jkovacs

Question: It says at point 8:

> Don't supervise the quality and volume of people’s work.

And I agree with the argument following that sentence. On the other hand, 2 points above that it says:

> Do enforce behavioral and performance standards. Fire bullies and underperformers.

So how else do I recognize underperformers without taking note of quantity and quality of people's output? Surely I can't just take someone else's word for it (and by the point a peer complains about this it's probably too late already anyway?).

Yes, but so are the trade schools/apprenticeships where people go that don't go to university, so what's your point? Your education is subsidized either way, unless you don't attend either of those options, in which case the individual is probably not going to pay for anything at all.

Lots of these (including this one) come out of universities, or university-corporate research partnerships. Personally I'm very glad that universities nowadays seem to be more okay with publishing tangible results (i.e. source code) as opposed to "just" the research papers. I don't think it's always been that way. I can't begin to imagine the amount of work that is rotting on someone's old usb stick, because they weren't allowed to publish their PhD theses's source code.

These are not exclusive, you can have both. In fact, last time I had to visit an administrative office they had an open office for the employee workspaces with numbered desks and a traditional waiting area with a take-a-number queue system (well, actually an online appointment booking system) that directs to you a specific desk if it's your turn.