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!
This would be considered as toxic management in any other environment. Yet, somehow, here, semiconductor people are speaking about "cultural" differences:
"In one department, managers sometimes applied what they called “stress tests” by announcing assignments due the same day or week, to make sure the Americans were able to meet tight deadlines and sacrifice personal time like Taiwanese workers, two engineers told Rest of World. Managers shamed American workers in front of their peers, sometimes by suggesting they quit engineering, one employee said."
There are tons of ways to produce a toxic work environment. In this case, it’s a pretty known cultural difference in “typical” working style (some would say ethic) between Taiwan and the southwestern US.
Unfortunately as is normally the case with typical large companies, someone high up the chain failed to think/act ahead here sufficiently of what happens when you put together two significantly different work cultures*.. so TSMC will have to suffer some high level of turnover (or more articles like this) before major changes are introduced..
*Similar to how other large companies will occasionally have open discussions about how different generations work and act in the workplace. There can be training and awareness for both employees and leaders to improve collaboration and tolerance for styles. When I started (as a young “Gen X”), I was educated on how the “Greatest Generation” and “Baby Boomers” worked differently for example..
It was going poorly, because Intel's "Copy Exactly!" was not working in China. Everything down to fab construction services that Intel had in US was not available in China. They had to find entirely new working recipes.
Copy Exactly refers to fab process, not building construction. Also, Fab 68 was originally targeted for 90nm logic technology in 2010, when Intel's newest CPUs in 2010 were on 32nm technology. I can't imagine the justification for building a fab two generations behind when you don't have a foundry business, but perhaps Intel was reconsidering a 90nm foundry business, like it did several years prior. Intel had a lot of bad ideas in the 2000-2010 timeframe. By 2015 Intel was converting Fab 68 to fabricating flash memory chips and, supposedly, what would become Optane, though Optane production there apparently never happened.
This would be considered as toxic management in any other environment. Yet, somehow, here, semiconductor people are speaking about "cultural" differences:
"In one department, managers sometimes applied what they called “stress tests” by announcing assignments due the same day or week, to make sure the Americans were able to meet tight deadlines and sacrifice personal time like Taiwanese workers, two engineers told Rest of World. Managers shamed American workers in front of their peers, sometimes by suggesting they quit engineering, one employee said."
I'm going to argue that a toxic work environment is subjective. And that is a key part of the problem here. What is being reported as abusive behavior here may not be considered abusive by the Taiwanese employees. It is a cultural norm for them. As an example I spent many years taking my kids to Tae Kwon Do classes. Over time it became clear to me that the only students being criticized were those that were working hard. The students who didn't put in the effort were just allowed to be there and do there own thing. I came to realize that the instructors were only criticizing the students that they felt were worth their time. It wasn't shaming, per say, but the criticism was made publicly while the whole class was there. So yeah, I think it is a cultural thing and in some cases I suspect that this was a culturally acceptable method to inspire people with potential to perform better.
This goes back to the comment above from TBiggs that managers couldn't accept an alternative way to get things done. Because to an American employee that behavior does constitute a toxic work environment. And ironically, this also speaks to the inability/unwillingness of the workers to adapt to a different way of being managed.
I'm going to argue that a toxic work environment is subjective. And that is a key part of the problem here. What is being reported as abusive behavior here may not be considered abusive by the Taiwanese employees. It is a cultural norm for them. As an example I spent many years taking my kids to Tae Kwon Do classes. Over time it became clear to me that the only students being criticized were those that were working hard. The students who didn't put in the effort were just allowed to be there and do there own thing. I came to realize that the instructors were only criticizing the students that they felt were worth their time. It wasn't shaming, per say, but the criticism was made publicly while the whole class was there. So yeah, I think it is a cultural thing and in some cases I suspect that this was a culturally acceptable method to inspire people with potential to perform better.
This goes back to the comment above from TBiggs that managers couldn't accept an alternative way to get things done. Because to an American employee that behavior does constitute a toxic work environment. And ironically, this also speaks to the inability/unwillingness of the workers to adapt to a different way of being managed.
Totally agree. "Toxic" has become just another undefined term people throw around when they don't like something, instead of looking at the facts.
The balance of rights vs responsibilities is different in different countries. But once you allow that ratio to drift too high, you're in danger of becoming uncompetitive. And inflexible (more flexible in workers' rights, but less flexible in what companies can actually achieve). If the US wants to keep pushing the ratio ever higher, then perhaps having domestic wafer fabs just isn't in its future - however much the government tries to underwrite the effort.
Totally agree. "Toxic" has become just another undefined term people throw around when they don't like something, instead of looking at the facts.
The balance of rights vs responsibilities is different in different countries. But once you allow that ratio to drift too high, you're in danger of becoming uncompetitive. And inflexible (more flexible in workers' rights, but less flexible in what companies can actually achieve). If the US wants to keep pushing the ratio ever higher, then perhaps having domestic wafer fabs just isn't in its future - however much the government tries to underwrite the effort.
I don't find this reasoning convincing at all. Any manager who thinks they need to disrespect and demean their subordinates to properly motivate them is some combination of arrogant, stupid, ineffective, incompetent, and foolish. Perhaps all of the above. I don't think cultural differences are an acceptable or appropriate explanation either. This has nothing to do with worker responsibilities. This is just one group of people who thinks they're in some way superior to another group, and that their subordinates don't deserve respect. I've found that people who think they're somehow superior to others usually learn difficult and painful lessons eventually.
I don't find this reasoning convincing at all. Any manager who thinks they need to disrespect and demean their subordinates to properly motivate them is some combination of arrogant, stupid, ineffective, incompetent, and foolish. Perhaps all of the above. I don't think cultural differences are an acceptable or appropriate explanation either. This has nothing to do with worker responsibilities. This is just one group of people who thinks they're in some way superior to another group, and that their subordinates don't deserve respect. I've found that people who think they're somehow superior to others usually learn difficult and painful lessons eventually.
You misunderstand somewhat. I'm not endorsing poor management and bullying here at all. Merely observing that stuff like work-life balance comes at a cost. This is all about tradeoffs. The US is of course free to make whatever choices it likes. But own the tradeoffs. And don't expect that you can have it all ("cakeism").
I'm - perhaps fortunately - not familiar with the type of management behaviour described. However, that does seem to be more culturally based than a few individuals who think they're superior (a systemic feature rather than a bug if you like). No one is forced to work for such an organisation.
You misunderstand somewhat. I'm not endorsing poor management and bullying here at all. Merely observing that stuff like work-life balance comes at a cost. This is all about tradeoffs. The US is of course free to make whatever choices it likes. But own the tradeoffs. And don't expect that you can have it all ("cakeism").
