The article is shortsighted. An employee accused management of knowing of the problem, in response management showed that the same employee participated in it and behaves in a hypocritical way. To make sure people can't jump into the same trap of discussing things which might create problems but not related to work itself - they ban those for discussion. The fact that a bunch of people left is fine, prob going to be better going forward with new people who'll focus on work.-+
I don't agree. When power is employed in the way Hansson employed it, the target is being deliberately shamed, and given no avenue for redemption or reconciliation. That's bad leadership.
Basically, the list was an example of human flaws, drawn up in foolish error rather than with malevolent intent. Conflating the foolish mistakes, flaws, and fragilities of the human condition with the intention to do harm to others is a serious problem, which is what I think Hansson was trying to illustrate in his response to the 'pyramid of hate' escalation. But his method of doing so was massively problematic, causing deep psychological harm to somebody he had power over, in order to reinforce his intellectual stance.
The final outcome of "ok, nobody is allowed to discuss this as it is too messy and fraught with tension for us to deal with" is deeply anti-human. Life and work are messy, with all kinds of interdependencies. Indeed, the desire to keep things "pure" and "perfectly in order" is arguably more contributory to an eventual stance of deliberately harming others than almost any other human conceit.
The article is shortsighted. An employee accused management of knowing of the problem, in response management showed that the same employee participated in it and behaves in a hypocritical way. To make sure people can't jump into the same trap of discussing things which might create problems but not related to work itself - they ban those for discussion. The fact that a bunch of people left is fine, prob going to be better going forward with new people who'll focus on work.-+
I don't agree. When power is employed in the way Hansson employed it, the target is being deliberately shamed, and given no avenue for redemption or reconciliation. That's bad leadership.
Basically, the list was an example of human flaws, drawn up in foolish error rather than with malevolent intent. Conflating the foolish mistakes, flaws, and fragilities of the human condition with the intention to do harm to others is a serious problem, which is what I think Hansson was trying to illustrate in his response to the 'pyramid of hate' escalation. But his method of doing so was massively problematic, causing deep psychological harm to somebody he had power over, in order to reinforce his intellectual stance.
The final outcome of "ok, nobody is allowed to discuss this as it is too messy and fraught with tension for us to deal with" is deeply anti-human. Life and work are messy, with all kinds of interdependencies. Indeed, the desire to keep things "pure" and "perfectly in order" is arguably more contributory to an eventual stance of deliberately harming others than almost any other human conceit.
Omits at least one significant part. For a better summary, see: https://www.platformer.news/p/-what-really-happened-at-basecamp.