Castaway MMA v2.0

osubuckeye4 said:
Grunge had it's place in time.... even if a lot of it didn't stand the test of time.
Click to expand...
The bands that were talented stand the test of time. Just like any other era. Grunge has Nirvana, Pearl Jam, Soundgarden/Audioslave/RATM however you want to discuss their iterations, and Alice in Chains still on heavy rotation on most music services, just like you have the real classic rock bands like Zeppelin, Sabbath, Hendrix, and a few more on heavy rotation on the same services. Their music appeals to many, many people.

But for every timeless band from an era, you have a dozen Foo Fighter's, Candlebox's, Silver Chair's, Boston's, Kansas' and Foreigner's. Bands with a catchy tune or two that most people who do not love the genre could give two shits about after those few songs are played. Such is the nature of popular music.

You have guys like @Tito Orcheese that will die on a hill for Tool whereas most people not in this forum know one song because of the crazy claymation video on MTV 30 years ago. Good band. Talented beyond most people's comprehension, but just doesn't appeal to the masses like Justin Timberlake and Oasis.
 
Ulf Murphy said:
The bands that were talented stand the test of time. Just like any other era. Grunge has Nirvana, Pearl Jam, Soundgarden/Audioslave/RATM however you want to discuss their iterations, and Alice in Chains still on heavy rotation on most music services, just like you have the real classic rock bands like Zeppelin, Sabbath, Hendrix, and a few more on heavy rotation on the same services. Their music appeals to many, many people.

But for every timeless band from an era, you have a dozen Foo Fighter's, Candlebox's, Silver Chair's, Boston's, Kansas' and Foreigner's. Bands with a catchy tune or two that most people who do not love the genre could give two shits about after those few songs are played. Such is the nature of popular music.

You have guys like @Tito Orcheese that will die on a hill for Tool whereas most people not in this forum know one song because of the crazy claymation video on MTV 30 years ago. Good band. Talented beyond most people's comprehension, but just doesn't appeal to the masses like Justin Timberlake and Oasis.
Click to expand...
Chris Cornell may be my favorite vocalist of all times. It's hard to vote against him. He was just excellent. I liked AudioSlave the most. Just really good stuff.

Of the guys that died young, I'm still a little partial to Jim Morrison. I'm a very big Doors fan. Love that music.
 
mrducks said:
Chris Cornell may be my favorite vocalist of all times. It's hard to vote against him. He was just excellent. I liked AudioSlave the most. Just really good stuff.

Of the guys that died young, I'm still a little partial to Jim Morrison. I'm a very big Doors fan. Love that music.
Click to expand...

Higher Truth is one my favorite albums of all time from a pure vocals standpoint.

Cornell really shows his range off throughout.
 
mrducks said:
Vocal mastery. I love this song always.
Click to expand...

I was always partial to this one in terms of range/mastery.


Everyone knows he's capable of belting it out (Black Hole Sun, Say Hello to Heaven, etc etc) , but he shows a lot of texturing and restraint while still commanding a huge range... and belting it out a few times for good measure.



EDIT: I'm not trying to say Cornell is undisputed #1 in terms of vocals... Freddie Mercury, Whitney Houston, Mike Patton, there's a healthy number of all time greats. I've just always regarded Chris Cornell very highly.
 
osubuckeye4 said:
I was always partial to this one in terms of range/mastery.


Everyone knows he's capable of belting it out (Black Hole Sun, Say Hello to Heaven, etc etc) , but he shows a lot of texturing and restraint while still commanding a huge range... and belting it out a few times for good measure.



EDIT: I'm not trying to say Cornell is undisputed #1 in terms of vocals... Freddie Mercury, Whitney Houston, Mike Patton, there's a healthy number of all time greats. I've just always regarded Chris Cornell very highly.
Click to expand...
You can quit being gay and just outright say that Cornell was the best.
 
I have a guy working for me, and he was a lifetime Marine. He came to us as a Lieutenant Colonel. I'm working with this guy, and he is very adept at doing briefings. He's a big asset to our company, but I think he has some stress issues. I'm trying to work through his issues. I'm guiding him daily about what he needs to do, as a construction project manager.

I really love this guy, but he's not doing right. How do I correct this? I'm not going to fire him. He's on spot for anything we ask him to do.

That's the problem with being in upper management. How do you deal with the people you like, but aren't performing?

I want to be a pro-veteran employer. And I am. But if there are performance issues that surface, how do I deal with that?

I'm looking for a response from Buckey. I think he's in the same corporate, upper management role that I'm in.
 
He will likely be used to structure, rules and hierarchy. Do you have all these clearly in place? How long has he been in civvies?
 
Last edited:
Ulf Murphy said:
The bands that were talented stand the test of time. Just like any other era. Grunge has Nirvana, Pearl Jam, Soundgarden/Audioslave/RATM however you want to discuss their iterations, and Alice in Chains still on heavy rotation on most music services, just like you have the real classic rock bands like Zeppelin, Sabbath, Hendrix, and a few more on heavy rotation on the same services. Their music appeals to many, many people.

But for every timeless band from an era, you have a dozen Foo Fighter's, Candlebox's, Silver Chair's, Boston's, Kansas' and Foreigner's. Bands with a catchy tune or two that most people who do not love the genre could give two shits about after those few songs are played. Such is the nature of popular music.

You have guys like @Tito Orcheese that will die on a hill for Tool whereas most people not in this forum know one song because of the crazy claymation video on MTV 30 years ago. Good band. Talented beyond most people's comprehension, but just doesn't appeal to the masses like Justin Timberlake and Oasis.
Click to expand...
tenor.gif
 
Webble said:
He will likely be used to structure rules and hierarchy. Do you have all these clearly in place? How long has he been in civvies?
Click to expand...
He's been with our company for 3 years. The dude is an absolute stud at doing meetings and briefings. His military background is a real asset.

