Latent parasites
During the years of work as a CIO, among managers at various levels, he made one observation - an amusing difference in the approaches to setting tasks and monitoring their implementation.
There are normal, adequate formulation and control, which lead to the solution of the problem, move forward and improve the condition of the company.
And there are strange, funny, sometimes unpleasant ways that lead to an increase in the ChSV leader, the destruction of the team, the deterioration of the company, intrigues and civil strife.
')
What is the difference? Let's try to figure it out.
Imagine such a situation. A woman asks a man to fix a faucet (mixer) in the bathroom. The tap works, but when you open the water, it leaks a little. And puts the term - until the end of the week.
The man understands that the task is not very urgent and not at all important - the tap works, and most of the time is not leaking. The woman understands this, of course.
So, day passes by day. The man does not repair the tap. Most likely, I forgot about this problem.
What is important - the woman does not remind the man about the tap, does not even hint.
There is a deadline. Crane leaking. What does a woman do?
What will happen next?
Moreover, it will be so in the event that a man immediately after the first picture runs and repairs, even if it takes a minute.
Now - just the opposite.
A man sets his son a task - to clean the yard. Deadline - until the end of the week. Explains why this is important: if you remove the yard, we can play football, you yourself have long wanted. It adds motivation - you, he says, wanted to make a picnic with friends, fry kebabs. You understand, while the yard looks more like cattle, you cannot call friends, and when you clean it, I will help you organize, buy, prepare everything.
He mentions resources - if, he says, something is missing (tools, for example), immediately say, find or buy.
The next day, if things are not moving, the man comes up and asks how things are going. Whether everything is clear, maybe he changed his mind or disagrees with something, or he needs help.
When the son is already doing the cleaning of the territory, the man will definitely come, encourage, praise, help.
As a result, the task is likely to be completed ahead of time.
It is clear that the examples are very refined and exaggerated. It is also clear that on the spot the task director in both examples can be a man, a woman, a grandmother, and a brother.
The first approach is parasitic. The second approach is symbiotic.
We recall the school course of biology. Symbiosis is the mutually beneficial existence of two organisms. In our case, the manager and subordinate, or, more broadly, the employee and the company.
When an employee is taken into a company, the only true model of existence is assumed - a symbiosis. It seems to be the basis of everything. In life, of course, this is far away, and often, instead of symbiosis, slavery occurs, or, I apologize, pimps, as in bad French. Straight and say - "to sell an employee for six months" ď. But let's agree for the time being that we are good, the company is good, and everything will be fine.
Will, until on the way there will be no parasites. Parasitism is the opposite of the symbiosis of a phenomenon when one organism uses the resources of another, often causing damage to it. The parasite is concerned only with one thing - its survival, prosperity and reproduction.
Parasites are almost always carefully hidden - these are the conditions for their survival. Therefore, it is so difficult to get rid of them - even in order to learn about their presence, it is necessary to perform many unpleasant and time consuming actions. Yes, and dumb, ashamed adults to pass children's tests for parasites.
So it is in business. Only explicit parasites can be removed - for example, those who steal tape from a warehouse. Or from the toilet freshener (this is from real practice examples ď). Implicit, and the most harmful parasites are always in the shadows, and are able to disguise themselves as correct, living according to the principles of symbiosis.
A separate, special type of parasites is latent, i.e. not aware of their parasitism. Such people may sincerely believe that they are right and good, and honestly try to do their job as best as possible. But the parasitic nature of their approaches does not go anywhere, even being unconscious.
So, in our case, parasites are those who do not serve the goals of the company, the goals of their leader, the goals of common sense, the goals of society and the world. Only yours. But - at the expense of the company.
For consideration, we will take only one type of parasites - managers who set goals, guided by their own interests (as in the first example). We will deal with other parasites later.
So, back to our examples and the approaches expressed in them. We define them as:
⢠A symbiotic approach - set the task and manage the process so that the task is completed ;
⢠Parasitic approach - to set the task and manage the process so that the task is NOT completed .
