Sorry but I don't see a direct relation between "doing your work in isolation" and the productivity of a worker of any type.
Let us clarify something. One organization is a group of persons that use resources to achieve a common GOAL.
In a good management, the goals should be defined by measurable objectives. The organization need to define performance indicators and establish plans to achieve them.
Something that define a radical difference in the management culture is the position the management staff assumes regarding sharing those objectives.
The first and most common group is one in which the chief doesn't share its vision, and uses the subordinates like robots that perform basic tasks. In this case they have a complete confidence that they can be the magic glue that unifies all the work. They are the only ones that seem to generate new ideas of high value and everybody else should trust 100%. They trend to think about the process and indicators (that everybody should improve, verify and contribute to) like industrial secret and in case that some subordinate reach a better understanding and generate better ideas it is a menace for its position.
There are certain workers that didn't start to work in that organization. They might have difference experience and even more validation of the practice. They know what is a problem for everybody and they have only two choices:
1) preasure for improvement
2) go away
I hope that is not the case of the person you had in mind while writing this. Otherwise my advice is to thank them to stay abord and let them participate.
They're are two kind of critics. The constructive one and the destructive one. You can differentiate them because the former comes with solution proposals and the later comes in public at first time.
The second group of organizations is the one when everybody knows the global goals and objectives. They are measurables and everybody makes its effort to make his own tasks and use knowledge over the area of the others to prevent side effects or to add value to them.
Let me explain why: the complexity of a system is given by its requirements. The software engeneering provides the way to divide that complexity in entities of lower complexity (components, services, etc.) but the theory says that the inherent complexity can not be diminished. The simpler are the components the greater is the complexity of their relationships. The complexity moves to the relationships. And is the task of the manager to drive that growing relaltionships when integrating the work.
So it is better when everybody knows about the area that relates to them. At least the the leader is a superhero at can drive evety time more complexity during integration.
Those who complain, might be the red flashing alarm that means "the ship is sinking"
Sorry for the late reply, I'm traveling with my family and have little time.
Thanks for your comment. I'm glad for you if you ever found such a place.
I have mostly worked for big corporations and goals are not that much shared among people.
I could start from a theoretical point of view saying that owners, the board, the management, the employees have all different goals.
But I think it's more personal. I joined a team in the past where I already knew someone. A couple of days after I joined, he gave some briefing. "Look, A is already on the move looking for something else, B wants to become staff so he will work hard, C just wants to work as little as possible without getting noticed, D is waiting for his permanent visa then will probably move." Of course, management set us a common goal. Everyone nodded.
This is just one team, but none of my other experience gives me a more idealistic view on common goals.
After all, most people will go towards the smallest resistance in order to get paid and go home to friends/family/etc. at the end of the day.
And I guess it's fine. If you want better teams, you need better staffing(?) and/or automating more steps in your pipeline to make people deliver quality work. And you need to show example, because Virtue always has neighbors.
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Sorry but I don't see a direct relation between "doing your work in isolation" and the productivity of a worker of any type.
Let us clarify something. One organization is a group of persons that use resources to achieve a common GOAL.
In a good management, the goals should be defined by measurable objectives. The organization need to define performance indicators and establish plans to achieve them.
Something that define a radical difference in the management culture is the position the management staff assumes regarding sharing those objectives.
The first and most common group is one in which the chief doesn't share its vision, and uses the subordinates like robots that perform basic tasks. In this case they have a complete confidence that they can be the magic glue that unifies all the work. They are the only ones that seem to generate new ideas of high value and everybody else should trust 100%. They trend to think about the process and indicators (that everybody should improve, verify and contribute to) like industrial secret and in case that some subordinate reach a better understanding and generate better ideas it is a menace for its position.
There are certain workers that didn't start to work in that organization. They might have difference experience and even more validation of the practice. They know what is a problem for everybody and they have only two choices:
1) preasure for improvement
2) go away
I hope that is not the case of the person you had in mind while writing this. Otherwise my advice is to thank them to stay abord and let them participate.
They're are two kind of critics. The constructive one and the destructive one. You can differentiate them because the former comes with solution proposals and the later comes in public at first time.
The second group of organizations is the one when everybody knows the global goals and objectives. They are measurables and everybody makes its effort to make his own tasks and use knowledge over the area of the others to prevent side effects or to add value to them.
Let me explain why: the complexity of a system is given by its requirements. The software engeneering provides the way to divide that complexity in entities of lower complexity (components, services, etc.) but the theory says that the inherent complexity can not be diminished. The simpler are the components the greater is the complexity of their relationships. The complexity moves to the relationships. And is the task of the manager to drive that growing relaltionships when integrating the work.
So it is better when everybody knows about the area that relates to them. At least the the leader is a superhero at can drive evety time more complexity during integration.
Those who complain, might be the red flashing alarm that means "the ship is sinking"
Sorry for the late reply, I'm traveling with my family and have little time.
Thanks for your comment. I'm glad for you if you ever found such a place.
I have mostly worked for big corporations and goals are not that much shared among people.
I could start from a theoretical point of view saying that owners, the board, the management, the employees have all different goals.
But I think it's more personal. I joined a team in the past where I already knew someone. A couple of days after I joined, he gave some briefing. "Look, A is already on the move looking for something else, B wants to become staff so he will work hard, C just wants to work as little as possible without getting noticed, D is waiting for his permanent visa then will probably move." Of course, management set us a common goal. Everyone nodded.
This is just one team, but none of my other experience gives me a more idealistic view on common goals.
After all, most people will go towards the smallest resistance in order to get paid and go home to friends/family/etc. at the end of the day.
And I guess it's fine. If you want better teams, you need better staffing(?) and/or automating more steps in your pipeline to make people deliver quality work. And you need to show example, because Virtue always has neighbors.