Humanities desk
< February 19	<< Jan \| February \| Mar >>	February 21 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Humanities Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

February 20

Workplace behaviour

Why do people often say that in the workplace, if you're making a nuisance of yourself and people tell get annoyed by you bothering them, you're doing a good job? 194.66.246.80 (talk) 12:36, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The saying refers to situations where you are trying to effect changes that will be of benefit to your workplace, but facing resistance. Your co-workers may be content to do things a certain way, and don't want to take the time to consider that there could be a better way to do them. So they see your push for change as a nuisance and a bother. Blueboar (talk) 13:09, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

People seem to apply it to other situations in the workplace too though. Generally anything that requires communication to get things done. 194.66.246.39 (talk) 13:23, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Not meaning to be facetious but why not just ask the speaker of that comment what they mean by it? In my opinion you are asking a very open-ended question, by which I am trying to say that a wide variety of responses are possible. I don't feel that a definitive "answer" is possible. But perhaps others can weigh in with clearcut responses that genuinely address your question. Bus stop (talk) 13:30, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Similar expressions are:

"You can't bake a cake without breaking a few eggs"

"Don't be afraid to make waves".

All convey the idea that you have to be somewhat confrontational to get the job done. StuRat (talk) 03:15, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'd rather wait than speak

Even though it's likely always been the case, I've only noticed recently that in NY and further north, it's not all-together uncommon for one person to be blocking the way ever so slightly and another to eagerly (or awkwardly) wait for them to move rather than saying 'excuse me' or 'sorry' and brushing past. They'll wait for a person to move out of the way before continuing on. It seems horribly inefficient in my mind and I don't see it as much in DC, Southern England, or various parts of Italy, where people generally excuse themselves and carefully move by or Israel where people are Israeli and just brush past you. What is this kind of behaviour called and what's the cause of this? Is it some, sort of mild anthropophobia or fear of communicating with others? Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | ^{Say Shalom!} 1 Adar 5775 14:05, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be interested to read the answers, because I myself often behave like this (and reside in Southern England). However, I'll spare you from self-analysis unless it seems to become pertinent. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 212.95.237.92 (talk) 14:26, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wait for the person to move? Say "excuse me"? Obviously Flinders has never been on the NYC Subway at rush hour. We just push pass without saying anything (or making eye contact). Blueboar (talk) 14:39, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sir, I ride the roving entertainment known as our subway thrice each weekday. I deftly move betwixt people, automatically saying excuse me and sorry and on occasion help people out and even enagage in conversation with random people. Trying to spread good will one person at a time. People generally never shove past me though as apparently I look somewhat intimidating even though I'm rather short. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | ^{Say Shalom!} 3 Adar 5775 19:20, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm from Northern England, and I always wait instead of asking, unless I am in a hurry, then I will ask "Excuse me, can I just get past please?" I find it exceptionally annoying when on escalators, people very often ignore the sign that says "Stand on the right" and just stand in the middle. The same goes for the flat version you see at airports (which are actually intended to help you go faster if you walk on them, while people just stand on them, watching the people on either side actually walk faster than them). KägeTorä - (^影_虎) (Chin Wag) 14:51, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Totally with you there. You don't want to walk on the escalator? I'm not judging. Maybe you had a hard day. Maybe you have physical challenges. Maybe you just don't want to and it's none of my business why. It's all good. Just please leave room for people to get by. --Trovatore (talk) 05:27, 24 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well I should say I'm thinking more about people who let's say get on a train and rather than brush past someone to find a seat will wait behind them with an awkward uncomfortable look trying to decide if they should say something or wait and potentially get tossed about by the train. If I'm elsewhere and not in a hurry then I'll just wait politely (especially if there's an older person involved) As for escalators, that's a one-way ticket to be snapped at in DC. When I lived there I would on occasion inform hapless tourists about this before someone else snapped at them. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | ^{Say Shalom!} 3 Adar 5775 19:20, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure those automated walkways aren't designed to make it easier to move that distance, as opposed to faster ? At my local airport one must walk miles to get from the parking lot to the gate, and when carrying luggage that gets old fast. When you include the elderly or people in poor health, walking that distance might be impossible. With my father, who could walk short distances but not that far, we ended up putting him in a wheelchair, which he found humiliating. StuRat (talk) 22:13, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I really believe they are for helping you to go faster, because, after all, every airport I have been to has had luggage trolleys (and some even have vehicles you can rent which drive within the airport building itself to help you with your luggage and get to your gate on time). The airports are more concerned with getting people out of them, rather than having a human traffic jam. KägeTorä - (^影_虎) (Chin Wag) 23:09, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My local airport is such a nightmare it requires going up stairs to get to the terminal. They do have an elevator for wheelchairs, but a scooter wouldn't fit in there. StuRat (talk) 23:30, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You must have incredibly small elevators, mate, if a scooter can't fit in there. :) KägeTorä - (^影_虎) (Chin Wag) 00:21, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect that Stu might use a motorised scooter and you're about to feel a bit silly, my good Northerner. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | ^{Say Shalom!} 3 Adar 5775 19:20, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I do indeed also know what our esteemed friend meant, it's just that 'scooters' is not what we call them. We generally call them 'motorized (wheel)chair' (when it refers to the ones for elderly or handicapped people, which are generally not much bigger than a mountain bike, in terms of length). The ones at airports, where you have a dedicated driver, are, of course, much bigger, as they need to carry luggage, but the drivers do know the way to the gate, because that is, bizarrely, what their job is. Elevator or no elevator. 'Scooter' means something completely different in Br.Eng., as referred to in my link above. KägeTorä - (^影_虎) (Chin Wag) 22:37, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I assume at my poorly designed airport they would have one scooter take the person to the elevator, put them in a wheelchair for the elevator ride, then put them on another scooter at the other level. Any elderly or handicapped person would find all this jostling quite annoying. (As for how the scooters get to the upper level in the first place, there must be a freight elevator somewhere.) StuRat (talk) 16:36, 23 February 2015 (UTC) [reply]

