Friend got laid off today due to insurgent on review. Is this the new way to fire people
7 replies (most recent on top)
Turn them into insoylent green
@b2+1jrk6tdfk Blind is leading the blind to the firing. Further insulating themselves and reinforcing the lack of accountability.
1-1 and you will be gone. Maybe 6 months maybe 12, super rare to hit 18 months as a 1-1.
Brain drain = alienation -> continued brain drain
Game theory first round you cooperate together
Second round you cooperate together
Third round you cooperate together
Fourth round you get betrayed
Fifth round you forgive
Sixth round you
Forgive
Seventh round you get betrayed
Eighth round you forgive
Vs first round you cooperate second round you cooperate third round you get betrayed fifth round you don’t cooperate sixth round you don’t cooperate seventh round you cooperate
Eight round you cooperate
Ninth round you cooperate
Brain gain
@ab+1jrk6tdfk we have words that are written the same yet mean two different things and we also have words that similarly mean the same thing yet written differently. Those words are dependent on context and without that nuance it is really difficult to have a ubiquitous dialogue on whether the reason that OPs friend was fired is due to something ongoing at ford, the individuals fault, managers fault, false accusation, legitimate reason for firing based on company needs etc.
Okay wait let me take this serious and share some cool stuff:
Functional question -> expand the picture -> my friend got laid off his job for insurgent on review - “what did it say?”
Clarification question -> there’s a word or phrase you don’t know -> you’re asking what does it mean -> some people know what the word quality means -> but what do other people mean by quality -> point is that all the description doesn’t change the picture -> if what they describe is a refrigerator, ask if it is a refrigerator once you get the picture so the person can confirm or change their perception
Implicit question -> something is implied -> “we got to market too late” what is implied by if we got to market with a sense of urgency? -> identify the implication -> ask a question to see if client agrees with the implications -> sometimes client doesn’t agree with themselves -> “if you got to market like russell Westbrook and his team using a good execution, would the performance gotten better”? Since that’s an implication and we now have a no or yes. -> make it really clear if the person agrees.
Discrepancy question -> Sometimes people contradict themselves, picture the whole thing and maybe 10-20 minutes later it totally contradicts when we have the picture. -> “This past year was a great year, reoccurring subscriptions were down”. -> Last year was a great year, but reoccurring subscriptions were down? -> Did I say last year reoccurring subscriptions were down? I mean x or y or there's an explanation that we don't have to explain discrepancy. -> How come was it a great year? Because we got an exposure to a problem in Michigan that we can all learn from and be better.
Underlying Structure, what's true and what's not. Sometimes a person doesn't have the underlying questions to go over what we do have. Keep it internally focused on the information that the person has provided you with. Otherwise, the context might collapse.
Fired for insufficient, insurgent, and insubordinate. Many such cases.
Elaborate on insurgent on review?