

On The Peltzman Effect In Team Work - porker
http://work.erikvold.com/thoughts/2013/08/12/on-the-peltzman-effect-in-team-work.html

======
porker
I post this because I strongly disagree with his premise. To me his favoured
environment sounds like working in a team without social skills, where ego and
pride drive team members.

Here's some choice quotes:

> In my opionin personal attacks are unproductive, but attacking ideas should
> be completely necessary in producing an effective team, which would be most
> capable of producing the highest quality products.

Disagreeing with ideas and developing them further yes, but going "Oh Tom's
had a good idea, let's shoot it down because it's not mine" \-- yeah that's
not what the author is saying, but nothing holds it one side of that line or
the other.

> If a member of a team feels no risk in submitting bad ideas to their team,
> then they will do so, because good ideas take more time to think through.
> However if a member of a team feels higher risk associated to submitting bad
> ideas, like having the idea publicly denounced, then they will think about
> it more, and produce a higher quality idea.

Or keep quiet, because nothing's good enough for the team to do anything but
criticize and shoot down, and there's enough aggro in life without generating
more on purpose.

> _In a team of people that are willing to say “No” pride is at risk, and in a
> team where people are concerned more about their pride than the productivity
> of the team_ someone that is willing to say “No” stands out, and risks being
> called a bad team-mate.

(italics mine). I disagree, I do not see the non-italicised section/conclusion
following on from the italicised text. I would call someone who is driven by
pride and up themselves a bad team-mate, who is not concerned about the
overall goal. Saying no from that motivation, which the article is arguing
for, is bad.

