Richard is right about this 'Asian politeness'. Sometimes we Americans like to hear a straight 'no' or 'there is a problem' or something similar. It saves us time, money, and even disaster sometimes.
But try to get it 'straight' from an 'Asian' at least in my experience Japanese or Taiwan businessmen, is often vexing.
Before it came up on this thread, Richard and I discussed the same problem by telephone of our experiences working with Asian companies, and we found the same thing working separately from each other over the years.
I'm sure that the Asians probably teach their newbees about Americans in much the same way, like: 'They talk like barbarians but really they mean well and are fairly nice actually' or something like that'. '-)
But try to get it 'straight' from an 'Asian' at least in my experience Japanese or Taiwan businessmen, is often vexing.
Before it came up on this thread, Richard and I discussed the same problem by telephone of our experiences working with Asian companies, and we found the same thing working separately from each other over the years.
I'm sure that the Asians probably teach their newbees about Americans in much the same way, like: 'They talk like barbarians but really they mean well and are fairly nice actually' or something like that'. '-)
Sometimes you just have to assume you are getting the run around, and ask the right questions that don't have an ambiguous answer.
Then again, some people are dumbasses, and you compound it with cultural behavior and it's disaster. An example...
An Asian flight alerted a Western control tower they were low on fuel, when landing was delayed. The control tower said please maintain circular patter, there is congestion on the ground. The flight complied. They maybe had the exchange another time or two. BOOM the flight dropped out of the air and everyone died.
Since then there has been a lot of training on both sides. Western control towers need to be aware that the combination of dumbass and overly polite Asian behavior can lead to inappropriate replies, so they need to take nonchalant comments more seriously and interrogate them. On the Asian side they have instructed them to be more overt, and excuse "rudeness" in emergencies.
I have known a few Asian people, born and raised, who were anything but particularly polite. In fact the last time I saw Kaygo, whom I lived with in a dorm, he was mooning me and slapping his a** from across the street. He was saying, "HEEY JEREMY HEEY JEREMY" while smacking his own a**, but due to the accent, the girl next to me thought he was yelling "HEEY JENNY", her name... She was a bit confused.
Last edited:
The same rules of etiquette apply to everyone you just don't know them. Something as simple as not filling the seats in a cab in the right order will cause noteworthy discomfort.
I was traveling with a newbie and he asked the waiter if he thought the ramen lunch special would fill him up. I put my hands over my eyes as both our host/translator and waiter stared at eachother for something to say. He then asked to substitute coke for the orange soda and in typical fashion after a couple of minutes of conversation and a trip to the kitchen the waiter came back and said "it is not possible".
Actually, pilots low on fuel are often hesitant to declare an emergency. They hope ATC will take the hint and get them on the ground sooner. Why? Pilots are responsible for fuel planning and for planning alternate airports in case of low fuel or other contingencies. They don't want attention from the FAA that they let things go so far as to result in a low fuel emergency. When an emergency is declared, airspace is cleared of all other traffic and the emergency flight is given full priority. It can result in rerouting of multiple other flights.
After I became CEO, the president and two EE partners and I had a talk at their request. How was I going to run things, chain of command etc. After I told them what I wanted and expected from the employees, they said to me.... Oh no you cant say that, they will rebel and sabotage things... passive aggressive? - So, I said fine. I'll be direct and blunt about things to you and you go and finesse it with them to make it happen. They were good with that idea.
THx-RNMarsh
THx-RNMarsh
Last edited:
No Western pilot is going to let everyone in the plane die when it gets to that point where it's land or die. They'll play it cool, like you say, but if things start getting to an absolute emergency, they sure as hell will force the subject. So your "actually" is not, actually. My story is fact, and fairly well known. The Asian flight was not just low on fuel, they completely & utterly ran out.
Last edited:
Well, sort of, they had landing gear failure that distracted them. Still a sad story. I'm glad we've learned a lot over the years, so flying is very safe now.
Actually, it still happens occasionally in general aviation. Not in commercial aviation. It's one reason for engine failure and small planes landing on freeways, etc.
It turns out people keep wanting to believe the fuel gauge is off a little bit and there is still a bit more in the tank. They recall they made the same trip before and although the gauge showed pretty low, they made it to the airport okay. Things like that go on in people's minds. Lot's of wishful thinking and over confidence they can make it. At the same time they worry declaring an emergency resulting from poor flight planning and bad decision making will get their licenses pulled. Eventually, they are in too deep to get out, and they make it to the airport okay with a big sigh of relief or the plane goes down, one or the other. Usually the former, but occasionally the latter.
Last edited:
Mark probably is thinking of avianca flight 052 bound for JFK
Avianca Flight 52 - Wikipedia
Now in terms of not admitting to things, it happens everywhere. Especially in engineering type disciplines where a lot of mildly autistic types tend to congregate.
If the person has a large collection of stories of people who screwed up and lost their jobs doubly so.
Of course the measure of a good manager is that he can read the team and get the most of them accordingly. Good managers are oddly in incredibly short supply though.
Avianca Flight 52 - Wikipedia
Now in terms of not admitting to things, it happens everywhere. Especially in engineering type disciplines where a lot of mildly autistic types tend to congregate.