With a symbiotic approach, everything is clear. And why does the parasitic behave this way? What is the purpose?
Everything is very simple. For a parasite, an unfulfilled task is more valuable than a completed one, because there is a âpayablesâ and, as a result, the possibility of manipulation.
This question already relates to the field of psychology of manipulators, which is very extensive and is not included in the scope of this publication. I will note only the main thing: the purpose of the manipulator is to obtain an object and a reason for manipulation. This goal is a parasite and pursues.
What is important: the reason for manipulation, i.e. unfulfilled task will live for very long. The parasite will seek to reuse this cause, reminding the object of a perfect mistake in order to prolong the dependence of the object and its own pleasure from manipulation.
That's it, enough about manipulators. We will look better at how parasitic and symbiotic approaches manifest themselves in management practice. And if you want, look at yourself in similar situations through the prism of these approaches.
Parasitic approach . Give a minimum of information, do not ask questions, especially leading. Do not give materials and links (he will ask when he will add, but it will be too late, bug). If he asks questions - answer âlook for yourselfâ, âyou are an expertâ, âwhat do I still have to teach you?â, Or simply âI donât knowâ, âI donât rememberâ.
Try to create a sense of guilt at the stage of setting the task.
Symbiotic approach . Explain the task with the knowledge of the contractor. To understand that the responsibility for understanding lies with the explanatory. To focus on moments, the complexity or importance of which at first glance is not obvious. Give all the materials that are at the moment.
Answer the questions. Ask leading questions to make sure that the person understood, and at the same time make his brain work.
Parasitic approach . Deadline must be. If there is no time limit, the moment of transition to manipulation is not clear.
The term should not be short, because this can provoke a person to go and do. âGo and doâ is evil for a parasitic approach. Procrastination is much better.
The current workload of a person can and should be taken into account in order to select a time interval in which the probability of completing the task is lower.
Symbiotic approach . The term is either short or none. Instead of the term - the strategy "as soon as possible." Even better - Scrum and sprints for control.
If necessary, quickly redraw the priorities of still outstanding tasks.
Parasitic approach . Either do not give resources, or give the wrong ones. It is better, of course, not to give, but to act as with questions when setting a task - to induce a feeling of guilt and inferiority. Hint or say bluntly that the intelligent artist himself will find all the resources.
Symbiotic approach . To give necessary and sufficient resources, within reasonable limits.
This, in my personal opinion, is the most interesting and characteristic.
Parasitic approach . Do not control the process. At all. Do not stutter about it. It is better not to intersect with a person at all.
Because - we remember the goal - we must make sure that the task is not completed. Or, at least, it is executed with delay, sometimes it is even better.
If you talk to a person, you will have to answer questions or ask them, to assist. Especially if the conversation takes place in the presence of outsiders, and among them will be people with a symbiotic approach and a higher position. Tritely may be suspected of incompetence, emotionality and moodiness. If such a situation has arisen - it is necessary to quickly say "let's meet separately and discuss."
Just waiting for the deadline, offended and on the carpet.
Symbiotic approach . Be sure to control the process - it is part of the system, regular management.
If the task is managed by deadlines, then split the execution period into control points and be interested in the state of affairs. The first point should be on the day after setting the task - you need to make sure that the person has correctly understood the task.
If the task is managed by Scrum, then everything will happen by itself - you can learn about the status of the task every day at the rally.
Parasitic approach . The possibility of postponement depends on business processes and, in general, the attitude in the company to postponement.
If the postponement is considered the norm and is not forbidden, but you can refuse - you must refuse.
If the postponement is considered something out of the ordinary, then you have to agree, struggling to pretend that this is a very, very big joint. The reason is the same - creating a sense of guilt. Even if he does everything perfectly, and in the new term he will keep it - the stigma is already in the gun, because there was a postponement, and the parasite showed leniency.
Symbiotic approach . If the task is managed by deadlines, then the transfer depends on the actual criticality of this term. Real criticality is checked by a simple formula: the term is critical, if after it the task can no longer be solved.
