I am a little tired of the frequency of her appearance in life. It is difficult to express an opinion so as not to plunge into yet another attempt to find out if what was said was rude.
Simple rules
My first encounter with this concept took place in juniorism. The backend washed down the lousy API without discussing it with the application team. I sarcastically complained about the lack of confirmation from the iOS team. The backend mentor immediately sent an anonymous complaint about me to the corporate network.
With trembling knees, I came to a meeting with HR, whose task was to comb the students under the comb of corporate thinking. I remembered two things: Carnegieâs stuck book , about which later, and the phrase: âI donât see anything like this in correspondence, but you are a smart guy and you understand that someone can take it badly . â I did not understand.
This served as a starting point for complexes and changes. For some time I was afraid to write in chat rooms, then I began to try a little. Frightening was my inability to recognize this same mysterious toxicity neither in strangers nor in my words. I reread messages out loud before sending, but nothing helped. To my sincere misunderstanding of the joint and the request to chew, they answered "if you did not understand this yourself, then it will be difficult for you in life . "
Since then, I have accumulated a list of rules that help to always remain confident in the correctness of my communication style:
- Forbidden dot at the end of the message. Better emoji or brace
- Use memes / stickers / gifs to convey capacious thoughts (agree / doubt / admire). They create a positive anchor in the interlocutor.
- Undiluted criticism is prohibited. Greetings and thanks for the work done
- Replace the tone of command with the questions: âChangeâ -> âWhat do you think of such a change?â
- Take interest in matters unobtrusively, wish good luck, communicate not only about work
- If criticism cannot be avoided, specify that this is only your opinion. The introductory word âseemsâ is now your best friend. Never write to someone âno / forbidden / not necessaryâ
- Any words with negative connotations are forbidden, replace with the questions: âUselessâ -> âWhy do you think this will be useful to us?â , âUnreadableâ -> âCan we support this?â
Of course, this list can be replenished with more narrow rules. And everything would be fine, but ... I do not want to!
I do not want to waste my time searching for and observing unwritten communication standards in vain attempts to please everyone around. I do not like dancing with a tambourine, only that people pay attention to the essence of the replicas, and not to their emotional responses after reading them.
After all, I should not be friendly towards my colleagues. The norm expected minimum is neutrality. No way , understand? And if you manage to evoke pleasant emotions, make friends - this is a plus to me!
But in our time, the notorious is not strongly displaced in a positive area. The deformed presumption of non-toxicity reads: "you are rude unless you prove otherwise . " Why did this happen?
Western influence
Slavs are not pioneers in IT. The Americans have already visited there and established their own rules. English is rightfully the most important programming language. But no one agreed upon entering IT to change their culture to American. After all, a Chinese man who has learned English for work is not required to drink tea with milk?
I lived in the valley for 5 months and I can clearly see where this radical politeness came from. âHow are you?â Is an automatic greeting phrase. Robotic âSorryâ after a light touch of the sleeve. The soulless "Thank you so much" for a successful card payment in the store.
Why should every programmer accept this standard of communication? Maybe he is a priori better than Russian inhospitable mines? I can argue.
The words you say to everyone you come across are worthless. I want to apologize when I feel guilty. I love to thank people! But only when they did something nice, important to me. I donât feel like saying thank you to my colleagues for their work. Yes, I could do it, but I shouldn't.
And this is not "basic politeness . " Unspoken rules make me speak words that I do not mean. It is required of me to show the interlocutor feelings that I do not feel. Look like a man that I am not. And this is called hypocrisy .
On a foreign land, you must follow the rules set by the owner. But development is not the territory of any particular people, but a multinational community. And in our century of tolerance, we could recall that not everyone has a tradition of hiding the true meaning of phrases behind draperies of empty words.
The misconception âdo what you like, you will be successful like themâ played a role , and the American style of communication was assimilated by Russian companies. Outsourcing is afraid of losing important customers, therefore, in an ultimatum order, shoves a memo to employees "How not to anger Western colleagues . " Training sessions are held, incorrect communication is the reason for transfers from projects and low ratings to perfomance review .
Apotheosis
It would seem to someone that I simply could not communicate flexible scamped owl with whipped owl. Maybe so, but I have friends. I like people who are cute to me, drink beer with colleagues and make them laugh as jokes beyond what is permitted. I recognize the importance of communication. After all, it is it that creates the products, making the business successful. But how on earth did I do my best to try not to be who I am and deal with the same people.
Job
A story has recently occurred that demonstrates the apotheosis of a cultured courtesy culture .
I found out that colleague A has a discount that can be shared several times. They also told me that there is nothing wrong with a polite request to do this. Colleague A answered affably: âYes, of course, I will look later :)â . The next day, colleague B came up to me to sharply accuse me of writing A on his behalf. That is, colleague A, having kindly answered me, scolded colleague B for disclosing information. Naturally, I didnât answer anything anymore, smiling regularly in the kitchen.
This situation shows the main problem of hypocritical non-toxicity. People do not change inside. They only dutifully pull a smile and keep the shit in themselves, gibbering behind their backs . All this creates an unhealthy atmosphere of fear and uncertainty. If colleague A simply wrote ânoâ instead of the notorious âlater :)â , I would have forgotten about the refusal in an hour. But the outcome will be remembered forever, and this will affect my squeeze in the team.
