“Quietly with myself, I am talking ...” - reflections on the subconscious, communication and blogs (continued to Outsourcing - Russia)
Another cross post from my main blog ...
---------------------------------
It’s no secret that my article “<A class =" "href =" blogs.technet.com/eldar/archive/2007/06/11/1132670.aspx "mce_href =" / eldar / archive / 2007/06/11 / 1132670.aspx "> Outsourcing - Russia" caused a fair amount of comments, including objections. As far as possible, I responded to these comments right there, but recently they wrote me a more detailed letter, and they wrote it quite well - in a good language, in a holistic picture, and most importantly, they convey the attitude of those whom I called “fundamentalists” in that article.
So what are the charges against that article? The first is that I appeal not only to the consciousness, but also to the subconsciousness of the readers.
All this taken together, read in one gulp (for you write well), has a very strong effect on people with a lower level of “criticality” - your “implied” ideas penetrate into their subconsciousness without any conscious assessment and filtering.
')
For me, this is quite a wild accusation for one very simple reason: we, homo sapiens, always communicate at the subconscious level, sometimes even without communication at the level of consciousness. Imagine a subway car full of strangers. The usual thing, right? People are silent with stone impassive faces, do not come into contact with their eyes, but in the meantime their subconscious minds are actively communicating, assessing the overall situation, agreeing on the status of the parties and intentions.
This communication takes place during indirect communication through video, sound or text. For example, in my articles my subconscious chooses some words or expressions, and yours analyzes them and draws its own conclusions. To accuse a person of communication at the subconscious level is the same as accusing him of being a person.
In order to clarify how strange the charge is, I first wanted to say that a person who does not communicate at the subconscious level is disabled, but then I realized that I was wrong. A person who does not communicate at the subconscious level is dead. All information that falls on the level of consciousness has already been processed by various subconscious departments, evaluated by importance, sorted, analyzed, decomposed from “immediately report” to “compost heap”. Not a single bit of information gets into our consciousness without censoring the subconscious. There are even some parts of the brain that do this work. For example, at the base of the brain in the area of the most ancient part of it, at the very top of the spinal cord, where it passes into the brain, there is a thin film of neurons that performs a very interesting function: it makes decisions whether this or that signal is bad or good, and then extinguishes good signals and reinforces the bad. The logic is simple - enjoying a banana should not interfere with seeing the leopard in the bushes.
So I was essentially accused of being a man, but how framed! Immediately there is an image of a sinister hypnotist, forcing people to play under his tune ... By the way, manipulations of the subconscious really exist. For example, in the restructuring, the tense and angry look of the journalist Sorokina transmitted a sense of danger and discomfort to the whole country even when she spoke about the performances of the Grand Ballet. To whom and why it was necessary - the conversation is separate, but it is a fairly pure example of voluntary or involuntary manipulation of the subconscious of people.
So the subconscious manipulations are possible, only I do not do it. Let me explain why, maybe you will find such arguments convincing and decide not to do such things either. I work for Microsoft, which means that there are always a lot of smart people around me. People are smart enough to notice attempts to manipulate their subconscious. Guess from three times how it will affect my career? Communicating at the subconscious level and being aware of what is happening at this level is undoubtedly important, but manipulating another's subconscious mind is not just a big “No-no”, it is just silly, especially with smart people.
Well, well, but what if I, a sort of villain, on Microsoft, are white and fluffy, and you are manipulating. Is it possible? Not. I'm still not such a fool. If I do this, it will become a habit, and this habit may shoot later in the work environment. And most importantly, for what? What will I win if you become more attentive to customer requirements?
And then begins the criticism "point by point":
But in the second part of the “Firm”, in the third and fourth paragraphs, the implied limitation was included to its fullest, that “it’s impossible to work for money, you have to bend down and do what the client wants.”
Oh! Well this one of us refers to the subconscious? And which of us is manipulating them? The phrase is some kind of, linked to social status and slightly sexually tinged - a classic way of manipulating the interlocutor's subconscious. And already under this "left hook", the following is rolled up:
There are no reasons to act in the way these firms / programmers act.
Even without saying that this is not true - I described the reasons, I just didn’t respond very well about them - there is another method by which these people do not even deceive me, but themselves. And what are these "reasons"? If I smack something like this at the presentation to a manager of the third or fourth level, they will immediately ask me which ones exactly? And if I can not answer, they will remember me as a person inclined to empty exaggerations, that is, manipulations with the subconscious. So what, I want to ask, the reasons for doing not what the customer asks, not to test products, delay deadlines, etc.? But such reasons in the criticism, of course, are not delicately mentioned.