If the task is managed by Scrum, then the question of postponement seems to arise.
Parasitic approach . To accept results as formally as possible - technical task, functional requirements, specifications. Do not show positive emotions, even if you like the result. Even a task completed with quality and in time can be accepted in such a way as to induce in the performer a sense of guilt with his coldness, let him think that he did something wrong.
If there were shoals in the process, such as a delay or a postponement, then they must be mentioned with a phrase like "this is all, of course, wonderful, but, remember, you ...".
Symbiotic approach . Check the essence of the task, achieving the goal, ignoring unimportant little things.
Parasitic approach . Either do not give feedback, or give negative. Not to give is when everything was done qualitatively and on time. Feedback is ok or approved.
And if there were shoals, then you can write a whole essay. There is no positive, smoothing of corners, attempts to reach a constructive, or learn something from mistakes - even working with this person.
Symbiotic approach . Give quality feedback, even if the performer did not ask, because it is a useful exercise for both parties. Mention the shortcomings of the process in a positive connotation - as the experience gained in solving problems.
I listed the main points of application of parasitic and symbiotic approaches in management and tried to convey to you, as I saw them in my practice. Of course, there are much more points, but then, if you wish, you can simulate the behavior of the characters in different business situations in life.
Even better, if you observe yourself and others around you through the prism of the parasitic and symbiotic approaches.
If you decide to watch, then remind the master key, which helps to understand the state of the situation and the actions of a person:
⢠If a person performs actions that help solve the problem - this is a symbiotic approach;
⢠If a person performs actions that interfere with the solution of the problem - this is a parasitic approach;
⢠Well, the state of Z. If a person performs actions that can be described as âplaying his own gameâ or âpursuing some of his own goalsâ, then this is also a parasitic approach.
The most interesting thing about this practice is to watch yourself. If you see that you are acting within the framework of a parasitic approach, then you need to seriously talk with yourself - do I consciously do that? It is my choice? My choice is to be a parasite ? Because there is one nasty thing in your use of the parasitic approach.
A separate branch of the parasitic approach is the use not for manipulation, but for self-affirmation.
Manipulation, in general, is not such a bad thing. In some situations, it helps to achieve faster or, on the contrary, long-term results.
But self-affirmation at the expense of others - the action is negative, anyway. Moreover, for both sides. With a man by which you asserted yourself, everything is clear - he will be disgusting. And you will be fine, but not for long and not for real, because self-affirmation at the expense of others is an illusion. Your value in this world is determined by hundreds, thousands of metrics, and self-assertion makes a positive difference in one metric relative to one point. You are programmers, then you will find yourself what it costs to increase one variable in a complex power polynomial. No shit it's not worth it.
And here again the plug. If you believe in this illusion, then your actions on self-affirmation can be justified - just as they justify the behavior of schizophrenics. If you do not believe in an illusion, but continue to assert yourself, then you, unfortunately, are a douche. I am sure that this is not about you. This is about me - a man called me a few years ago with just such a word, who noticed that I was engaged in conscious self-assertion. For which I am still grateful to him.
What is the most disgusting in this filth - of all the people I have watched, it is most often found among programmers.
For example, an experienced person sets a task for an inexperienced person, guided by a parasitic approach. To set such a task is not difficult, especially taking advantage of the fact that the novice does not know the context - the subject area, new modules, client, legislation, project bottlenecks.
The inexperienced cannot cope with quality, time, or all at once. Or even the server laid.
The self-affirmation of the experienced happens automatically. How? Already guessed it, I guess.
Experienced would do better and faster. Everyone is sure of this, there is no doubt. An experienced person may not even say a single bad word if there are spectators and witnesses around. And everyone will come to the same conclusions, helping the experienced to become even a big shit or a schizophrenic.
It was enough to apply a symbiotic approach, and the result would be useful for all participants, including business.
I can not fail to mention another phenomenon that is quite massive in nature - steep managers. This is not a term invented by me, they call themselves that.
Cool managers formulate their approach in the following way: âset goals, mark deadlines, and grumble for non-fulfillmentâ (this is a quote).
