How Detailed Are You In Your Feedback At Work?

[Newell Steamer]

I work with quite a few people who never back what they claim. They immediately naysay or dismiss something, but, never articulate, support or back what they are claiming is a problem.

Dismissive Dullard: This isn't going to work, because of XYZ process,..
Me: Ok, what is the XYZ process??
Dismissive Dullard: It's the process that covers XYZ.
Me: Sure. So, who owns or does this process?
Dismissive Dullard: I don't know - but, this isn't going to work.
Me: Well, what part of this is going to cause an issue for the XYZ process??
Dismissive Dullard: I don't know - but, this isn't going to work.
Me: Is there one part, at least, that you can tell me where things will break down??
Dismissive Dullard: I don't know - but, this isn't going to work.
Me: Ok - can you summarize what the concerns are??
Dismissive Dullard: No - this isn't going to work.

When I come across an issue/problem, I am pretty detailed on what and where the conflicts are. Flow charts, use cases, bullet points, etc. I am not sure how people get away with just waving their hands at things,..

Anyway, how detailed are you with your feedback at work??

 

[yhelothar]

As detailed as I need to be to get the point across, but not anymore detailed than that. In your case, not stating how XYZ process would prevent "it" from working would not be considered getting the point across. That lack of understanding undermines his ability to say it's not going to work since an understanding can lead to a workaround.

 

[Vdubchaos]

Asking the why question at work usually = stepping on people's toes

Be careful, usually there is a VERY good reason why "things are the way they are".

 

[rudeguy]

not detailed at all

I sound exactly like dismissive guy when I'm talking to idiots who don't understand what is going on. I am not going to spend 3 hours explaining shit to someone who doesn't need to know the details.

If I'm working through something or explaining to someone who needs to know, then I will be as detailed as necessary. It sounds like you are bothering someone who has better things to do than explain shit that you don't understand.

 

[Sho'Nuff]

In my line of work the devil is in the details. So when I am training a junior associate I am ruthless when it comes to feedback. You have to sweat the little stuff or else you are going to pay the price in litigation.

As many in my field say, "nothing ruins a good patent litigation like poor patent prosecution."

For more senior folk I keep things high level, because I expect them to understand the benefits and risks of various approaches and to have already made a decision as to which approach is better in their circumstances.

That said, I strike a balance between written feedback and verbal, and lately have been focusing more or verbal. When I give written feedback it usually turns into an exercise where I am rewriting whatever work product I have been asked to review. That doesn't do anyone any good (especially when it comes to my billing efficiency).

 

[Newell Steamer]

not detailed at all

I sound exactly like dismissive guy when I'm talking to idiots who don't understand what is going on. I am not going to spend 3 hours explaining shit to someone who doesn't need to know the details.

If I'm working through something or explaining to someone who needs to know, then I will be as detailed as necessary. It sounds like you are bothering someone who has better things to do than explain shit that you don't understand.

Well, he doesn't understand either,.. but, you glossed that over,.. not surprised.

I sound exactly like dismissive guy

 

[rudeguy]

Well, he doesn't understand either,.. but, you glossed that over,.. not surprised.

I don't have to understand how every single process works. I have much more important things to do than try to micro manage someone else's job.

Keep thinking you are important though, I'm sure you bosses notice it.

 

[rcpratt]

You can't fix the process unless you understand the process. Time to go a Go-and-see of XYZ process.

 

[Markbnj]

Asking the why question at work usually = stepping on people's toes Be careful, usually there is a VERY good reason why "things are the way they are".

There may be very good reasons for why things are the way they are, but unless this is some sort of sensitive security issue there's no good reason for not explaining what the hell they are.

 

[Newell Steamer]

I don't have to understand how every single process works. I have much more important things to do than try to micro manage someone else's job.

Keep thinking you are important though, I'm sure you bosses notice it.

None of that is anywhere in my post,.. and, it had to come from somewhere.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection

 

[Newell Steamer]

There may be very good reasons for why things are the way they are, but unless this is some sort of sensitive security issue there's no good reason for not explaining what the hell they are.

This I can understand and certainly respect.

But, the impression that walked away with, it is more in line with what Vdubchaos said;

stepping on people's toes

I think someone told this dismissive dullard to just say 'no' without even understanding what and why. It feels political.