| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Trust and Zeal in Open Source Advocacy (O'ReillyNet)Trust and Zeal in Open Source Advocacy (O'ReillyNet)Posted Apr 23, 2005 7:51 UTC (Sat) by nurhussein (guest, #16226)Parent article: Trust and Zeal in Open Source Advocacy (O'ReillyNet)
Legitimizing the concept of community and the community-driven open source process partially involves trying to persuade the business culture that being competitive does not require having absolute control of the process, developers, and final product.
(Log in to post comments)
Trust and Zeal in Open Source Advocacy (O'ReillyNet) Posted Apr 25, 2005 17:55 UTC (Mon) by mchristensen (guest, #4955) [Link] "The more control-freak-inclined ones." -- I know this is an off the cuff remark, but it struck a nerve with me.
Forgive me if I am using this as an excuse to rant, but I think this is a very important theme for those who want to advocate anything.
Perhaps the folks you were talking to were actually control freeks, but playing the villain/victim game is very rarely helpful. In my experience it is better to ask yourself, what would make a reasonable person do what that manager did? What was she trying to accomplish? What assumptions about the world would lead a reasonable person to try to reach those goals by doing what she just did?
If you can think your way out of villainizing someone, you've taken the first and most important step to having a productive dialog with them.
Sometimes tech people do things wrong, sometimes managers get the wrong idea about what tech people should be doing, and sometimes lack of communication turns into poorly informed decision making on both sides. The only answer is better communication between the two groups, and villainizing management just makes that harder.
--Mark Ramm-Christensen
|
|
||||||||||||