Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Jargon is painful isn't it?


But basically it means, if you are put in charge of a team, can you manage them they way we (the company) want (or say we want) - you know, do appraisals, set objectives ("promise to brush up on those excel skills Barry?" - "yes boss") and review those objectives for each of your team. yadda yadda

Serious answer? Are we playing the game here?


I'd replace 'assisting' with 'promoting', 'achievable' with 'realistic but stretching' and 'regular supervision and monitoring' with 'continual and interactive support, direction and feedback'.


Hee hee.


Why are other people's jobs so much more fun?

Bloody hell, it's only heading up a new team advising and providing advocacy to visually impaired people, I could do that with my eyes closed (pardon the pun)! :(


Moos, are you serious, because...


"I believe in promoting the personal and professional development of those who report directly to me by setting realistic objectives and giving continual and interactive support, direction and feedback"


... Just sounds a bit too clever for me :-S


Bugger it, it's going in!


Maybe I'm safer in social services, although all this stupid speak is creeping more and more in to our office!

"I use SMART objectives to maximise the personal and professional development of my team."


HR jargon, gratuitous use of the word 'team' and POWER-VERBS for the win. (Ugh.) Now if only I could remember what smart objectives are... S-something, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic and T-something - probably targeted.


Good luck Keef. Hope the job's worth the jargon.

T = Timebound. ie you have to tell them by when they have to have the tea made.


Keef, yes I was kind of serious. Managementspeak is of course bollocks but being managed by someone who really wants ('promotes') you to get on, who actually sets objectives that you can make but aren't ridiculously easy, and who takes the time to talk to you, tell you how you're doing and how you can do it better is great. Not that you wouldn't do that anyway, but the point is if you are playing the application game, you might as well say 'I'm a good guy' in the language they've asked you to speak.

God, I hate management speak, hate it when I find myself doing it. The one that drives me potty at the moment is when I am asked to do a report in powerpoint slide format for people to "talk to" in a meeting instead of for them to use in a meeting where they are talking to other people.


This example doesn't even seem to make sense, "develop, review and implement objectives..." at best you develop the objectives, given them to your team to implement and then you review their performance against them.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I'm a bit worried by your sudden involvement on this Forum.  The former Prince Andrew is now Andrew Mountbatten Windsor Mountbatten in an anglicisation of Von Battenburg adopted by that branch of our Royal Family in 1917 due to anti-German sentiment. Another anglicisation could be simply Battenburg as in the checker board cake.  So I surmise that your are Andrew Battenburg, aka Andrew Mountbatten Windsor and that you have infiltrated social media so that the country can put the emphasis on Mandelson ather than yourself.  Bit of a failure. I don't expect an answer from police custody.  
    • We had John fit our PLYKEA kitchen (IKEA cabinets with custom doors) and would happily recommend him and Gabi to anyone. Gabi handled all communication and was brilliant throughout — responsive and happy to answer questions however detailed. John is meticulous, cares about the small details, and was a pleasure to have in the house. The carpentry required for the custom doors was done to a high standard, and he even refinished the plumbing under the sink to sit better with the new cabinets — a small touch that made a real difference. They were happy to return and tie up a few things that couldn't be finished in the time, which we appreciated. No hesitations recommending them.
    • Not sure about that. Rockets seems to have (rightly in my view) identified two key motivating elements in Mcash's defection: anger at his previous (arguably shabby) treatment and a (linked) desire to trash the Labour party, nationally and locally. The defection, timed for maximum damage, combined with the invective and moral exhibitionism of his statement counts as rather more than a "hissy fit".  I would add a third motivation of political ambition: it's not inconceivable that he has his eye on the Dulwich & West Norwood seat which is predicted to go Green.  James Barber was indulging in typical LibDem sleight of hand, claiming that Blair introduced austerity to *councils* before the coalition. This is a kind of sixth form debating point. From 1997-1999 Labour broadly stuck to Tory spending totals, meaning there was limited growth in departmental spending, including local govt grants. However local government funding rose substantially in the Noughties, especially in education and social care. It is a matter of record that real-terms local authority spending increased in the Blair / Brown years overall. So he's manifestly wrong (or only right if the focus is on 1997-1999, which would be a bizarre focus and one he didn't include in his claim) but he wasn't claiming Blair introduced austerity more widely. 
    • My view is that any party that welcomes a self-declared Marxist would merit a negative point. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...