107, RE: Re: generalizations
Posted by Stunna on Wed 31-Dec-69 07:00 PM
Your response seems vaguely like it's asking for a flame, but I'm giving it the benefit of the doubt.
>>> Your process for staff development is not good. > >So, you understand the process of staff development enough to >understand this? Which IMM were you again?
I can see a large number of people join the staff and quickly fail. I don't need intuitive knowledge from my experience as an imm, I have statistical evidence of a low success rate.
> >I apologize for sounding crass,
No offense taken.
but it annoys me to no end >when people have a certain level of expertise in field >A, and then just assume that this knowledge naturally >applies to B,C,D,....
Right now I currently have 4 paid employees and a volunteer staff of 14, not to mention vendors. All happily trucking along. I have had as many as 30 full time employees under me.
> >I could be completely wrong in any of my own assumptions, but >I would guess that making this CF thing like more like a >"professional project" for the folks who work on it would >probably sink it quicker than any thing else.
Not sure what to make of this... I think orginization will make any project more enjoyable. We can have a requirement that everyone work on an area pretty much by themselves for a period of multiple months, but we can't expect them to work on a team? I'm not sure I get what your saying.
|