People are not infected with passive aggression from the fact that someone sneezed nearby. This is what we get by suppressing the personality and imposing an unnatural social norm âsmile in any situationâ . Masked people play by the rules, but this does not reduce the number of conflicts. On the contrary, now they ripen in isolation, boil in their own juice. The lid of a healthy atmosphere jumps on the cauldron of seething passions.
Nonwork
Participating in open source seemed like a cool thing to me. Solve people's needs, do useful things for everyone. But I was just strangled by a non-toxic atmosphere. People in issues are interested in the health of children, wives, and consider this the norm , which must be met.
In response to objective feedback, he arrives: "I completely agree with Anton, but all this had to be said more politely . " That is, thank you for your work, take an interest in things and donât use the expression âdoesn't make any senseâ .
There is a type of people who are confident in their only possible understanding of politeness. This gives rise to numerous: "I actually do not care, just passed by and it seemed like you were toxic . " Such a comment automatically kills any controversy. After all, now you can refer to the toxicity of the opponent, deftly devaluing any further arguments . The stigma of rudeness burns with a fresh imprint and no one will find out if it really was.
Noting outright mistakes has also become almost toxic. At some point, I was so tired of correspondence on the topic âyou are incorrectly reviewing and generally delaying work, itâs rudeâ that I decided to simply blink without looking. Itâs easier to fix it later than an hour to think about messages.
By the way, I did read "The Secret to Communicating with People . " I recall with horror this collection of tips about flattery, hypocrisy, and manipulation through verbal tricks. If this is really the recommended way of behavior in IT, then it is better to immediately dismiss. I do not want to work in such a team.
Subjectivity
The main problem with an unwritten list of courtesy rules is the inability to check it. At any moment, someone may find the phrase âneeds workâ toxic, and nothing can be objected to this.
Usually the subjectivity of the utterance testifies against it. And the teapot in orbit should not be forgotten. But human thinking is flexible, so suddenly nothing needs to be proved on the issue of toxicity. The phrase "You are toxic, because it seems to me so" is an indisputable evidence.
I could make out specific cases in detail. But I wonât be for one simple reason: this, bitch, is subjective . Any message can be interpreted as toxic and non-toxic, to give any emotional color. In emoticons and gratitude you can see subtle trolling, in the ordinary question harassment . But to do this is not only not necessary, but also strictly prohibited.
A person cannot be offended, a person can be offended. There is no list of unforgivable curses, which in any circumstances are an insult. Or maybe you never write âoh you bitchâ chatting with friends?
No one around can know which associations will generate random words and expressions. For example, I hate complex proposals with the union âhowever,â and I consider them arrogantly arrogant. And you know what I do when someone writes me this? Maybe Iâm running to tell everyone about the disgusting act of toxicity? No, I realize that I have a distortion, I stop projecting my cockroaches on other people and pay attention to the essence of the text that has arrived.
Decision
How to systematize the rules that everyone forms based on his life experience? Hmm, do you know what? After all, programmers have already done this. Now every project has a linter. And all the discussions on the topic âit seems to me that I need two blank lines hereâ , â I think this indentation is wrongâ miraculously evaporated. After all, what is the point of arguing and inventing every day if regulatory rules can be introduced?
Moreover, the issue of toxicity has also been resolved by humanity. Hagakure and other codes permeate history. The modern version is code of conduct . But somewhere we turned the wrong way, because part of the signs of toxicity still floats in the air, supplemented and changed by clicking. Do not do like this. Just put all the rules in corporate google dock. Add examples, do not skimp on the explanation. I always lacked such a fundamental document that can resolve any subjective dispute.
Just donât need âPOLITALITY IS YOUR EDUCATION, MOM HAS TO LEARNâ . For a person born in a yurt, the habit of holding the door in front of a girl is not absorbed with mother's milk. An exaggerated example, but politeness is rigidly tied to the culture of the people, and it is foolish to expect one hundred percent coincidence in the thinking of people from different continents.
Do not think over what the interlocutor had in mind and compete in levels of irony . Read what is written. Stop hiding antipathy and swallow conflicts. One honest conversation can solve the whole situation and turn the attitude on the opposite.
Stop, passing by, evaluate the communication style of others, advise you to correct something. Because most likely you share your personal experience, not supported by an experiment. Everyone has such an experience, and, horrified, not one of them is true. It's like advising to bet on black, because you played five times.
Borderline cases of toxicity ( âI canât indicate a broken rule, but I felt somethingâ ) should always be allowed in favor of the accused. It's just to take and do nothing, if there is no way you can rationally explain what the interlocutor was rude to.
This is not even close to radical honesty , just communication without unnecessary scenery. You need to repair not the world around, but your perception. Just stop asking your neighbor to anticipate your moods. Start offering adequate communication without tinsel. Communication in which you are not afraid to send the next message without surrounding it with emoticons.
To view
If you, too, are tired of the endless verbal tinsel, fly to holivarit on Twitter . Announcements of new articles are also there!
Very soon, Uncle Baruch, who managed not to be exhausted in toxicity, will tell insights about the personal brand of the developer. Come see it!