Well, well, let's try to present such reasons ourselves. Imagine a man walking through the eastern bazaar, he wants to buy apples. And around the traders vying offer peaches, pears, wormy and rotten apples, in general, what a person does not need. Is there a reason why traders offer not what a person needs? Yes there is. What is not needed is their product that they need to sell. But that's what's interesting, in the eastern bazaar or there in the Haymarket market, you can easily slip rotten apples, but in the western store do not. Shop what, stupid? Or can he sell the goods is not necessary? Yes, no, not stupid, and he needs to sell the goods, only the market is different, not the bazaar. And in this other market, other rules, in this other market, selling rotten apples as good ones is unprofitable.
And that was exactly what my article was about. Maybe someone is used to selling software in the eastern bazaar or there at the flea market in the form of pirated discs. In one of my visits to Russia, I bought about thirty disks with Soviet films that were not available in the United States at such a flea market (“Yunona” in Avtovo). Result? None of these CDs are on my shelf right now. There were discs with the wrong films that were announced on the cover, there were discs playable only on a computer and requiring installation of a codec, often with a virus or a “back door”, there were unreadable discs, there were just blank discs. And note, I was a chode, and not the seller, who made his own small money though. So in Russia at that time, the model of the eastern bazaar clearly worked.
The article was about something else. Here you have a little bazaar, you want to enter a new market. Big market. Rich market. And I know this market. I tell you how this market works, and what mistakes people from Russia and the CIS often make. Do you want to argue? Do you think that inside it is exactly arranged like a familiar eastern bazaar, and I just hide it maliciously from you? Do you think you can sell more empty disks?
Well, and a couple of petty charges:
Regarding lack of attention to aspects of platform independence, usability, etc. - nonsense. In the same way as there are programmers who will lick the base scheme in any conditions, there are others who, instead of the base, will lick the platform-independent or usability (of course, regardless of whether the client needs it :))
First, as rightly observed, "regardless of whether the client needs it." And secondly, the normal development of software usually requires attention in some proportion (determined by the customer’s priorities) to ALL these aspects, while the characters described above usually loop on one thing, losing other aspects. So I do not know what is the nonsense.
About the management. Another implicit assumption is being made that there can be no sense from “bright outstanding” programmers, as long as there is no manager who could cope with them. Those. with them it is necessary to "cope"! And again without a hint of possible alternatives and, naturally, without substantiating this idea.
There is just an inattentive reading of the article. First, yes, "fundamentalists" demand someone who would keep them in check. I have not yet seen a single software project with a number of participants of more than three people, where the fundamentalists, with all their positive contributions, would also not present a serious problem, often fairly exceeding their positive contribution. This is my experience, whether you like it or not. But most importantly, when I talked about the lack of a culture of management in Russia, I first of all spoke not about nurses with straitjackets. and about the management culture of the software development process and software development projects. And this is not just my opinion. This is what real customers on the American side are complaining about in Russia and the CIS. So again, I have nothing to do with it. Do not want - do not believe. Here - the baking sun, here - the Congo River, here - the crocodiles, bathe in health ...
Well, and finally, which is very logical, the conclusion:
But I consider ideas that it promotes to be harmful. And the method of promoting these ideas is dangerous. State these ideas openly, argue them - I will be only in favor. You have the right to your opinion, and to defend it. Just do it honestly, allow readers to critically evaluate your ideas and argue with them.
I outlined them, in my opinion, very openly. Well, here I tried again. But I do not want to argue with you at all. How I don't want to argue with someone about the multiplication table. Do not believe - do not. As they say in America, “ok, learn it a hard way.” Or as stated in the film “Aybolit-66” - “normal heroes always go around!” Your choice. I have something to do with it? Try to sell what the customer does not want. Do not forget that hundreds of thousands of cheaper Indians and Chinese breathe in your neck, not even counting the Canadians, Irish, Israelis, Romanians, Egyptians, and many companies from Russia and the CIS who have already reached . What to argue about? Act on the advice of an apprentice hunter from the “Ordinary Miracle”: “Let's go hunting, shoot a lot of game, and it will turn out that we are great, and they are scoundrels.” And it was no use to beat the water in a mortar.