This is a parasitic approach in almost pure form. I watched a lot of these guys. They are willing to hire, because they give the impression of a strong-willed, purposeful, result-oriented, without snot and unnecessary reasoning.
In the first months of their work, the positive impression only intensifies, since bad things happen, like those described above. A steep manager during this period often repeats the key phrase: âonly morons around, even if you do everything yourselfâ. The central filthy thought is constantly repeated and strengthened - a cool manager can do everything, the rest can do nothing. True, a cool manager does not try to do something himself, but it still does not matter. It simply sets tasks that people cannot handle. Deliberately, and with such a goal - to not cope. Why and why - you already know.
And then the plug. Either awareness will wake up from the higher-ranking ones, and they will see that the only achieved result is a disproportionately increased metric of âself-affirmationâ. Alas, this metric plays no role in assessing the state of a business. Fortunately, if during this period the business has seriously subsided according to normal indicators, then shit will fly out quickly and beautifully.
If awareness does not wake up, then a cool manager will sit down for a long time. It will reduce the activity of self-affirmation, and, most likely, will use a more refined parasitic approach - with the aim of manipulation.
Look, are there any tough managers in your environment? If you want, of course.
Finally, I mention: according to my observations, there is practically no place for a parasitic approach when working on Scrum.
In Scrum, there are simply no suitable roles and situations. There is no concept "to give someone a task." There is no âtask deadlineâ entity. There is no âpostponementâ. There is no boss who has the right to everything - just a flat structure with a distribution of roles. This is if we talk about pure Scrum.
BUT. Our Russian reality, with its fiction, has learned and in Scrum to find a place for parasites. This is not yet a mass phenomenon, but unpleasant tendencies are slipping.
For example, linking the motivation system to the volume of completed tasks in a sprint can provide a loophole for external parasites - a person will not strive for results, but to avoid guilt for a low KPI (you know who the guilt feeling is).
Another example is the substitution of roles for Scrum with traditional posts. The concept of flat teams very slowly enters the heads of traditional Russian management - they still need âone person from whom I will ask the dates and the resultâ. Well, tantrum. You understand how the appearance of such a person will affect the team.
Take care of Scrum if you still have it. And don't forget to sometimes re-read pages 54-55 of Jeff Sutherlandâs book.
The theme, as you see, will never be fully disclosed. Parasitic and symbiotic approach - these are principles, abstractions, philosophy - which can be understood and applied only in practice. And the practice is endless.
Finally - the most unpleasant. There are people with the essence of parasites, but there are few of them. There are people who a priori build a symbiosis around themselves, but there are even fewer such people. And those, and others approach - the property of the individual, a character trait. Well, the parasite man, and everywhere behaves just like that. These are bad movie characters. Not those in which girls fall in love, but those who are created as a complete antipode to the main character, and they are unpleasant to everyone. As worms, I apologize.
Most people do not have the parasite personality trait, but there is a parasitic approach at certain points in time. It happens that a person at one job was in symbiosis, switched to another - and became a parasite.
It happens that in the morning a person sets tasks so that they are completed, and in the evening - so as to get a reason for manipulation.
It happens that a person is in symbiosis with two colleagues, and parasitizes on three others.
Do you understand what I am doing? All, without exception, sometimes parasites. And you, and me, and they. When we parasitize consciously, we are the real Parasites, with a capital P.
When not aware - latent. This is the most unpleasant. It is embarrassing for this - true, only if you notice that you have a little âparasitizedâ. It is a shame not only in front of another person, but also in front of himself - we sincerely consider ourselves as good guys, and here it is. As an obsession found some kind of insanity. He knew that he could not cope, but still could not stop and set the task that way.
In order not to be a parasite, you need to maintain awareness as much as possible. Watch your motives and goals, your words and actions. Because the desire for self-assertion and manipulation sits deep and firmly in the subconscious, and can play a cruel joke with you at the most inopportune moment.
It is better to be master in your head.
