You are currently viewing SemiWiki as a guest which gives you limited access to the site. To view blog comments and experience other SemiWiki features you must be a registered member. Registration is fast, simple, and absolutely free so please, join our community today!
I guess it depends on the company culture. One possible approach is to disagree and commit (tell the manager what you think, but they are the boss, so you still help them to execute their decision), another is to escalate, especially if the consequences are significant. My instinct is to escalate openly, but it might also make sense to escalate quietly -- it undermines trust, but could allow everyone to save face, so depends on the culture what's considered better.
I'm also interested to know what TSMC considers the right answer.
disagree and commit is much harder said than done, especially when the commit part requires 100% embrace idea not from you or you have reservation about. I guess it depends on size of the company. For a startup or medium size, assuming talents are above average across the team (a necessary condition for such company to overcome dominate players), you want each one's opinion to be heard. Not so much (cannot practically anyway) for huge companies with many levels.
I would add a pre-condition to disagree and commit. Open discuss is the 1st step for any key decision impacting broadly the company mission. The decision making process I learnt over the years is "open discussion, clear decision, disagree and commit)
disagree and commit is much harder said than done, especially when the commit part requires 100% embrace idea not from you or you have reservation about. I guess it depends on size of the company. For a startup or medium size, assuming talents are above average across the team (a necessary condition for such company to overcome dominate players), you want each one's opinion to be heard. Not so much (cannot practically anyway) for huge companies with many levels.
I would add a pre-condition to disagree and commit. Open discuss is the 1st step for any key decision impacting broadly the company mission. The decision making process I learnt over the years is "open discussion, clear decision, disagree and commit)
The answer I would want to hear is constructively discuss and commit one way or the other. If your boss is wrong, approach the situation tactfully and professionally. First, ensure you fully understand their perspective by listening carefully and asking clarifying questions if needed. Then, if appropriate, present your viewpoint with clear, factual evidence or reasoning to support your case with a focus on the issue, not the person. This keeps the conversation collaborative. If the issue isn’t critical, sometimes it’s better to let it go, but if it’s significant, respectfully escalate your concerns while staying open to their reasoning. Always prioritize the team’s goals and maintain a constructive tone. If all else fails vote with your feet and leave the group without slamming the door shut. Just my opinion of course.
Thoughts on Naga? General consensus seems to be that he’s a very sharp guy who contributed a lot to Micron’s current strength vs the Korean siblings (SK, Samsung).
As I said before. People that I have tons of respect for .... have tons of respect for Naga. and people who have interacted with him at Intel seem to like him
I think he is perfect for the job (just an opinion)
