Billyspad Loc: The Philippines

The article here was on the BBC website and interested me as a fan of harsh reality and truth to get to where one wants to be whether its in a business context or in a learning environment. In a nutshell would a Steve Jobs character be better at commenting on posts, with a view to improving them, than someone with the philosophy of Ghandi.
Give me Steve Jobs but interested in the views of others should they wish to step forward.

http://www.bbc.com/capital/story/20160824-why-a-nice-boss-can-hurt-your-career

St3v3M Loc: 35,000 feet

It's an interesting article, and while I read though it, and understand the authors point of view, I agree and don't at the same.

A tree-hugger, as you say, is predictably too nice to be of value other than a curiosity and draw the media's attention to the tree, on the other-side though a tyrant leads by fear, manipulation, and an iron-fist crushing all that disobey, so ultimately there needs to be a balance, like all things in life. The key then is to be honest, say what you mean, lead by example, but above all treat people the way you want to be treated, ideally with the respect they deserve.

Respect begets respect, like all things a give and take, give respect and ask for it in return, for other than love, what-else do we really have? S-

rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA

From my experience, bosses who act as tyrants generally get less loyalty from their subordinates, and subordinates are less likely to "go the extra mile" in their tasks, as they view the boss not part of the team, but as an external entity to the team. There is usually much more infighting and backstabbing going on under a tyrant. The way I see it, an ideal boss should be firm, yet also fair and considerate. Never tyrannical.

Billyspad Loc: The Philippines

This does not really take account of the results driven individual St3v3M and for some a rough journey is worth the result. In the business world to really achieve one has to be results driven. Could Steve Jobs have built what he did in such a short space of time without being driven by a desire to succeed at all costs. You need to be selfish and disregard the feelings of others to reach the top of business or something such as sport which is totally results led. Nice guys do not win Im afraid. Working for a tyrant is fine if your compensated in your salary package and learning from a tyrant is also not a problem once you realize the process will be painful but quick. I have done both of the above but have a skin like a rhino so the treatment considered harsh by some had no effect on me. The boss/tutor and I had the same goal either to make lots of moola or be the best at at new skill.

winterrose Loc: Kyneton, Victoria, Australia

In the context of adult learning of which I have considerable experience as a student, and of which I have both university level training and experience as a trainer in the field, there is little to be gained by being “nice”.

Serious students don’t want nice, they want information.

They need to know what it is that is holding them back or preventing them from reaching their goals.

So if we apply this to the case we sometimes encounter here, where a member presents a picture with the genuine hope of receiving advice on improvement, one would expect the member to rightfully feel a level of disappointment if his post attracted only responses from people intent on fulfilling some oblique need to “be nice”.

There are of course those who put up pictures for reasons other than this, in which case any negative comment is seen as a direct insult, but these folks should not to be mistaken as being genuine seekers of improvement in their photography.

In short, truthfulness is only seen as tyranny by those who choose to shun it.

ebrunner Loc: New Jersey Shore

An interesting article, Billy. The focus of the article was the business world. I don't earn a living in that theater. I'm a school teacher. Every year I get a new crop of students and every year I let them know what my expectations are. I've found that there is no one approach that will allow my students to realize those expectations. Some students are absolutely opposed to harshness. They are used to it and good at ignoring harsh criticism. These students will not live up to my expectations if I use an approach that does not allow for success. In this case it is the teacher, not the student, who has failed.

A case in point is a student that I had in class last year. He refused to do homework and to participate in class. The more I pushed him, the more he dug in his heals. Finally I resorted to an approach where I would praise any effort and encourage wider participation. The result was a student who, for the most part, completed assignments and turned in work as expected. Despite his reluctance to do what was expected, my approach encouraged him to do the minimum and get rewarded for that. He passed the course with a very low average; but he did pass. (No I did not lower the bar to make sure he passed).

So, to keep this short, I believe that good leadership takes into account the individual personalities and abilities of the people you are leading. There is no such thing as "one size fits all". If good leadership is judged by getting results, then the onus is on the leader to find the approach that produces the results. That is why he/she is a leader and that is what defines him/her.

pfrancke Loc: cold Maine

I also wish to point out that in the business world, employees make a salary. They are paid to perform. I am purposely contrasting that environment with the FYC environment where ALL participants are present by choice and interest for a diverse set of reasons, none of which involve salary or product.

