| > Over generalized and inane comment. He/She clearly states that their progress was objective and benefitted the company. Which is utter bullshit. All progress is subjective. You can make up all the charts and numbers you like, but its not necessarily his / her job to decide on the priorities. Honestly, there's no real point developing metrics if you can't convince upper management that the metrics you've developed are in fact superior. Selling metrics is part of your job. It sounds to me like the anonymous github post assumed that everyone would agree with his/her math, and was pissed off that they didn't. Even if we _assume_ this "self-made" learner who couldn't work with PH.Ds or whatever did his/her math correctly... part of the job is indeed making sure everyone is on the same page and understands exactly what you're doing. Lets look at the github post. >> I am an autodidact (my formal education only tangentially describes what I can do), and a polymath (capable of holding my own amongst PhD-level Operations Researchers, Statisticians, Econometricians, Data Scientists, Computer Scientists, as well as Software Engineers). That is factually false. If he/she was truly holding his own against the other researchers, then upper management would trust his/her numbers and metrics. There's almost no point to "winning" hypothetical chatter debates by the water cooler. The important battle is convincing everyone else (such as upper management) |