---------------------------------
It’s no secret that my article “<A class =" "href =" blogs.technet.com/eldar/archive/2007/06/11/1132670.aspx "mce_href =" / eldar / archive / 2007/06/11 / 1132670.aspx "> Outsourcing - Russia" caused a fair amount of comments, including objections. As far as possible, I responded to these comments right there, but recently they wrote me a more detailed letter, and they wrote it quite well - in a good language, in a holistic picture, and most importantly, they convey the attitude of those whom I called “fundamentalists” in that article.
So what are the charges against that article? The first is that I appeal not only to the consciousness, but also to the subconsciousness of the readers.
All this taken together, read in one gulp (for you write well), has a very strong effect on people with a lower level of “criticality” - your “implied” ideas penetrate into their subconsciousness without any conscious assessment and filtering.
')
For me, this is quite a wild accusation for one very simple reason: we, homo sapiens, always communicate at the subconscious level, sometimes even without communication at the level of consciousness. Imagine a subway car full of strangers. The usual thing, right? People are silent with stone impassive faces, do not come into contact with their eyes, but in the meantime their subconscious minds are actively communicating, assessing the overall situation, agreeing on the status of the parties and intentions.
This communication takes place during indirect communication through video, sound or text. For example, in my articles my subconscious chooses some words or expressions, and yours analyzes them and draws its own conclusions. To accuse a person of communication at the subconscious level is the same as accusing him of being a person.
In order to clarify how strange the charge is, I first wanted to say that a person who does not communicate at the subconscious level is disabled, but then I realized that I was wrong. A person who does not communicate at the subconscious level is dead. All information that falls on the level of consciousness has already been processed by various subconscious departments, evaluated by importance, sorted, analyzed, decomposed from “immediately report” to “compost heap”. Not a single bit of information gets into our consciousness without censoring the subconscious. There are even some parts of the brain that do this work. For example, at the base of the brain in the area of the most ancient part of it, at the very top of the spinal cord, where it passes into the brain, there is a thin film of neurons that performs a very interesting function: it makes decisions whether this or that signal is bad or good, and then extinguishes good signals and reinforces the bad. The logic is simple - enjoying a banana should not interfere with seeing the leopard in the bushes.
So I was essentially accused of being a man, but how framed! Immediately there is an image of a sinister hypnotist, forcing people to play under his tune ... By the way, manipulations of the subconscious really exist. For example, in the restructuring, the tense and angry look of the journalist Sorokina transmitted a sense of danger and discomfort to the whole country even when she spoke about the performances of the Grand Ballet. To whom and why it was necessary - the conversation is separate, but it is a fairly pure example of voluntary or involuntary manipulation of the subconscious of people.
So the subconscious manipulations are possible, only I do not do it. Let me explain why, maybe you will find such arguments convincing and decide not to do such things either. I work for Microsoft, which means that there are always a lot of smart people around me. People are smart enough to notice attempts to manipulate their subconscious. Guess from three times how it will affect my career? Communicating at the subconscious level and being aware of what is happening at this level is undoubtedly important, but manipulating another's subconscious mind is not just a big “No-no”, it is just silly, especially with smart people.
Well, well, but what if I, a sort of villain, on Microsoft, are white and fluffy, and you are manipulating. Is it possible? Not. I'm still not such a fool. If I do this, it will become a habit, and this habit may shoot later in the work environment. And most importantly, for what? What will I win if you become more attentive to customer requirements?
And then begins the criticism "point by point":
But in the second part of the “Firm”, in the third and fourth paragraphs, the implied limitation was included to its fullest, that “it’s impossible to work for money, you have to bend down and do what the client wants.”
Oh! Well this one of us refers to the subconscious? And which of us is manipulating them? The phrase is some kind of, linked to social status and slightly sexually tinged - a classic way of manipulating the interlocutor's subconscious. And already under this "left hook", the following is rolled up:
There are no reasons to act in the way these firms / programmers act.
Even without saying that this is not true - I described the reasons, I just didn’t respond very well about them - there is another method by which these people do not even deceive me, but themselves. And what are these "reasons"? If I smack something like this at the presentation to a manager of the third or fourth level, they will immediately ask me which ones exactly? And if I can not answer, they will remember me as a person inclined to empty exaggerations, that is, manipulations with the subconscious. So what, I want to ask, the reasons for doing not what the customer asks, not to test products, delay deadlines, etc.? But such reasons in the criticism, of course, are not delicately mentioned.