There are normal, adequate formulation and control, which lead to the solution of the problem, move forward and improve the condition of the company.
And there are strange, funny, sometimes unpleasant ways that lead to an increase in the ChSV leader, the destruction of the team, the deterioration of the company, intrigues and civil strife.
')
What is the difference? Let's try to figure it out.
Imagine such a situation. A woman asks a man to fix a faucet (mixer) in the bathroom. The tap works, but when you open the water, it leaks a little. And puts the term - until the end of the week.
The man understands that the task is not very urgent and not at all important - the tap works, and most of the time is not leaking. The woman understands this, of course.
So, day passes by day. The man does not repair the tap. Most likely, I forgot about this problem.
What is important - the woman does not remind the man about the tap, does not even hint.
There is a deadline. Crane leaking. What does a woman do?
What will happen next?
Moreover, it will be so in the event that a man immediately after the first picture runs and repairs, even if it takes a minute.
Now - just the opposite.
A man sets his son a task - to clean the yard. Deadline - until the end of the week. Explains why this is important: if you remove the yard, we can play football, you yourself have long wanted. It adds motivation - you, he says, wanted to make a picnic with friends, fry kebabs. You understand, while the yard looks more like cattle, you cannot call friends, and when you clean it, I will help you organize, buy, prepare everything.
He mentions resources - if, he says, something is missing (tools, for example), immediately say, find or buy.
The next day, if things are not moving, the man comes up and asks how things are going. Whether everything is clear, maybe he changed his mind or disagrees with something, or he needs help.
When the son is already doing the cleaning of the territory, the man will definitely come, encourage, praise, help.
As a result, the task is likely to be completed ahead of time.
It is clear that the examples are very refined and exaggerated. It is also clear that on the spot the task director in both examples can be a man, a woman, a grandmother, and a brother.
The first approach is parasitic. The second approach is symbiotic.
We recall the school course of biology. Symbiosis is the mutually beneficial existence of two organisms. In our case, the manager and subordinate, or, more broadly, the employee and the company.
When an employee is taken into a company, the only true model of existence is assumed - a symbiosis. It seems to be the basis of everything. In life, of course, this is far away, and often, instead of symbiosis, slavery occurs, or, I apologize, pimps, as in bad French. Straight and say - "to sell an employee for six months" ď. But let's agree for the time being that we are good, the company is good, and everything will be fine.
Will, until on the way there will be no parasites. Parasitism is the opposite of the symbiosis of a phenomenon when one organism uses the resources of another, often causing damage to it. The parasite is concerned only with one thing - its survival, prosperity and reproduction.
Parasites are almost always carefully hidden - these are the conditions for their survival. Therefore, it is so difficult to get rid of them - even in order to learn about their presence, it is necessary to perform many unpleasant and time consuming actions. Yes, and dumb, ashamed adults to pass children's tests for parasites.
So it is in business. Only explicit parasites can be removed - for example, those who steal tape from a warehouse. Or from the toilet freshener (this is from real practice examples ď). Implicit, and the most harmful parasites are always in the shadows, and are able to disguise themselves as correct, living according to the principles of symbiosis.
A separate, special type of parasites is latent, i.e. not aware of their parasitism. Such people may sincerely believe that they are right and good, and honestly try to do their job as best as possible. But the parasitic nature of their approaches does not go anywhere, even being unconscious.
So, in our case, parasites are those who do not serve the goals of the company, the goals of their leader, the goals of common sense, the goals of society and the world. Only yours. But - at the expense of the company.
For consideration, we will take only one type of parasites - managers who set goals, guided by their own interests (as in the first example). We will deal with other parasites later.
So, back to our examples and the approaches expressed in them. We define them as:
⢠A symbiotic approach - set the task and manage the process so that the task is completed ;
⢠Parasitic approach - to set the task and manage the process so that the task is NOT completed .
With a symbiotic approach, everything is clear. And why does the parasitic behave this way? What is the purpose?
Everything is very simple. For a parasite, an unfulfilled task is more valuable than a completed one, because there is a âpayablesâ and, as a result, the possibility of manipulation.
