Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Promotions/Raises

Expand Messages
  • scrumnoob
    This is an interesting topic. Personally I have never found the Human Remains department that engaging or interested in anyting other than their own dogma.
    Message 1 of 111 , May 6, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      This is an interesting topic. Personally I have never found the Human Remains department that engaging or interested in anyting other than their own dogma.

      However, I have only worked in a couple of organisations where there has been a significant HR function.

      Has anyone managed to change HR process/atitude off the back of Scrum adoption? Interested in the stratagies and tactics that anyone has adopted.
    • Ilja Preuß
      I agree that one shouldn t. How does that connect to what I said? Confused, Ilja
      Message 111 of 111 , May 26, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        I agree that one shouldn't. How does that connect to what I said?

        Confused,

        Ilja

        2010/5/26, Paul Tiseo <paul_tiseo@...>:
        >
        > IMO, one should not confuse creativity/innovation with interdependent
        > work. The two are orthogonal.
        >
        > On 5/25/2010 10:15 AM, Ilja Preuß wrote:
        >>
        >> As far as I remember, the Pink talk argues against rewards for tasks
        >> that require creativity (and he actually points out that rewards can
        >> work well for tasks that don't).
        >>
        >> Whereas the research you are pointing to is about rewarding teams vs.
        >> rewarding individuals (vs. doing both). And in the context of, as far
        >> as I can tell, work that doesn't require a lot of creativity.
        >>
        >> Which doesn't render it invalid or uninteresting. I don't see how it
        >> shifts the picture, though.
        >>
        >> Cheers, Ilja
        >>
        >> 2010/5/25 Paul Tiseo <paul_tiseo@...
        >> <mailto:paul_tiseo@...>>
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >> The Pearsall reference. Beersma et al. I've posted it already,
        >> Yahoo has archived it, and we've debated it.
        >>
        >> I'm not sure why you and Ron seem to have so quickly and
        >> completely forgotten it already.
        >>
        >>
        >> On 5/25/2010 3:36 AM, Ilja Preuß wrote:
        >>>
        >>> Where can I read about that recent research?
        >>>
        >>> 2010/5/25 Paul Tiseo <paul_tiseo@...
        >>> <mailto:paul_tiseo@...>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>> Mark:
        >>>
        >>> Just go back to many of my previous emails on this thread,
        >>> and pick up some of the points I made and references I got
        >>> out of the literature. Pink quotes research about 3-5 years
        >>> old, which is better than most, but the picture *is*
        >>> shifting. Recent research is slightly center of left.
        >>>
        >>> _________________________________
        >>> *PAUL TISEO*
        >>> paul_tiseo@... <http://paul_tiseo@...>
        >>> (904) 382-5704 (cell)
        >>>
        >>> On 5/24/2010 5:32 PM, Mark Levison wrote:
        >>>>
        >>>>
        >>>>
        >>>> On Mon, May 24, 2010 at 4:32 PM, Paul Tiseo
        >>>> <paul_tiseo@... <mailto:paul_tiseo@...>> wrote:
        >>>>
        >>>> Thank you, Ron, for that simplified answer.
        >>>>
        >>>> So why not call out what oversimplifications you perceive.
        >>>>
        >>>> Cheers
        >>>> Mark
        >>>
        >>>
        >>>
        >>
        >> --
        >> _________________________________
        >> *PAUL TISEO*
        >> paul_tiseo@... <mailto:paul_tiseo@...>
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >
        > --
        > _________________________________
        > *PAUL TISEO*
        > paul_tiseo@...
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.