|
|
|
|
|
by 5trokerac3
2682 days ago
|
|
As someone proclaiming that "manners are oil for bodies at friction", the ridiculousness of your rudeness is only surpassed by the unbelievable strawman you just set up. blue1379 brings up some very valid questions. If a snobbish, but highly talented employee builds toolkits/engines that double or triple the production of the average employee, does the same equation used in the study apply? On the other hand, what constitutes a "non-toxic" employee? Does everybody's buddy who convinces half the team that 2-5pm is ping pong and beer time not disproportionately decrease productivity? He's asking for more nuance, which is never a bad thing. You seem to be demanding that things stay binary. |
|
That person is not 'toxic' because the qualifier is that they have trained their coworkers on the frameworks they created, thus they actually get along.
I think the toxic version would be making statements like, "I spend all my time building frameworks that if my coworkers used them, would double their productivity, but they're obviously too stupid to understand. The more I hear their silly questions on how to use it, the more I realize how f'd hiring is around here that these people are 'coworkers'. So please, I give up, I'll use my frameworks and I'll be 8x more productive than them, just make them leave me alone so I can work."