[luord]

The example given for negative feedback is kind of at odds with the point of the article itself.

Seems like, in that case, the managers themselves didn't communicate until they had to, and even though they were seeing a problem, they didn't communicate earlier. Now it's in the onus of the employee to give constant updates else he risks losing his job, even though he wasn't given constant updates from the other direction in the first place.

In general, the article seems to be saying "tell everything to the managers, make their jobs easier", and here I thought one of the responsibilities of management was making work easier for the employees.

Sure, communicate, but it should be in both directions.

[twoquestions]

> I thought one of the responsibilities of management was making work easier for the employees.

Every place I've worked, it's management's job to enforce status hierarchies on their subordinates, and making people's jobs easier is directly in conflict with that primary objective.

You may work in a different culture than I do though, the vast majority of work here no matter the industry is of the "no excuses" variety stated in the article.

[luord]

I've worked in pretty much the same kind of companies as you have and I completely agree with you.

I was being deliberately overly idealistic in my first comment (and it was perhaps a bit of a reassertion of how I would handle management in my hypothetical own company).