Not an answer, but some related references: NYC walks faster than London according to this research [1], and Singapore, Copenhagen and Madrid are the top three fastest walking cities. Radiolab has a nice story about walking speeds in various cities here [2]. SemanticMantis (talk) 21:29, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed the case. Londoners also have this weird aversion to J-walking. Even when there's no cars for 50m! Absolutely inefficient. Especially when you've an appointment to keep. Odd about the top three though. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | ^{Say Shalom!} 3 Adar 5775 19:20, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Deborah Tannen has written about different styles of communication, so this might have a similar name.

—Wavelength (talk) 20:38, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The work of Deborah Tannen is really worth exploring here. Her older books are the most interesting for this question. The field of research, I think, is called sociolinguistics. See http://faculty.georgetown.edu/tannend/books.html. They were a real eye-opener for me. --Judithcomm (talk) 16:11, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Another option is to not speak, but still "make your presence known", by making loud footsteps as you approach, or maybe rattling your shopping basket/trolley if in the grocery store. StuRat (talk) 22:50, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In cases like that I might wait and if the person looked particularly grouchy I've played ignorant and said, "Terribly sorry, didn't realise you were there." Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | ^{Say Shalom!} 3 Adar 5775 19:20, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

We have an article on conflict avoidance. It's a general thing, which envelops waiting for people to move themselves. Not sure if that has a particular name. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:03, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

