to misunderstandings.
None of that helps with Maslow's theories directly, but it can help improve the work environment to a degree that focus can change to getting back to self-actualization now that other-actualization-comprehension is at a more stable level of enlightenment. It sure beats having no clue why people are the way they are!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 23 2015, @03:47AM
Small correction - not everyone is motivated by money, but everyone is motivated by not starving, and not starving in the US requires having money. Its a means, not the ends.
(Score: 2) by Hyperturtle on Friday October 23 2015, @09:19PM
Right -- my comment regarding their money beliefs was of their interpretation of from what motivation comes from.
And for them, it is the extrinsic motivation of money. Also, they did not know what extrinsic or intrinsic meant.
In any event, even in our star trek future, there will be people that see what others have and demand more for themselves even if they are not merited to have it. That's human nature. I would want to let them try to gain what it is they want, but some people will always be hammers no matter how much they think they get screwed.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 23 2015, @10:35AM
Lots of people will starve for their children/loved ones or even sacrifice their own lives.
Maslow had some ideas that might be interesting to clueless people but the fact is the hierarchy is inaccurate or even counterproductive to understanding people and their motivations and why they do the things they do.
People have their goals/objectives - short term and long term. These goals can and do change. Most of people are not fully aware of all of their goals. Most people will try to set up routines and habits - since it reduces the amount of thinking about goals etc. So you go to work, you go for lunch, you do what Da Boss says, you mimic what others are doing, etc. You don't spend time asking why - you might have asked why and set those goals earlier, or you just follow what others are doing or telling you to do.
The world is too complicated for most people to understand fully about why they do certain things - so one of the goals is mimicking and following of traditions and unwritten rules (e.g. what motivates most people to stand facing the elevator door rather than have your back to the wall so you can see what others are doing - and so protect yourself if needed?).
Maslow's hierarchy is inadequate to explain why so many people work late and skip meals even though they are hungry. Do you really think that people are calculating and believing that they would starve in the long term otherwise? Maybe it's true for some cases but in most cases they are doing it because they want to avoid unpleasant stuff that's more immediate. Or because they "believe in the cause". Or they just want to get the job done and get some sense of completion. You know how many OCD people just need to complete stuff, many of us have similar urges but not to a pathological degree). Why do you think so many games have the psychological tricks they have now?
(Score: 2) by PizzaRollPlinkett on Thursday October 22 2015, @07:45PM
The idea that anyone would believe anything an executive would tell them, let alone be motivated to work harder for less money, is astounding. Of course execs would manipulate you to work for below market value any way they could. That's their job. You must not have met the same executives I've met. Maybe German executives are different than American ones? You can't possibly generalize this study to the whole world.
(E-mail me if you want a pizza roll!)
(Score: 1) by nitehawk214 on Thursday October 22 2015, @08:57PM
I believe German executives are not quite so absurdly overpaid as American ones. Perhaps this means they are less likely to delude themselves into thinking they are acting in the employee's best interest. Or perhaps that comes with a German mentality.
"Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
(Score: 1) by WillAdams on Monday October 26 2015, @04:20PM
The big thing for pay is the ``pay slope'' --- one company which takes this seriously (and promotes only from w/in) is Lee-Valley:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/time-to-lead/how-one-company-levels-the-pay-slope-of-executives-and-workers/article15472738/ [theglobeandmail.com]
Keep the pay slope below 22--1 and any pay is likely to be perceived as fair --- let it exceed that, and employees see the contract as organized theft.
(Score: 2) by el_oscuro on Saturday October 24 2015, @02:21AM
Obligatory:
http://despair.com/collections/demotivators/products/motivation [despair.com]
SoylentNews is Bacon! [nueskes.com]
(Score: 2, Interesting) by nitehawk214 on Thursday October 22 2015, @08:35PM
But the devil is in the details.
10 years or so ago, I was defined by my work. Programming was who I was, not just what I did. Most of my circle of friends were my coworkers. (and/or classmates) I was in the industry long enough that wages were not an issue; therefore seeking a job that has amenities and was fun was paramount.
But now I might be a programmer but my true interested are in things like brewing and astronomy. People make money on those things, but I know I would rather keep them as hobbies. My work is a way to fund these hobbies. So now, I care little about free lunches and foozball, and more about getting the hell out the door at 5pm while making a decent wage. Also my circle of friends is largely the same people as from the previous decade, but none of us work together anymore. It used to be a priority to work with friends, now its a priority to work with people I can simply tolerate.
"Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
(Score: 4, Funny) by Grishnakh on Thursday October 22 2015, @11:49PM
I'm sorry, but a bunch of nice words and pats on the back aren't worth shit to me; there's several factors that determine if I like a job, but the big ones are:
1) money (no surprise)
2) work environment - now here's the one that most employers these days have no fucking clue on. At this point, I would just love to have another job where I make good money (#1), and have a fucking cubicle, just like in the good ol' days of the 1990s. I want to be able to sit down at my desk, in front of my computer (preferably with two large screens--these things are cheap these days), and NOT see streams of people walking by because I'm on a busy corridor with low walls, or have to sit 6 inches from a coworker because they're too cheap to allocate enough room for everyone to have a separate cube, or have to look at another coworker's face because some idiot manager thinks having no walls is great for "collaboration", or have some asshole from another group come and lean his ass on my desk and have a chit-chat with other people in my group, again because some idiot manager stuck us together with no walls thinking this arrangement is great for "collaboration".
3) commute - locate the workplace in a good location, not in bumfuck, not in the ghetto, etc.
4) management - don't have some crazy HR lady running the company and setting up cameras in front of the restrooms to record how long employees spend in there etc. (Extron Electronics does this according to multiple postings on glassdoor.com.)
(Score: 2) by Hyperturtle on Friday October 23 2015, @01:40AM
I take it then you don't want to be part of our motivational team? we are trying to find people to come up with signs and banners to help them feel more happy at work in a way that doesn't point out to them how expensive sounding their incessant demands are!
I was consulting at a place that adoped the "why what how" thing. OMG. management didn't even read the book, some corporate life coach told them it would be a good idea to help increase billable hours by incentivizing people to work more. it was hilarious, but uh no, motivation actually wasn't helped, but I will always remember them for it and how you can't just print posters and make people come in, unpaid for a mandatory important business all employee meeting, to learn that they are going to Embrace Why... and then not expect people to ask WTF.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 23 2015, @03:36PM
Dear Roach Molecular Systems,
Having just been terminated after a mere four weeks as a contract employee, I question your explanation of events.
My read is that Roach - or, more precisely, Arick - needed someone to fill in for their IT manager, Jason, while he was on a two-week vacation, in Hawaii.
So, as I reconstruct events, Roach brought someone onboard a week before the IT manager - Jason - went on vacation ... gave them a week to get up to speed ... ONLY THEN, did they tell this contractor - me - that the other guy - Jason - was going on vacation for two weeks ... THEN, after the guy - Jason - returned from his two-week vacation in Hawaii, Roach waited a few days for things to settle down, and terminated their contractor - me ... as, with the IT manager, Jason, returned, they no longer needed their contractor's - my - services.
My read is that Roach withheld the fact that their IT guy, Jason, was going on vacation from me, the candidate, during the interview phase, because Roche was concealing Roach's true short-term motives for employing me, from me, the candidate, and misrepresenting the situation to me, as a long-term relationship, when, in fact, a six-month employment contract was never Roach's true intention.
Based on information and belief, that would be fraud.
My read is that Arick never bothered to interview me, because he never intended to retain me for longer than the time required for me to cover for Jason, while Jason was in Hawaii, on vacation.
My read is that Jason never bothered to complete the paperwork that had been submitted to him, electronically, three weeks ago, so that I could get the second, "pseudo" administrative account required to complete the administrative responsibilities that I had been assigned - because he knew, three weeks ago, that I was not going to be retained, after he returned from his vacation.
Also, because his inactions gave Jason a convenient - albeit, some might say, crooked - excuse to terminate the contract.
It's a fact, that the Monday morning of my last week at Roach ... as soon as Jason had returned from his vacation and within ten minutes of coming onsite, Jason cornered me, took me into an empty office, closed the door, and yelled at me.
Jason was angry that I had helped Siemens personnel - onsite to secure the Sequencing Unit computer room - log in to Roach's "Guest" wireless network, after an administrative assistant had asked me to help, at 7:30 AM, well before the usual IT staff were onsite.
He thought I should have opened a ticket and waited until 9 AM, maybe 9:30 AM, for the regular IT guys to get on site.
WTF?
Jason was also angry at me for replying to an email - from a researcher, by the name of Amrita - asking why, if a computer had 24 CPUs, only one of the CPUs was active. I gave her a quick, four-paragraph briefing on parallel programming paradigms, along with helpful URLs.
