职业与工作方法jvns.ca
同事做得出色时，告诉他们的经理
When your coworker does great work, tell their manager
2020 — 2023，它一次次回到首页
黑点是上首页（≥ 50 分）的那次投稿，空心点是没冲上去的投稿，点越大分数越高。
导读
Julia Evans 的博客文章：当同事做出优秀的工作时，应该主动告诉他们的经理。文章讨论了这么做的价值，也给出实操建议——比如先征得对方同意，因为不是所有人都喜欢被公开表扬，或者不希望自己的上级知道自己在职责范围外帮了别人。
为什么经久不衰：它把一句简单可执行的职场建议讲透了，同时又诚实讨论了绩效制度和人际政治带来的副作用，多年后读仍然实用。
HN 评论精选
强制排名把同事变成零和竞争者，反而扼杀了互相称赞的动机。
这是堆叠排名（stack ranking）最大的问题。我在一家知名软件公司被迫经历过这套制度，它只会制造零和博弈，让我完全没有动力去称赞别人——我必须确保自己的排名尽可能高，绩效评估期非常煎熬。即使我是高绩效者也很痛苦，因为它无法营造我想要的协作型环境。我还听 Facebook 的朋友说那里同样疯狂：大家都知道绩效评估基于粗糙的统计数字，于是就去刷这些数字，比如每次有人约会议，就期待对方回一句“谢谢”，而这本身就是绩效指标之一；评论数也能靠发一句“+1!”刷上去。
ping_pong查看英文原文
This is the biggest problem with stack ranking software engineers, the practice I had to endure while at a well known software company. All it does is create a zero-sum game, so I have no incentive to compliment anyone else. I needed to make sure that my rank was as high as I could make it, which really sucked during performance time. It was very stressful, even though I was a high performer, because it didn't foster the type of environment I wanted to work at, which is collaborative. I heard from my friends at Facebook that the environment there is equally crazy. Everyone knows that the performance reviews are based on lazy stats, so they game the stats. Every time someone requests a meeting, they are expected to give a "thank you" which is one of the measures for performance. Also, things like the number of reviews commented on could be easily gamed by adding a "+1!" as a comment which sounds like another undesirable place to work at. Maybe current Facebook employees can comment, however.
口碑也能用来毁人；依赖“听说”的管理者暴露了绩效评估的脆弱。
反过来说，如果你想毁掉某人的职业生涯，就在他经理面前说他坏话。我在多家公司工作过，发现经理对下属的评价极其容易被“道听途说”左右，无论好坏。曾有另一个团队的几个人因为我做的一个产品决策与他们意见相左，跑去向我经理抱怨我不合作、不是团队型选手。为了避免被开除，我只好请其他团队的许多同事（如实）向我经理说明我干得不错——居然奏效了，按他的说法我在短短几周内就“彻底改观”了。归根结底这完全是政治，一个糟糕的经理根本不知道如何直接评估我的工作，只能依赖他“听到的”东西。我尽快辞职去了更好的地方。所以是的，同事干得好就告诉他们经理，但我们必须依赖这种方式本身就很糟糕，而不是靠能直接评估工作的经理。
crazygringo查看英文原文
The flip side of this is, if you want to sink someone's career, badmouth them to their manager. Having worked at many companies, I've observed how shockingly easy it is for a manager's assessment of their reports to be colored by "hearsay" whether good or bad. I once had several members of another team who deeply disgreed with a product decision I'd made complain to my manager that I was being uncooperative, not a team player, etc. To avoid getting fired, I had to ask a bunch of members of various other teams to (honestly) tell my manager what a good job I was doing. Which worked -- according to him I'd really "turned things around" in the space of just a couple weeks (!). In the end it was 100% political, a bad manager who had no idea how to actually assess my work for what it was and so relied entirely on what he was "hearing", and I quit as soon as I could for a better job. So yes, tell someone's manager when they're doing a great job. But it sucks that we have to rely on this stuff at all, rather than managers who can actually assess your work directly.