This question already relates to the field of psychology of manipulators, which is very extensive and is not included in the scope of this publication. I will note only the main thing: the purpose of the manipulator is to obtain an object and a reason for manipulation. This goal is a parasite and pursues.
What is important: the reason for manipulation, i.e. unfulfilled task will live for very long. The parasite will seek to reuse this cause, reminding the object of a perfect mistake in order to prolong the dependence of the object and its own pleasure from manipulation.
That's it, enough about manipulators. We will look better at how parasitic and symbiotic approaches manifest themselves in management practice. And if you want, look at yourself in similar situations through the prism of these approaches.
Formulation of the problem
Parasitic approach . Give a minimum of information, do not ask questions, especially leading. Do not give materials and links (he will ask when he will add, but it will be too late, bug). If he asks questions - answer âlook for yourselfâ, âyou are an expertâ, âwhat do I still have to teach you?â, Or simply âI donât knowâ, âI donât rememberâ.
Try to create a sense of guilt at the stage of setting the task.
Symbiotic approach . Explain the task with the knowledge of the contractor. To understand that the responsibility for understanding lies with the explanatory. To focus on moments, the complexity or importance of which at first glance is not obvious. Give all the materials that are at the moment.
Answer the questions. Ask leading questions to make sure that the person understood, and at the same time make his brain work.
Deadline for solving the problem
Parasitic approach . Deadline must be. If there is no time limit, the moment of transition to manipulation is not clear.
The term should not be short, because this can provoke a person to go and do. âGo and doâ is evil for a parasitic approach. Procrastination is much better.
The current workload of a person can and should be taken into account in order to select a time interval in which the probability of completing the task is lower.
Symbiotic approach . The term is either short or none. Instead of the term - the strategy "as soon as possible." Even better - Scrum and sprints for control.
If necessary, quickly redraw the priorities of still outstanding tasks.
Resources
Parasitic approach . Either do not give resources, or give the wrong ones. It is better, of course, not to give, but to act as with questions when setting a task - to induce a feeling of guilt and inferiority. Hint or say bluntly that the intelligent artist himself will find all the resources.
Symbiotic approach . To give necessary and sufficient resources, within reasonable limits.
Process control
This, in my personal opinion, is the most interesting and characteristic.
Parasitic approach . Do not control the process. At all. Do not stutter about it. It is better not to intersect with a person at all.
Because - we remember the goal - we must make sure that the task is not completed. Or, at least, it is executed with delay, sometimes it is even better.
If you talk to a person, you will have to answer questions or ask them, to assist. Especially if the conversation takes place in the presence of outsiders, and among them will be people with a symbiotic approach and a higher position. Tritely may be suspected of incompetence, emotionality and moodiness. If such a situation has arisen - it is necessary to quickly say "let's meet separately and discuss."
Just waiting for the deadline, offended and on the carpet.
Symbiotic approach . Be sure to control the process - it is part of the system, regular management.
If the task is managed by deadlines, then split the execution period into control points and be interested in the state of affairs. The first point should be on the day after setting the task - you need to make sure that the person has correctly understood the task.
If the task is managed by Scrum, then everything will happen by itself - you can learn about the status of the task every day at the rally.
Postponement of execution
Parasitic approach . The possibility of postponement depends on business processes and, in general, the attitude in the company to postponement.
If the postponement is considered the norm and is not forbidden, but you can refuse - you must refuse.
If the postponement is considered something out of the ordinary, then you have to agree, struggling to pretend that this is a very, very big joint. The reason is the same - creating a sense of guilt. Even if he does everything perfectly, and in the new term he will keep it - the stigma is already in the gun, because there was a postponement, and the parasite showed leniency.
Symbiotic approach . If the task is managed by deadlines, then the transfer depends on the actual criticality of this term. Real criticality is checked by a simple formula: the term is critical, if after it the task can no longer be solved.
If the task is managed by Scrum, then the question of postponement seems to arise.