In an online world, good information, respect, and the all things that make community are key.

Frank2013 Loc: San Antonio, TX. & Milwaukee, WI.

Very well put Erich. We all should strive to find the way to motivate each other in a positive manner, when that involves a bit of negativity it should be without nastiness.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

I'm not sure what we "know" about Steve Jobs ... and how much of that is accurate, especially in later years, when he had little contact with "worker bees". The article showed his picture, but never mentioned him by name or attribute.

I'd point out that the article said "nice" is not the opposite of "tyrant"; I'd also say that "mean" is not the opposite of "nice". Personality is a multidimensional thing, with lots of choices/options. We had a recent demonstration here by someone, not a regular here, who is not nice but also not helpful.

My career alternated between my working as a software developer and my teaching computers/math at the college level. From those experiences, I am certain that one needs to earn a "hearing" before people will be truly influenced, and as others have already said here, showing respect for the other person is essential to getting them to truly listen and be influenced.

RichieC Loc: Adirondacks

Jobs was a brilliant idiot. He killed himself. His cancer was extremely treatable if he took action- only because they discovered it very very early - pancreatic cancer is as treatable as any other- and they discovered it by accident. God had given his sinking body a life boat, he decided he was smart enough to make it to the dock. The problem with that sort of cancer is usually when you develop symptoms, you are already almost dead from it. He'd be alive right now if he took proactive action. The point is , though he was effective, he was also fallible. His herbs and meditation did little to save his life. HE was a hero of mine though- I have spent a fortune with Apple- at work home and freelance. . And yep- you have to dance for him... and people did, and he had spectacular, genius vision.

Now tell me how your approach of totally insulting subjects bodies and other non-photographical comments have anything to do with Jobs technique... did he insult his workers wives or similar to prove his prowess?... Or did he lead and inspire them?

tdekany Loc: Oregon

According to some, he was a terrible narcissist. I'm sure he inspired many, but anyone "close to him" suffered dearly because of his lack of empathy. There are many studies out there with similar findings on bosses/CEOs - most of them test for sociopathy. You can't get to the top being a nice guy.

pfrancke Loc: cold Maine

Also... the person I am most interested in commenting on an image of mine, would be the one that was interested in the image. I would not presume that such a person was like Jobs, or like Ghandi. I don't have either of those expectations for my peers or friends. I don't have to pigeon hole my peers or friends to a specific pattern of behavior. I would want them to be themselves and to make their own choices.

You speak of honesty (harsh reality and truth)... why do you think Ghandi is not honest and Jobs is?

Edit -- I think Jobs says what he wants because he is extremely powerful -- I think Ghandi says what she wants, because she is extremely ethical.
Edit2 -- I think most would argue that Ghandi also got results -- and I don't know if she is "nice" or not, I imagine those that found her troublesome did not think that she was very nice.

rehess Loc: South Bend, Indiana, USA

Roughly 33 years ago I was half of the two that deadlocked a jury 10-2; like most members of the jury, I felt that the defendant was guilty, but I also felt the state had done a lousy job of proving their case. A young man on the jury said to me, "You could never judge anyone". He did not know that I had already signed a contract to leave my programming job in nearby Kokomo (*) and teach at his college. Fortunately for him, he was not a computer major, and I taught computer major courses only; otherwise he would have had a very good view of my ability to "judge" {for example, I had an "A" student furious at me because I graded papers for English, as well as for technical content}. The truth is that we should be able to focus on "facts", to encourage others to do better, but so often the critic denigrates the person rather than evaluates their work.

(*) U.S. members may recognize Kokomo from this week's news; a tornado flattened a Starbucks in Kokomo {that Starbucks was located in a mall I passed every day back when I was commuting to Kokomo}

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

The article itself says, "being tough doesn’t mean being offensive."

In lightstalking.com's "Shark Tank" forum, in which both you and Conkerwood participate, the stated purpose is "constructive, but negative criticism." Its etiquette rules include, "Always be polite. This is about being helpful, not nasty."

Showing respect, being polite, being constructive and helpful...these attributes are embraced by the majority of folks in FYC, and apparently even by a forum calling itself shark.

Linda From Maine Loc: Yakima, Washington

There is constructive feedback in FYC every single day that proves you can have both; the ideas are not mutually exclusive.