Well, well, let's try to present such reasons ourselves. Imagine a man walking through the eastern bazaar, he wants to buy apples. And around the traders vying offer peaches, pears, wormy and rotten apples, in general, what a person does not need. Is there a reason why traders offer not what a person needs? Yes there is. What is not needed is their product that they need to sell. But that's what's interesting, in the eastern bazaar or there in the Haymarket market, you can easily slip rotten apples, but in the western store do not. Shop what, stupid? Or can he sell the goods is not necessary? Yes, no, not stupid, and he needs to sell the goods, only the market is different, not the bazaar. And in this other market, other rules, in this other market, selling rotten apples as good ones is unprofitable.
And that was exactly what my article was about. Maybe someone is used to selling software in the eastern bazaar or there at the flea market in the form of pirated discs. In one of my visits to Russia, I bought about thirty disks with Soviet films that were not available in the United States at such a flea market (“Yunona” in Avtovo). Result? None of these CDs are on my shelf right now. There were discs with the wrong films that were announced on the cover, there were discs playable only on a computer and requiring installation of a codec, often with a virus or a “back door”, there were unreadable discs, there were just blank discs. And note, I was a chode, and not the seller, who made his own small money though. So in Russia at that time, the model of the eastern bazaar clearly worked.
The article was about something else. Here you have a little bazaar, you want to enter a new market. Big market. Rich market. And I know this market. I tell you how this market works, and what mistakes people from Russia and the CIS often make. Do you want to argue? Do you think that inside it is exactly arranged like a familiar eastern bazaar, and I just hide it maliciously from you? Do you think you can sell more empty disks?
Well, and a couple of petty charges:
Regarding lack of attention to aspects of platform independence, usability, etc. - nonsense. In the same way as there are programmers who will lick the base scheme in any conditions, there are others who, instead of the base, will lick the platform-independent or usability (of course, regardless of whether the client needs it :))
First, as rightly observed, "regardless of whether the client needs it." And secondly, the normal development of software usually requires attention in some proportion (determined by the customer’s priorities) to ALL these aspects, while the characters described above usually loop on one thing, losing other aspects. So I do not know what is the nonsense.
About the management. Another implicit assumption is being made that there can be no sense from “bright outstanding” programmers, as long as there is no manager who could cope with them. Those. with them it is necessary to "cope"! And again without a hint of possible alternatives and, naturally, without substantiating this idea.
There is just an inattentive reading of the article. First, yes, "fundamentalists" demand someone who would keep them in check. I have not yet seen a single software project with a number of participants of more than three people, where the fundamentalists, with all their positive contributions, would also not present a serious problem, often fairly exceeding their positive contribution. This is my experience, whether you like it or not. But most importantly, when I talked about the lack of a culture of management in Russia, I first of all spoke not about nurses with straitjackets. and about the management culture of the software development process and software development projects. And this is not just my opinion. This is what real customers on the American side are complaining about in Russia and the CIS. So again, I have nothing to do with it. Do not want - do not believe. Here - the baking sun, here - the Congo River, here - the crocodiles, bathe in health ...
Well, and finally, which is very logical, the conclusion:
But I consider ideas that it promotes to be harmful. And the method of promoting these ideas is dangerous. State these ideas openly, argue them - I will be only in favor. You have the right to your opinion, and to defend it. Just do it honestly, allow readers to critically evaluate your ideas and argue with them.
I outlined them, in my opinion, very openly. Well, here I tried again. But I do not want to argue with you at all. How I don't want to argue with someone about the multiplication table. Do not believe - do not. As they say in America, “ok, learn it a hard way.” Or as stated in the film “Aybolit-66” - “normal heroes always go around!” Your choice. I have something to do with it? Try to sell what the customer does not want. Do not forget that hundreds of thousands of cheaper Indians and Chinese breathe in your neck, not even counting the Canadians, Irish, Israelis, Romanians, Egyptians, and many companies from Russia and the CIS who have already reached . What to argue about? Act on the advice of an apprentice hunter from the “Ordinary Miracle”: “Let's go hunting, shoot a lot of game, and it will turn out that we are great, and they are scoundrels.” And it was no use to beat the water in a mortar.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/13541/
All Articles