[pensatoio]

That was a surprisingly direct and non-hostile directive. Wish my company communicated like this.

[Oarch]

I feel this every time I read an internal Zuck email.

I hope to be this clear and concise some day.

[tmpz22]

Step 1: Be a multi-billionaire from Harvard

Step 2: Have absolute control of the company

[wilg]

damn thats crazy he was a multibillionaire before creating facebook?

[CSMastermind]

No but he was when he wrote the memo they're commenting about.

[neilv]

Overall, the clarity and rationale of the email improves my impression of Zuckerberg.

I'm not a big fan of Facebook, but this sounds like he might be better to work with than the average tech industry executive.

Not knowing how they usually talk, I agree it's probably "non-hostile", but it might be a bit confrontational. And maybe that's appropriate for the situation.

[K0balt]

Yeah, I thought it was A pretty good example of how to say something strongly and directly without being hostile.

[fivre]

being politely hostile isn't not being hostile, it's just being hostile while maintaining decorum. there aren't meaningful consequences for a CEO breaking decorum in negotiations with those under them; maintaining it is just a nicety

while prior context is absent, at least in this email zuck isn't offering assistance or asking what he could do assist, it's just a politely-worded "get it done, fucker"

i find a servant leadership approach far more effective, and better able to acknowledge that said team problems were quite likely caused by previous "stop complaining and get it done" leadership whose only skill is cracking the whip

[K0balt]

I mean, it’s a bit beyond polite I think, and in the lack of proper context we have, get it done seems like enough to me. (I’m assuming he is speaking to someone who is supposed to have a capacity for management and leadership)

If the PM needs resources, she should just ask for them, in this situation. If a PM needs handholding or niceties to do their job, they probably shouldn’t be a PM.

Making sure priorities are clearly aligned seems like an appropriate conversation.

[K0balt]

On servant leadership, serving the greater good is the only legitimate form of leadership. But that doesn’t mean being servile to incompetence. That goes against the greater good. A leader defining what represents competence in this situation seems appropriate to me.

You can’t serve your way to success you are serving people with misaligned agendas or whom are not capable of doing their job. You serve the people who are serving the organisation. You don’t ask “what do you need” to a person who is apparently not even working on the same goals that the organisation needs to address. That is just fuelling the misguided path.

[malfist]

Did you read the headline or the actual email? This is definitely not non-hostile. He flat out says "I don't care about the team"

[exe34]

no, he said it wasn't his priority. his business isn't in building teams, it's in advertising.

I don't generally like people like him, but I don't think he's done anything wrong here . he was actually very clear about what he wanted, a great feature in a boss.

[Chance-Device]

He said he doesn’t care about fixing the team as a stand alone objective. Which is fine by me, because it’s probably a bullshit excuse for them not getting things done anyway.

[aag]

"Separately, I just don't understand why this app is so hard to build."

[cedws]

That doesn’t sound hostile to me, it sounds like an invitation for somebody to tell him why it’s harder than he thinks, or to get on with the job.