But, he's screwing up in other areas. Particularly in doing change orders and in accounting for costs. The private construction world is different from being in the military. I do everything I can to help him. I write his letters, if they are important. I help him deal with subconractors.

That's what I do. I'm a project manager. I like to be nice, but sometimes I need to be firm, and almost lawyer like.

I love my veterans though, and wil continue to employ and stick up for them.
 
mrducks said:
I have a guy working for me, and he was a lifetime Marine. He came to us as a Lieutenant Colonel. I'm working with this guy, and he is very adept at doing briefings. He's a big asset to our company, but I think he has some stress issues. I'm trying to work through his issues. I'm guiding him daily about what he needs to do, as a construction project manager.

I really love this guy, but he's not doing right. How do I correct this? I'm not going to fire him. He's on spot for anything we ask him to do.

That's the problem with being in upper management. How do you deal with the people you like, but aren't performing?

I want to be a pro-veteran employer. And I am. But if there are performance issues that surface, how do I deal with that?

I'm looking for a response from Buckey. I think he's in the same corporate, upper management role that I'm in.
Click to expand...

I'll start by saying that I don't think I have enough information to give proper advice... but here's my thought process based of what you wrote.

You said that he's: doing everything you ask him to do, adept at doing briefings and a big asset... but, that he has stress issues and isn't performing?

If he's doing everything you ask him to do and that isn't satisfactory, then I really think you need to more clearly define your expectations for him.


As far as the stress... unless it's costing you money (clients bailing, co-workers threatening to quit or leaving because he's so intense), I don't know that you need to directly address it with him. If it's one of those situations where you think he truly needs helps and could be a danger to himself or others, you can always bring it up somewhat informally with the old, "wanted to check in and see how you're doing. Is everything okay at home? You okay with how things are going here?". Ultimately, if he's unwilling to work with you on it though there's not a whole lot you can do until/unless it start effecting your bottom line. At that point, you will need to have the sit down and present the numbers and brainstorm how you can both figure out a way to right the ship.
 
osubuckeye4 said:
I'll start by saying that I don't think I have enough information to give proper advice... but here's my thought process based of what you wrote.

You said that he's: doing everything you ask him to do, adept at doing briefings and a big asset... but, that he has stress issues and isn't performing?

If he's doing everything you ask him to do and that isn't satisfactory, then I really think you need to more clearly define your expectations for him.


As far as the stress... unless it's costing you money (clients bailing, co-workers threatening to quit or leaving because he's so intense), I don't know that you need to directly address it with him. If it's one of those situations where you think he truly needs helps and could be a danger to himself or others, you can always bring it up somewhat informally with the old, "wanted to check in and see how you're doing. Is everything okay at home? You okay with how things are going here?". Ultimately, if he's unwilling to work with you on it though there's not a whole lot you can do until/unless it start effecting your bottom line. At that point, you will need to have the sit down and present the numbers and brainstorm how you can both figure out a way to right the ship.
Click to expand...
Thanks Buckeye. Yes, some of his decisions cost money. I'm the VP of Project Managment, but I give a lot of room for the people under me to perform. Everyone has a different style, and I respect their style.

I'm definitely not a micro-manager. We hire people to do their jobs, and I'm not going to interfere with what they are doing. Only when it becomes detrimental, like in this case. I provide all the support needed. I'll write any letters that need writing, and go in person to any meetings that I need to. But that's what the project managers should do.

I won't fire this guy, because I really like him. I'm just in a conundrum. How do I reprimand him when he screws up? I can't.
 
mrducks said:
Thanks Buckeye. Yes, some of his decisions cost money. I'm the VP of Project Managment, but I give a lot of room for the people under me to perform. Everyone has a different style, and I respect their style.

I'm definitely not a micro-manager. We hire people to do their jobs, and I'm not going to interfere with what they are doing. Only when it becomes detrimental, like in this case. I provide all the support needed. I'll write any letters that need writing, and go in person to any meetings that I need to. But that's what the project managers should do.

I won't fire this guy, because I really like him. I'm just in a conundrum. How do I reprimand him when he screws up? I can't.
Click to expand...

There's a couple ways you could do it.

1) You could schedule a 'performance review' or 'touch base' or whatever you want to call it meeting and go over everything (positive and negative... don't pile on with the negative) and praise him for what he does well while clearly defining your future expectations from him and making sure he's on the same page as you.

2) Every time you have to do one of his duties for him or correct something he messed up, you can email him and let him know so that he's aware. You want to be careful with that one if the guy has stress issues though... might push him over the edge and backfire. Me, as an employee, I prefer this one and I've told our senior management if I fuck up... even if it's a small procedural thing and not a major issue... they better let me know so I can fix it. Some of the people I work with get really offended if senior management calls them out on the little stuff though. That's a tricky one, really should only be used when you are sure you have a read on the person.

3) If you have time to do it, you could always take him under your wing a bit and mentor him on the aspects of the business that he doesn't seem to be able to pick up on his own. Schedule some time to meet and go over best practices. Maybe you show him some 'demo' letters and tips and tricks for how to perform better at those aspects of the job.



Just some ideas... when I had employees that weren't getting the job done my first inclination was to meet under the umbrella of a 'general performance review' and subtly ask them why. I wouldn't shut the door and throw the fuck-up in their face. It was more of a, "here's the good stuff, here's the bad stuff, here's what I expect from you going forward" and then based on their response I would figure out how I would proceed.

I'd say a good 50% of the time they weren't even aware that there was an issue, and it would get solved simply by me going over the thing they fucked up and them saying, "oh, I was taught not to do it that way... I'll do it your way going forward".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top