Acceptance of results
Parasitic approach . To accept results as formally as possible - technical task, functional requirements, specifications. Do not show positive emotions, even if you like the result. Even a task completed with quality and in time can be accepted in such a way as to induce in the performer a sense of guilt with his coldness, let him think that he did something wrong.
If there were shoals in the process, such as a delay or a postponement, then they must be mentioned with a phrase like "this is all, of course, wonderful, but, remember, you ...".
Symbiotic approach . Check the essence of the task, achieving the goal, ignoring unimportant little things.
Feedback
Parasitic approach . Either do not give feedback, or give negative. Not to give is when everything was done qualitatively and on time. Feedback is ok or approved.
And if there were shoals, then you can write a whole essay. There is no positive, smoothing of corners, attempts to reach a constructive, or learn something from mistakes - even working with this person.
Symbiotic approach . Give quality feedback, even if the performer did not ask, because it is a useful exercise for both parties. Mention the shortcomings of the process in a positive connotation - as the experience gained in solving problems.
Summary
I listed the main points of application of parasitic and symbiotic approaches in management and tried to convey to you, as I saw them in my practice. Of course, there are much more points, but then, if you wish, you can simulate the behavior of the characters in different business situations in life.
Even better, if you observe yourself and others around you through the prism of the parasitic and symbiotic approaches.
If you decide to watch, then remind the master key, which helps to understand the state of the situation and the actions of a person:
⢠If a person performs actions that help solve the problem - this is a symbiotic approach;
⢠If a person performs actions that interfere with the solution of the problem - this is a parasitic approach;
⢠Well, the state of Z. If a person performs actions that can be described as âplaying his own gameâ or âpursuing some of his own goalsâ, then this is also a parasitic approach.
The most interesting thing about this practice is to watch yourself. If you see that you are acting within the framework of a parasitic approach, then you need to seriously talk with yourself - do I consciously do that? It is my choice? My choice is to be a parasite ? Because there is one nasty thing in your use of the parasitic approach.
Muck
A separate branch of the parasitic approach is the use not for manipulation, but for self-affirmation.
Manipulation, in general, is not such a bad thing. In some situations, it helps to achieve faster or, on the contrary, long-term results.
But self-affirmation at the expense of others - the action is negative, anyway. Moreover, for both sides. With a man by which you asserted yourself, everything is clear - he will be disgusting. And you will be fine, but not for long and not for real, because self-affirmation at the expense of others is an illusion. Your value in this world is determined by hundreds, thousands of metrics, and self-assertion makes a positive difference in one metric relative to one point. You are programmers, then you will find yourself what it costs to increase one variable in a complex power polynomial. No shit it's not worth it.
And here again the plug. If you believe in this illusion, then your actions on self-affirmation can be justified - just as they justify the behavior of schizophrenics. If you do not believe in an illusion, but continue to assert yourself, then you, unfortunately, are a douche. I am sure that this is not about you. This is about me - a man called me a few years ago with just such a word, who noticed that I was engaged in conscious self-assertion. For which I am still grateful to him.
What is the most disgusting in this filth - of all the people I have watched, it is most often found among programmers.
For example, an experienced person sets a task for an inexperienced person, guided by a parasitic approach. To set such a task is not difficult, especially taking advantage of the fact that the novice does not know the context - the subject area, new modules, client, legislation, project bottlenecks.
The inexperienced cannot cope with quality, time, or all at once. Or even the server laid.
The self-affirmation of the experienced happens automatically. How? Already guessed it, I guess.
Experienced would do better and faster. Everyone is sure of this, there is no doubt. An experienced person may not even say a single bad word if there are spectators and witnesses around. And everyone will come to the same conclusions, helping the experienced to become even a big shit or a schizophrenic.
It was enough to apply a symbiotic approach, and the result would be useful for all participants, including business.
Cool managers
I can not fail to mention another phenomenon that is quite massive in nature - steep managers. This is not a term invented by me, they call themselves that.
Cool managers formulate their approach in the following way: âset goals, mark deadlines, and grumble for non-fulfillmentâ (this is a quote).
