Maybe it’s just me, but I notice a difference in response from the author that I personally try to avoid. To me these two things:
> There are no docs for [this thing you're doing].
And:
> Coworker: I have (specific concern) about [thing you're doing]. I couldn't find anything about it in that group post or on the wiki.
Would receive a somewhat similar response. Sure it’s annoying when people can’t find something, or when they don’t bother looking, but we also work in a field where someone might ask you something in a very hostile sounding way simply because they aren’t very skilled socially.
Telling them “yes there is”, sort of escalates the conflict in my book and while it’s totally understandable (and I’ll do this myself on my less good days) it’s also just asking for things to go south. Which is something I have learned not to waste time on.
If they continue being hostile after you respond openly, helpful and defusing, then sure, they can go fuck themselves. Just be sure that you use the corporate-speak fuck you instead of what you actually want to say to keep your hands clean.
> Telling them “yes there is”, sort of escalates the conflict in my book and while it’s totally understandable (and I’ll do this myself on my less good days) it’s also just asking for things to go south. Which is something I have learned not to waste time on.
no kidding. if you're going to be that abrupt, then just send them a link to the docs as the sole response.
i usually also ask "where did you try looking for it, so that i can put links there?". and then i put links there.
> i usually also ask "where did you try looking for it, so that i can put links there?". and then i put links there.
This is a seriously helpful move. When I remember to, if it takes me a while to find a link I will go back to the first place I looked for it and then add a link there.
And similarly, if I forget the password to something, after going through the password reset process I set the new password to the first thing I tried to guess initially, since apparently that's the password I already have in my head.
Valid, but thats not the point of the article. The point of the article was broad vs specific and people having a predefined outcome for a conversation.
i.e.
Q: There are no docs for home page redesign.
A: They are right here
Q: I have question about the color choice of the header on home page redesign. I couldn't find anything about it in that group post or on the wiki.
A: Ah, yeah sorry, it is buried here. If it's still not clear, let's have a chat about it.
Yeah, but I think OC’s point is the first coworker isn’t impossible to deal with if you treat the first interaction with care.
If you get an off putting response, instead of hammering them with facts and trying to prove them wrong, maybe back up a minute and try to uncover what’s really going on.
Maybe you haven’t done your job on telling them why X is important to them or the company.
If I know how important something is, I don’t mind doing a little extra leg work to understand what you’re trying to tell me.
Personally it seems kind of rude to me to ask someone to review something that’s disjointed or missing info and expect them to search for the missing pieces. Most people I know are fairly busy at their jobs and you’re adding one more thing on their plate and you’re not even their boss.
If it’s really that important to you, take the time to communicate it to me clearly and simply. Otherwise, it’s like you’re passive aggressively asking me to do your work for you without giving me a good reason why I should stop what I’m doing and help you.
Again, this situation is when you ARE doing all of those things, treating the interaction with care, etc.
"Personally it seems kind of rude to me to ask someone to review something that’s disjointed or missing info and expect them to search for the missing pieces. Most people I know are fairly busy at their jobs and you’re adding one more thing on their plate and you’re not even their boss."
I feel like you're missing the point, this was just an example of someone who has taken a look and has a real question vs someone who hasn't looked at all. Of course, none of us are perfect and we will always miss things which means there will always be questions. This doesn't mean something is disjointed or missing info on purpose or maliciously. I would turn the table and say it's rude to come in, see a small mistake and assume the person didn't put effort into what they showed you.
Not saying that this doesn't happen, just saying the article was about a situation where the person DID put effort in and did their best and is having to say, essentially, "Here is the link to the documentation that is in the exact place that it is supposed to be that you chose to ignore"
> There are no docs for [this thing you're doing].
And:
> Coworker: I have (specific concern) about [thing you're doing]. I couldn't find anything about it in that group post or on the wiki.
Would receive a somewhat similar response. Sure it’s annoying when people can’t find something, or when they don’t bother looking, but we also work in a field where someone might ask you something in a very hostile sounding way simply because they aren’t very skilled socially.
Telling them “yes there is”, sort of escalates the conflict in my book and while it’s totally understandable (and I’ll do this myself on my less good days) it’s also just asking for things to go south. Which is something I have learned not to waste time on.
If they continue being hostile after you respond openly, helpful and defusing, then sure, they can go fuck themselves. Just be sure that you use the corporate-speak fuck you instead of what you actually want to say to keep your hands clean.