May 4, 2008 at AyTishniki and normal people. Communication problems.
I would like to raise a topic that, I am sure, will be relevant for many programmers, admins, and other IT brothers. It is no secret that mutual understanding between IT and non-IT professionals is achieved at the cost of tremendous effort on both sides . But even when it is reached, contact remains only superficial. If it is possible to exchange views in a language that is more or less clear to the interlocutors, then it is almost never possible to discuss problems - it is very far from completely understanding the interests of the other side. At least I have just these feelings from communicating with non-IT people :). The motives of both sides remain secret behind seven seals for the opposite side.
I think, in part, this can be blamed on the initial difference between the characters - it is known for certain thatpeople with a very definite mindset go to IT . A different internal world order, if you will. However, I tend to see the main reason in the habits and communication methods of IT people within the community. Given the youthfulness of the field of information technology, one can often meet fire in the eyes, maximalism in the blood and fanatical devotion to one's ideals - ideas for changing the world for the better. In this situation, it is not surprising that the discussion of new technologies, ideas or projects is quickly turning into a heated debate. Often in just a dumb holivar . Naturally, as in any other professional sphere, attempts are made to transfer professional habits, including not the best ones, to private life.
On one of these attempts, I got sleepy - having started discussing with one of the users the problem of perceiving error messages, I quickly forgot that I was talking with an ordinary person and, as it turned out later, asked a simple question “What is incomprehensible to you !?” in such a tone that the interlocutor lost his temper - he considered my tone inadmissible in a conversation. If you take the dormitory point of view - yes, maybe I got excited. But if you compare this with the heated debate about the architecture of a project, you can say that I talked without raising my voice a bit.
I have long noticed that everything is constructive ( from my point of view) discussions on professional topics are held in a heated debate mode - with active gestures, in raised tones. It always seemed normal to me - in such disputes I try to keep my head cold and the ability to perceive opponents' ideas, while actively testing these ideas for strength. I expect the same from opponents. It seems to me that this approach can effectively identify the weaknesses of new ideas and make it possible to generate a more or less tenacious option.
Problems begin when the interlocutor does not have experience in such discussions. If the interlocutor is hot, he quickly loses his temper and a constructive argument with elevated tones turns into a banal abuse. In another case, the dispute quickly stalls, and the interlocutor remains unpleasant aftertaste, possibly even insult. In any case, this approach turns out to be so unproductive that the phrase “better to chew than speak” recalls ,
I wonder - how is the discussion process with other IT people?Could my habits be the exception rather than the rule? Perhaps it is customary to discuss ideas in the entire civilized world not in such a harsh manner as I do, but in a softer one - over a cup of tea, pondering every word, with pleasure digesting the opponent’s ideas and imbued with their beauty? I would like to know what you think on this issue.
PS I tried to highlight the main thoughts with a bold - did not go too far?
I think, in part, this can be blamed on the initial difference between the characters - it is known for certain thatpeople with a very definite mindset go to IT . A different internal world order, if you will. However, I tend to see the main reason in the habits and communication methods of IT people within the community. Given the youthfulness of the field of information technology, one can often meet fire in the eyes, maximalism in the blood and fanatical devotion to one's ideals - ideas for changing the world for the better. In this situation, it is not surprising that the discussion of new technologies, ideas or projects is quickly turning into a heated debate. Often in just a dumb holivar . Naturally, as in any other professional sphere, attempts are made to transfer professional habits, including not the best ones, to private life.
On one of these attempts, I got sleepy - having started discussing with one of the users the problem of perceiving error messages, I quickly forgot that I was talking with an ordinary person and, as it turned out later, asked a simple question “What is incomprehensible to you !?” in such a tone that the interlocutor lost his temper - he considered my tone inadmissible in a conversation. If you take the dormitory point of view - yes, maybe I got excited. But if you compare this with the heated debate about the architecture of a project, you can say that I talked without raising my voice a bit.
I have long noticed that everything is constructive ( from my point of view) discussions on professional topics are held in a heated debate mode - with active gestures, in raised tones. It always seemed normal to me - in such disputes I try to keep my head cold and the ability to perceive opponents' ideas, while actively testing these ideas for strength. I expect the same from opponents. It seems to me that this approach can effectively identify the weaknesses of new ideas and make it possible to generate a more or less tenacious option.
Problems begin when the interlocutor does not have experience in such discussions. If the interlocutor is hot, he quickly loses his temper and a constructive argument with elevated tones turns into a banal abuse. In another case, the dispute quickly stalls, and the interlocutor remains unpleasant aftertaste, possibly even insult. In any case, this approach turns out to be so unproductive that the phrase “better to chew than speak” recalls ,
I wonder - how is the discussion process with other IT people?Could my habits be the exception rather than the rule? Perhaps it is customary to discuss ideas in the entire civilized world not in such a harsh manner as I do, but in a softer one - over a cup of tea, pondering every word, with pleasure digesting the opponent’s ideas and imbued with their beauty? I would like to know what you think on this issue.
PS I tried to highlight the main thoughts with a bold - did not go too far?