Nothing kills motivation more than bad management, I can totally feel his pain.
In saying that, I don't think public, targeted statements like this are ever the right thing to do. She's just a person, doing a job.
In saying that, I don't think public, targeted statements like this are ever the right thing to do. She's just a person, doing a job.
As a previous believer in this, I now strongly disagree. (even if I am too chicken to do it myself)
Tech nerds are usually nice and non-confrontational people. They get exploited to high heaven by those who are effective at navigating low-visibility & grey-area political spaces. When an org, leader, employee or associate taints every single private avenue for criticism, you are left without much recourse.
People quit bad managers. But bad managers are often amazing as appearing amazing. As long as management has zero accountability within the org structure, sub-optimal signals like these must do.
> Those who make private criticism impossible will make public tirades inevitable
- John F. Kennedy reincarnated in 2023
I think it's in very bad taste in this case.
With her budget, just her org is effectively bigger than the biggest tech company in most countries of the world. At that point upper leadership is not allowed to differentiate between private and public life. Public criticism is private criticism and vice-versa. It's likely a testament to her achievements that she has earned an enviable? level of success that makes public criticism acceptable.
> in particular some rather ugly people who in particular get especially unhinged on the topic of women in tech at Google, etc.
That being said I do agree with your point. With those risks in mind, I still think it should be socially permissible to make this kind of post.
> I think it's in very bad taste in this case.
I thought it was done as well as one could. I know the west coast prides itself for its 'niceness', but in a lot of parts of USA, plain expression of dislike is considered in better taste than the kind of passive aggressiveness that would result from softening the poster's language. It was meant to be a targeted question at her competence. Just because she is one of many incompetent people at the helm at Google, doesn't invalidate the poster's experience.
The anecdotal optics might be bad. But I for one rely on Occam's razor before jumping to conclusions about racial/gender angles in everything.
I also don't have enough information to say she's "not" a bad person, but with the information given, I don't see anything that would indicate she is one.
There's more to life and a person than a job. That's all. Even the worst managers I've had have been good people. They're good dads and mums, enjoy hiking and camping.
Public statements like this one are easy to make, impossible to verify or challenge, and only cause hurt
And no, public statements can make you a public target. These are not easy to make.
And what’s wrong with that, if that’s their honest and informed impression?
So, in that vein, I think I'd hesitate to publicly embarrass someone merely for being bad at a job, since that crosses over to affecting their personal life. If someone asked me about that person in a professional context (to make a hiring decision, for example), I'd be frank about their weaknesses. But I don't think the whole world has to know about it.