This is a parasitic approach in almost pure form. I watched a lot of these guys. They are willing to hire, because they give the impression of a strong-willed, purposeful, result-oriented, without snot and unnecessary reasoning.
In the first months of their work, the positive impression only intensifies, since bad things happen, like those described above. A steep manager during this period often repeats the key phrase: âonly morons around, even if you do everything yourselfâ. The central filthy thought is constantly repeated and strengthened - a cool manager can do everything, the rest can do nothing. True, a cool manager does not try to do something himself, but it still does not matter. It simply sets tasks that people cannot handle. Deliberately, and with such a goal - to not cope. Why and why - you already know.
And then the plug. Either awareness will wake up from the higher-ranking ones, and they will see that the only achieved result is a disproportionately increased metric of âself-affirmationâ. Alas, this metric plays no role in assessing the state of a business. Fortunately, if during this period the business has seriously subsided according to normal indicators, then shit will fly out quickly and beautifully.
If awareness does not wake up, then a cool manager will sit down for a long time. It will reduce the activity of self-affirmation, and, most likely, will use a more refined parasitic approach - with the aim of manipulation.
Look, are there any tough managers in your environment? If you want, of course.
Scrum
Finally, I mention: according to my observations, there is practically no place for a parasitic approach when working on Scrum.
In Scrum, there are simply no suitable roles and situations. There is no concept "to give someone a task." There is no âtask deadlineâ entity. There is no âpostponementâ. There is no boss who has the right to everything - just a flat structure with a distribution of roles. This is if we talk about pure Scrum.
BUT. Our Russian reality, with its fiction, has learned and in Scrum to find a place for parasites. This is not yet a mass phenomenon, but unpleasant tendencies are slipping.
For example, linking the motivation system to the volume of completed tasks in a sprint can provide a loophole for external parasites - a person will not strive for results, but to avoid guilt for a low KPI (you know who the guilt feeling is).
Another example is the substitution of roles for Scrum with traditional posts. The concept of flat teams very slowly enters the heads of traditional Russian management - they still need âone person from whom I will ask the dates and the resultâ. Well, tantrum. You understand how the appearance of such a person will affect the team.
Take care of Scrum if you still have it. And don't forget to sometimes re-read pages 54-55 of Jeff Sutherlandâs book.
PS
The theme, as you see, will never be fully disclosed. Parasitic and symbiotic approach - these are principles, abstractions, philosophy - which can be understood and applied only in practice. And the practice is endless.
Finally - the most unpleasant. There are people with the essence of parasites, but there are few of them. There are people who a priori build a symbiosis around themselves, but there are even fewer such people. And those, and others approach - the property of the individual, a character trait. Well, the parasite man, and everywhere behaves just like that. These are bad movie characters. Not those in which girls fall in love, but those who are created as a complete antipode to the main character, and they are unpleasant to everyone. As worms, I apologize.
Most people do not have the parasite personality trait, but there is a parasitic approach at certain points in time. It happens that a person at one job was in symbiosis, switched to another - and became a parasite.
It happens that in the morning a person sets tasks so that they are completed, and in the evening - so as to get a reason for manipulation.
It happens that a person is in symbiosis with two colleagues, and parasitizes on three others.
Do you understand what I am doing? All, without exception, sometimes parasites. And you, and me, and they. When we parasitize consciously, we are the real Parasites, with a capital P.
When not aware - latent. This is the most unpleasant. It is embarrassing for this - true, only if you notice that you have a little âparasitizedâ. It is a shame not only in front of another person, but also in front of himself - we sincerely consider ourselves as good guys, and here it is. As an obsession found some kind of insanity. He knew that he could not cope, but still could not stop and set the task that way.
In order not to be a parasite, you need to maintain awareness as much as possible. Watch your motives and goals, your words and actions. Because the desire for self-assertion and manipulation sits deep and firmly in the subconscious, and can play a cruel joke with you at the most inopportune moment.
It is better to be master in your head.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/343696/
All Articles