> In public, you have to support the policies, but when you’re in private with your manager and your peers, that’s the time you can safely push for change.
They are actually advocating being two-faced as a form of leadership.
They are actually advocating being two-faced as a form of leadership.
2. If you are a dead-eyed shill for the company your employees won't trust you and you'll be an ineffective manager.
Calling this work dynamic being two faced puts the wrong tone on the behavior. It's more akin to leading a resistance cell in under an authoritarian regime. When the people above you demand unwavering unquestioning loyalty it's the best you can do.
It becomes two-faced if you actually agree with the higher ups but pretend you don't to your employees. Everyone, including your employees, understands the need to "we love Great Leader, so intelligent and wise" in public and won't judge you for it.
If you are actually against the policy and suspect a lot of people are too, then don't silence your employees by keeping their feedback isolated to 1:1s which you admit are ineffective.
Executives need clear feedback to avoid making major mistakes.
In all cases they have eventually just told me to shut up, no matter how diplomatic I try to be, and in some cases it has led to me being terminated
Feedback is just taken as a sign that you aren't aligned with their vision, so you have to go
I have approached management with stats, hard facts and level headed, calm discussions many times. It doesn't make a difference. Execs do not give a shit, unless you're also an exec, and they will pretty much always ignore anything you have to say. If you don't align with whatever idea they have at that moment, you're "not being a team player"
i'm asking because (in my experience) executives get hundreds of pieces of feedback and advice. they can't follow all of it, and so they have to prioritize, and their priorities might not overlap completely with those of ICs.
You need to have good reasons
> their priorities might not overlap completely with those of ICs
Then their ICs are fully reasonable to be pissed off
If a company's desires doesn't align with the desires of the workers, then there is a big problem imo