The World Beyond BetterMost > Women Today
Here we go again - after the revolution - women pushed back into the kitchen
serious crayons:
--- Quote from: milomorris on March 17, 2011, 09:28:00 pm ---BWAAAHAAAHAAHAAHAAAA!!!
This is just too ironic. These "heroes" are finally starting to show their true colors.
I wonder what other little surprises the lauded new Egypt will have in store??
--- End quote ---
--- Quote from: milomorris on March 18, 2011, 03:37:19 pm ---Many male institutions come with an element of testing the mettle of their new male members. If women want to join, they should expect the same treatment.
--- End quote ---
That's strange. These both appear to have been posted by the same person.
milomorris:
--- Quote from: Buffymon on March 18, 2011, 06:11:15 pm --- In most work places they can achieve compatability without silly games. So no, I don´t think we should.
--- End quote ---
So let me get this right..
A = the personal whims, and private intuitions of a hiring manager at a corporation which are applied to your suitability for employment before you're hired.
vs.
B = out-in-the-open testing of one's character and personality by your peers after you have already secured the job.
Me? I'd much rather put up with the group games of my colleagues than the personal voodoo of the hiring manager. Why? Because I can win a game. With voodoo, the witchdoctor is in control.
iYou can call these games "silly" all you want. But you fail to recognize the benefits that play can bring to a company. When I was at Verizon, the annual meeting always included at least a half day of team-building exercises. The coaches were from institutions of higher learnng such as Cornell, George Washington University, and Penn State. These were games designed to encourage teamwork, critical analysis of our peers, and praise of each others' efforts.
You can call these things "silly" if you want to, but that illustrates how out of step you are with both the business and academic communities on this topic.
milomorris:
--- Quote from: crayonlicious on March 19, 2011, 12:27:24 am ---That's strange. These both appear to have been posted by the same person.
--- End quote ---
That "same person" would be me. What's the problem?
Brown Eyes:
^I think K was trying to point out that your reaction to the situation in the two different posts seems to reveal a contradiction.
K, please correct me if I'm mistaken in what you were trying to illustrate.
Monika:
--- Quote from: milomorris on March 19, 2011, 12:31:12 am ---So let me get this right..
A = the personal whims, and private intuitions of a hiring manager at a corporation which are applied to your suitability for employment before you're hired.
vs.
B = out-in-the-open testing of one's character and personality by your peers after you have already secured the job.
Me? I'd much rather put up with the group games of my colleagues than the personal voodoo of the hiring manager. Why? Because I can win a game. With voodoo, the witchdoctor is in control.
iYou can call these games "silly" all you want. But you fail to recognize the benefits that play can bring to a company. When I was at Verizon, the annual meeting always included at least a half day of team-building exercises. The coaches were from institutions of higher learnng such as Cornell, George Washington University, and Penn State. These were games designed to encourage teamwork, critical analysis of our peers, and praise of each others' efforts.
You can call these things "silly" if you want to, but that illustrates how out of step you are with both the business and academic communities on this topic.
--- End quote ---
Team building efforts can come in many shapes or forms. My experience is though, that with good leadership it´s not neccessary. And if you need more, doing things together outside of work can do the trick and not any "gauntlets". I mean, next time, why don´t you just whip out your willies and a meassure tape and get it over with?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version