Thursday, 3 January 2008

A Nice Day at the Office

The whole of Wednesday, reckoning the new year was quite nice at office. We had a nice session where my mentor did give me some useful ideas to improve things I was working on and review some of my skills. I really liked the time spent as it was most useful.

For the next part, I was most interested in an open-house where the management shared information on the last quarterly performance of the company both in numbers as well as inside. While many were asked to come up with their questions, I noticed that everyone was looking at the possibility of pointing out at issues that had not yet been taken up. The speaker had made sure that these issues will not be the point of (an endless) discussion in the most polite and acceptable fashion.

Everyone seemed intent to find fault with "decision making" or "policies" that had not been taken up. The trouble was no one (who was criticizing middle management as a blocker) was pro-actively fighting it out by getting things done by convincing the necessary people. As it was someone else's job function, they were hoping that it should have been done by those responsible and were unwilling to try it out themselves. I find that the environment does allow people to do things themselves at every level.

As each system is held back by some sort of inertia, the response time is a drastic factor in deciding whether a pro-active approach of changing things is really worth the while. It is unfortunate that people switch jobs hoping that another system with different inertial properties will help them. If one can't get something from the present outfit/establishment they are working/interacting with, they should at best sharpen their skills. These sharpened skillsets can help them change the system itself rather than require them to switch. This holds good unless there is something drastically wrong or factually impossible. Such cases are rare and occur when a system is at its end.

The grass is always greener on the other side. Many leave finding good pastures, but the one thing they might definitely find is a temporary change in compensation. For that switch; it would seem a reasonable thing. Better administration and management do not necessarily mean that they are superlative, they would still have their fallbacks. I find great opportunity in making something grow better, and the more latitude of growth it has, greater the offer.

I do agree that any system that disallows change is doomed to self-destruct. The environment constantly changes dictating everything that is part of it to react and change suitably. Nothing within the environment can reverse these tides of change. Changing the environment would require many systems or a large number of systems that are part of it to affect the environment in such a way (drawing similar analogy.)