If the person has a large collection of stories of people who screwed up and lost their jobs doubly so.
Of course the measure of a good manager is that he can read the team and get the most of them accordingly. Good managers are oddly in incredibly short supply though.
Being in photonics I work with a lot of Asians. First and foremost it is about saving face. We do our wafer growth at CalTech and where trying to find out when our laser die were getting dirty. Our Chinese engineers there spent a week putting a power point together saying it wasn't them. Ultimately it was and we didn't care we just wanted to get the process fixed. I had e mech engineer who though he new his particular package config, it was with a very hard laser to couple into a fiber. So he didn't vault any drawings so we couldn't tell how many tries he had made. Even though our SOP was to vault before ordering. TO SAVE FACE
The difference between the Asian flight (Korean I think) and other examples is there was no weather problems or technical malfunctions; it was just congestion. They never even attempted to land, which 052 did. Also in 052 the pilots were in miscommunication about what had been described to the control tower. Sad mistakes that cost a lot of lives... but they had an extenuating circumstance of weather combined with it.
I forgot that part of it, certainly complicated things.
Flying certainly has gotten safer over the years.
A good manager reads his people, and prevents large screw ups. A good manager micromanages those that need it, and clears the way for the ones who are good.
If the lower level people are not comfortable bringing problems to the higher ups, who's problem is that?
If the higher ups are not constantly visiting the work and establishing rapport, who's problem is it?
Last week a lower level person made a decision I would not have made. I informed upper management that given the circumstances, he made a good choice. I told him I would have chosen differently but that he did good. (In a few years, he will need to replace me, he needs confidence)
Management is all about building trust. Lower level people need to know you have their back, higher level people need to know their people, and build them up.
Flight 52 was an odd disconnect. A close friend broke into John McEnroe's garage (yes the tennis guy), grabbed a ladder to hang between trees so the EMT's could hang IV bags for the critical.
Jn
Last edited:
I get the feeling many of the members here have been on the wrong end of these stone age management techniques. I was on a first name basis with the CEO and COB and the technical community managed the removal of clueless directors more than once. jn has it right about trust our CEO knew he had no clue about designing IC's and never tried to interfere with the technical community in any way. Lecturing employees on what you expect, rebellion, sabotage, how totally silly. Any management team that thinks, a priory, the employees are a bunch of salary slave chumps that do as little as they can get away with deserves what they get.
Last edited:
Agreed.
Also, the best tech I've ever worked with.. when I described what I wanted done, he would feign "lack of understanding", and ask me to demonstrate.
I would, soldering, epoxy impregnation, pulling cables at the top of a 90 foot Grove man lift, whatever. It showed that I would never ask them to do things I would not, that I knew what I was doing. He and his co-workers are the best in the world at what they do now, and if they make an incorrect decision, it is my fault. I tell them to keep me informed of their decisions so that if failure occurs, it is a result of my choice, I approved the work.
In reality, I approve the workers...
That is how it should be.
Jn
Last edited:
I started with techs working under me over 50 years ago. Sometimes it is easy, sometimes you can get 'passive-aggressive' behavior no matter what nationality you are working with.
Usually an American 'designer' is interested in getting things to work, is not terribly well trained in employee management, and is usually tolerant with accidental screw-ups if they don't come too often. Often these 'designers' once had a position as a 'technician' sometimes for years before they graduated to 'designers', therefore they can relate to the technician as a 'younger brother' rather than someone from a different social class.
I have had my share of technician problems however, over the decades.
Many are just not as interested in the project as I am. Many are a little sloppy in their task, thinking it is good enough. I have always valued German or Swiss trained technicians, because they usually have their own high standard that they work to, and I don't have to correct or criticize their work very often.
Now I want to point out the Richard Marsh spent many decades as a 'designer' (I don't know his exact job title) in one of the most prestigious physics laboratories in the USA LLL, and did it successfully. His opinions on employee relations are as valid as anyone here. 'Knocking' his input is prejudicial, rather than informative.
Usually an American 'designer' is interested in getting things to work, is not terribly well trained in employee management, and is usually tolerant with accidental screw-ups if they don't come too often. Often these 'designers' once had a position as a 'technician' sometimes for years before they graduated to 'designers', therefore they can relate to the technician as a 'younger brother' rather than someone from a different social class.
I have had my share of technician problems however, over the decades.
Many are just not as interested in the project as I am. Many are a little sloppy in their task, thinking it is good enough. I have always valued German or Swiss trained technicians, because they usually have their own high standard that they work to, and I don't have to correct or criticize their work very often.
Now I want to point out the Richard Marsh spent many decades as a 'designer' (I don't know his exact job title) in one of the most prestigious physics laboratories in the USA LLL, and did it successfully. His opinions on employee relations are as valid as anyone here. 'Knocking' his input is prejudicial, rather than informative.
As a further comment on this subthread, I never made any effort to place blame for a mistake on an individual, ever. An IC layout has a review by 10-20 or more people of all disciplines, if a diode is flipped we all missed it. The system isn't perfect.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.