This book may be useful, if you'd rather not wait, but I don't like the look of the guy on the cover. This face seems friendlier. InedibleHulk (talk) 23:05, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't care for that first title: "The Coward's Guide...". Wanting to avoid conflict isn't cowardice, it's proper social behavior. It's those who try to cause conflict who should be ostracized (unless doing so creates conflict, of course). StuRat (talk) 23:15, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It depends on what we consider conflict. A polite exchange wherein a person is made aware that they're blocking someone's way and the other person is friendly about it is perfectly fine and makes people more likely to be polite in other situations. It's another thing if we're talking about unnecessarily making an ass of oneself or intervening by pointing out someone's attempt to cause conflict is causing a nuisance to other people. For instance, yesterday at a grocery store after I'd checked out, a Norwegian (based on his accent) gentleman was reading a magazine and waiting for a loyalty club card form after having put all his items on the belt. The cashier was doing her thing and no action was required by the man, but this older fellow behind him (who looked like a Menonite based on his beard actually) said, "You should read that at home" in a voice most grumpy. The Norwegian was surprised and asked the guy to repeat himself and the man repeated what he said twice in an angry voice. I said to the angry fellow twice, "That's really not necessary" with a disgusted look on his face and he was silent afterwards. There was another instance where I had to tell off a lady in a car who was being rude to my friend's mother simply because she was standing in a parking spot to save it for her husband (all of them were our guests and the lady in the car was giving a poor impression of the local hospitality). Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | ^{Say Shalom!} 3 Adar 5775 19:20, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I imagine you're also not fond of the term "sheeple". Not calling you that, but there's no consensus on proper social behaviour. What's good for the goose may be good for the gander, but doesn't work at all for the wolf (or even a busy beaver). "As conformity is a group phenomenon, factors such as group size, unanimity, cohesion, status, prior commitment, and public opinion help determine the level of conformity an individual displays." InedibleHulk (talk) 23:24, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Conformity and conflict avoidance are by no means the same. For example, if somebody has purple hair, the conformist would be upset by that and say so, while conflict avoidance would lead to the attitude that "as long as they aren't causing any harm, let them do their own thing". StuRat (talk) 18:21, 23 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

My natural instinct is to say something like "You know, a toddler could still possibly slip by, but you could make the aisle completely impassible if you angled your cart diagonally and then used your lard ass to block the rest". Fortunately, my conflict avoidance instinct has won the battle every time so far. StuRat (talk) 23:19, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

So, despite all your rage, you're still just a rat in a cage? InedibleHulk (talk) 23:37, 20 February 2015 (UTC) [reply]

My favourite, which works on escalators, elevators, and in shopping aisles, is "So, I know you are wondering why I brought you here today..." in a really posh British accent. Works every time. KägeTorä - (^影_虎) (Chin Wag) 00:28, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What? I don't get that one, KageTora. "why I brought you here today"??? What is it you are implying in this funny statement? --Lgriot (talk) 16:08, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's sometimes used by managers when starting a staff meeting after a tense silence at the beginning... or at least that is a stereotype. :) KägeTorä - (^影_虎) (Chin Wag) 17:07, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I fail to see how a potentially scouse accent could ever be considered posh (one of my least favourite terms along with boffin), my good sir. Sir William Matthew Flinders Petrie | ^{Say Shalom!} 3 Adar 5775 19:20, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, dear chap, I do apologize for my failure to inform you that I have spent most of my life abroad, worked mostly with foreigners (as I still do), and therefore do not, in my daily life, actually have a Scouse accent, but only use it when I 'need' it. It is my native dialect, but, believe it or not, there are people who are perfectly capable of Code-switching. KägeTorä - (^影_虎) (Chin Wag) 21:36, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Shock, I have something in common with Stu. “And with just a bit more effort, you could block both these intersecting passages!” —Tamfang (talk) 05:03, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What ever happened to just saying pardon me?

That certainly is appropriate when somebody is shopping in a considerate way and just happens to have their cart where you need to go. But then you have people who abandon their cart blocking a main aisle, with no attempt to park it out of the way, before they go get whatever item they forgot. It seems like such inconsiderate behavior demands stronger words. However, I've come to understand that a large portion of these people suffer from a mental deficiency. That is, they don't even think that leaving their cart in the way of everybody else will be inconvenience, because they simply can't view things from the perspective of others. Those with autism spectrum disorders are one such group. StuRat (talk) 21:20, 22 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]