Is the measurement that they're getting the results, or is it that they aren't working extra hours? "Getting the results from the majority of the people the majority of the time" is exactly how I'd expect an executive to handwave employees burning out due to the kind of environment we're talking about. Not everybody is going to manifest visible problems at the same time, so it will just look like a handful "not working out" every once in awhile, which is to be expected.

It could describe a healthy environment equally well... But my point is just that your formulation ("Results from the majority of the people the majority of the time") doesn't seem to me to have the ability to distinguish between a healthy and a toxic environment.

[–] BallShapedMan@lemmy.world 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

The phrase applies to negative results not positive ones because the rest of the phrase is it's not the people it's the system which implies a problem not a good result. Going through all the details of the system is more than I'm willing to type. If you'd like to know more these are a few of my favorite resources.

Multipliers by Liz Wiseman

Beyond Command and Control by John Seddon

First Break All the Rules by Marcus Buckingham

The Effective Manager by Mark Horstman

Dare to Lead by Brene Brown

The Effective Executive by Peter F. Drucker

You're Not Listening by Kate Murphy

Four Thousand Weeks by Oliver Burkeman

[–] thanks_shakey_snake@lemmy.ca 2 points 10 months ago

Oh, sorry for misunderstanding you. I'm used to "getting results" as referring to achieving measurable business objectives, but the meaning changes completely if you meant the opposite, and I'm not sure I follow what you're saying in that case.

Thanks for the recommendations. I will look at those.