Jason said that he did not want to confuse the researchers about the level of service being provided - apparently, I had been TOO HELPFUL, and, I now surmise, I made the level of service that Jason was providing to his customers, look ... well, shoddy.
Jason ordered me to NOT provide any desktop support, and also ordered me to NOT communicate with any customers. This was affirmed in a follow-up email - so it's in writing.
Interpreted literally, Jason was instructing me to not respond to any of the tickets I was being assigned!
There is a name for such a situation - it is referred to as a double-bind ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_bind, [wikipedia.org] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gregory_Bateson [wikipedia.org] ) and it is considered an indicator of schizophrenia.
Double-bind scenarios are not an indicator of good management, in my opinion. Just the opposite. It's abuse - or worse.
I haven't even touched on the conflict that already existed, between Jason, and Amrita, before I even arrived.
From what I overheard, Amrita and her krewe were constantly trying to measure the resources available to them ... and Jason was constantly trying to thwart her, and her krewe's, efforts.
Why, on my last day there at Roach, I asked if I could install an open source utility called htop(1) ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Htop [wikipedia.org] ) on some of the Linux servers, so that resource utilization could be better measured. Jason refused me permission, without explanation.
Why would a system manager deliberately go out of his way to deny his customers - even his own L3 support engineers - access to the very open source tools that professionals use, everywhere, to measure capacity and performance?
I wondered if Jason and Amrita had both come from 454 ... and if there had been a grudge between them, even before the company had been absorbed, by Roach.
My sympathies were with Amrita - whose efforts to install a Nagios server were undone when Jason discovered it, and destroyed the installation.
Why would Jason do such a thing? The Sequencing Unit does not lack for computing and networking capacity.
(Those problems the Sequencing Unit experienced with the NetApp server, while Jason was on vacation were, I think, a consequence of Sequencing Unit's IT staff using default NFS mount options - leading to a network lockup - precisely as I had warned, on my very first day at Roach Molecular Systems.)
I was so upset by the event, with Jason - in the office, with the door closed - that I looked up Jason's manager - Arick - and Arick's manager - Aleksandra, in the employee database - FUD4ALL.
My analysis is that this action of Roach's is a violation of my employment contract, insofar as their termination decision is based upon fraud and deceit.
My read is that Bungle Consulting was probably a willing party to the deception.
My analysis is that because Roach, and Bungle Consulting, deliberately engineered a situation where I was manipulated into leaving the premises with equipment that I no longer needed - as I was no longer employed - that the burden and cost of recovering that equipment is Bungle's, and Roach's - not mine.
So I'll be happy to ship it back to Bungle, or Roach, via FedEx - as soon as you give me a FedEx account number to use.
Not a moment earlier.
I'm not spending any of my own money returning equipment that could have been recovered by either:
(a) Arick, or
(b) Jason, or
(c) Farhan, or
(d) one of the other two IT guys in the building, or
(e) one of the half a dozen security people onsite, or
(f) one of half a dozen people working at Bungle Consulting.
In vernacular Olde English: Fuck you!
Where is the excellence? What have you done with it?
I've worked with excellent people. I've worked FOR excellent people. I know excellence when I see it.
None of you are excellent at anything other than misrepresenting the truth.
It's hard to feel sympathetic for you or your organizations - you all set out to find the smartest, most-experienced, fastest-learning computer person you could find, on short notice ... and then, you tried to lie to him, to trick him, to fool him, and to abuse his trust.
You even tried to trick him into returning, at his own expense, the very equipment that you had tricked him into removing from the premises!
You are some very sick people.
In closing, I also want to ask: what does Roach Molecular Systems intend to do about that hepatitis B vaccine sequence they requested me to initiate?
As part of working at Roach Molecular Systems, I was encouraged to get a hepatitis B vaccine.
After receiving the first sht I was informed that it was a three-shot sequence spread out across slightly more than six months - that is, it would take longer to finish the hepatitis B vaccine sequence than my contract was intended to last. I felt the first stirrings of concern. That didn't seem very diligent on the part of Roach Molecular Systems.
Now, it's two weeks later. The contract has been terminated.
Does Roach intend to complete the vaccine sequence that it requested me to initiate?
Or are they just going to apply the first shot, and walk away from it, as a bad investment, and let me deal with the medical consequences?
Inquiring minds want to know.