I don’t understand a hell or I don’t give a damn what I don’t like. It’s the statement I made to my TL i.e. Technical Leader a person who is old enough to advise some one technically and who can lead a team of fresher man, techie and pseudo techie. I clash with my TL most of the times not technically but in understanding people’s mentality towards work, work allocation, people understanding and motivation. I simply call it team dynamics. I feel it changes from team to team.
Just got a sandwich and sat with my colleague for breakfast, my TL who’s my favorite tea-mate just joined us. We chatted from elections to evolutions to Ileana. Our discussion about the team and team dynamics are never ending.
One heated argument was “if same work is allocated to a person multiple times, it improves work efficiency and the understanding of the problem”. I really gone mad for his statement and said it pure bullshit it’s going to improve nothing, the work is gonna suck the interest of a person if it is an uninteresting problem. I hope he would have meant an interesting problem:).
I do really feel bored to do the same work, again and again and again. Personally I will do first time good, second time better and third time worst**:) (** If I am not interested). At uninterested work times I feel I should show un-interest in my interest;).
I think my TL had a point too, if his entire team asks for an interesting (“by law”) work, if he has time-bounded activities to be completed, what he can do? Business can’t go on personal interest or the individual employee’s interest; it always goes for money.
By law:
- All work are not interesting
- Interesting work always have lesser time (Amount of time for work)
- Interesting work is always less (Amount for work)
- Interesting work at all times are not interesting
- Uninteresting work with more time is interesting (lot of leisure time)
- Uninteresting work done by your buddy is interesting for you (Other side is always green)
Finally, I lost my interest in writing this :(. CY…