同行表彰制度容易变成刷曝光和政治作秀，反而伤害踏实做事的人。
Google 有内部同行奖金和致谢的文化，某种程度上很好，本意也是为了解决这类问题——但它也催生了内部“恭喜！”“感谢你的出色工作！”的百人长贴，常常忽略项目上的其他贡献者，或者被过于政治化的经理利用来给自手下和项目造势、争取公司曝光。被埋没的是那种做不起眼的增量工作的职业精神，以及经理和身边人“做好本职工作”去认可它。许多公司的绩效流程、同行奖金等只是把这一点糊弄过去，并且间接或直接鼓励“追逐名声”的行为——我认为这是对公司长期绩效和利润最具腐蚀性的东西。
cmrdporcupine查看英文原文
Google has a culture of internal peer bonuses and kudos, which in some ways is great and meant to help with this kind of thing... except that it also leads to an internal culture of "congrats!" and "thank you for your amazing work!" centi-threads which often overlook other contributors on a project, or are used strategically by overly political managers to boost their own reports and projects and gain corporate visibility for them. Lost in this is just the work ethic of doing incremental non-glamorous work and managers and people around you _doing their job_ by recognizing it. Many corporate perf processes, peer bonuses, and so on simply smudge this over, and they indirectly or directly encourage _fame seeking behaviour_ which is in my opinion the most corrosive thing to a company's long term performance and bottom line.
赞美也可能被武器化，用来贬低或暗示自己有功，措辞需谨慎。
我一直很喜欢读她的文章，她一定是个很出色的同事。我也发现有些人是“武器化赞美”的高手：他们能给出既是恭维又是侮辱或攻击的赞美。比如对一份明显有问题的图形素材说：“真好，你把边缘做得多粗糙啊。”还有“我一直跟 Bob 说你在这方面有多厉害”——这是“窃取功劳”式的赞美，暗示没有他们的帮助你就做不到。有些情况下这完全是无心的，所以我们确实需要仔细斟酌自己的赞美。
ChrisMarshallNY查看英文原文
I always enjoy reading her posts. She must be an outstanding coworker. I have also found that some people are experts at "weaponized compliments." They can give a compliment that is an insult, or an attack. "That's great, how you roughened the edges." when talking about a graphic asset with obvious mistakes. "I always told Bob how great you are, at that." This is the "stolen valor" compliment. It insinuates that you could not have done it without their help. etc. In some cases, it's completely accidental, so we need to think carefully about our compliment.
历次讨论
同类还值得读
用十年时间自学编程（1998）
Teach Yourself Programming in Ten Years (1998)
Peter Norvig 1998 年的经典文章，回应“21天/24小时学会编程”一类速成书，主张真正精通编程需要约十年持续、有意识的练习。
职业与工作方法上首页 11 次 · 2007–2025norvig.com编辑精选如何成为一名程序员：简短、全面而个人的总结
How to be a Programmer: A Short, Comprehensive, and Personal Summary
一篇广为流传的程序员成长指南，作者以个人经验系统总结了成为优秀程序员所需的各项技能——从调试、测试、沟通到团队协作与身心健康。
职业与工作方法上首页 6 次 · 2008–2015samizdat.mines.edu编辑精选不要自称程序员
Don't Call Yourself a Programmer
经典职业建议文章劝软件工程师不要把自己局限在“程序员”这个标签上，而要从公司业务角度说明自己创造的价值；文中讨论了成本中心与利润中心、头衔、求职与职业选择，也顺带批评了学术界的价…
职业与工作方法上首页 5 次 · 2011–2021kalzumeus.com编辑精选创作者的日程与经理的日程
Maker's Schedule, Manager's Schedule (2009)
Paul Graham 在这篇文章里把时间表分成两类：管理者的日程以小时为单位，会议可以填满一天；创作者（程序员、写作者等）的日程则以半天为单位，需要长时间不被打断的连续块。
职业与工作方法上首页 5 次 · 2009–2021paulgraham.com编辑精选为什么程序员的薪酬不与生产力成正比
Why programmers are not paid in proportion to their productivity
讨论为什么程序员的薪酬往往不随其生产力成比例增长：生产力难以客观量化，薪酬更多受组织预算、岗位定价和个人议价能力影响。
职业与工作方法上首页 5 次 · 2009–2022johndcook.com