An “Oubliette JIRA” refers to a JIRA ticket created primarily to appease someone requesting work, often with little intention of actually addressing it.
Explanation:
An Oubliette, as Wikipedia will tell you, is a form of dungeon named after the French word for “to forget.” It was a horrible place where people were sent to die, often abandoned and forgotten by the world. The defining feature of an oubliette was its utter isolation—once you were placed there, no one cared about your fate. This concept serves as a metaphor when we refer to an “Oubliette Jira.” In the context of project management tools like Jira, an “Oubliette Jira” is a task or ticket that is effectively abandoned. While it might exist in the system, no one will ever revisit or act on it.
Recognising something as an Oubliette Jira typically means acknowledging that it has been relegated to irrelevance, despite its initial presentation as a priority.
Most often, an Oubliette Jira emerges when a manager or someone in a lower authority position insists on the task’s importance. This insistence often stems from their personal priorities rather than the broader needs of the team or project.
Despite verbal or meeting assurances that the task cannot be prioritised due to a lack of time or resources, they push for its formalisation in Jira. Raising such a ticket often serves as a way to end an uncomfortable or awkward conversation rather than a genuine commitment to action.
Disclaimer: As always these posts are not aimed at anyone client or employer and are just my personal observations over a lifetime of dealing with both management and frontline associates.
A “TEEN tantrum” is a way to describe the typical methods some managers and project managers employ when trying to get their way. I came across this term recently, and after having it explained to me, I thought it fit quite well, so I’m sharing it here. Credit goes to the original creator, who prefers to remain anonymous.
The acronym breaks down as follows:
“T” is for Time:
This is about urgency. Common demands include:
“When can I have this?!” “I want this immediately!” “How long will it take to finish this?!”
These types of questions are often the starting point for expressing dissatisfaction.
“E” is for Exasperation:
Exasperation usually manifests as frustration with perceived delays. For example:
“Why is this taking so long?!” “This should only take a few moments!” “Who is responsible for this?!”
Often, the person exhibiting this behavior lacks expertise in the subject, so they’re unaware of the complexities involved in delivering the work.
“E” is for Escalation:
This stage involves threatening to escalate the issue:
“This needs Escalating!” “I want this done now!” “I’ll get your boss involved.” “Give me the name of the person in charge.”
“N” is for Name Dropping:
The final stage includes leveraging authority or connections: “I know ‘Boss X’ ” ” ‘Boss X’ will hear about this!”
This behaviour resembles what some describe as the “Karen” archetype in corporate culture, though it is, of course, gender neutral.
Disclaimer: As always these posts are not aimed at anyone client or employer and are just my personal observations over a lifetime of dealing with both management and frontline associates.
Meetings serve a few valuable functions: they help organize efforts, prepare people for challenges, and identify problems. However, meetings themselves don’t accomplish tasks and at the end of nearly all meetings, no tangible work has been done.
To be effective, meetings must either add to the team’s understanding of their task and deliverables or gather new, actionable information. If they fail to do this, they are largely pointless.
The main exception is well executed agile meetings, particularly short, focused morning stand-ups. These can be useful if done right:
Keep them short.
Keep them honest.
Avoid using them as a reporting mechanism for managers. They’re not for compiling data into spreadsheets or lists. Stand-ups exist to help team members stay on track and understand what’s going on.
For managers, here’s an easy rule of thumb to determine if you have the right number of meetings:
If you were off sick, how long would it take for something important to go wrong?
If it’s a week, weekly meetings may be appropriate.
If your absence wouldn’t cause issues, you might not need that meeting at all.
Finally, consider this: do your team members get more done when you’re on holiday? If so, it might be time to rethink how and why you’re holding meetings.
Disclaimer: As always these posts are not aimed at anyone client or employer and are just my personal observations over a lifetime of dealing with both management and frontline associates.
This is more of an open discussion than my usual posts, as I don’t have a definitive answer. Lately, I’ve been reflecting on when optimism and cheerfulness are most effective in managing projects and leading large teams. Before diving into this, let’s establish some definitions—at least as I interpret them when it comes to a project. Even these are open to debate, but they serve as a foundation for the discussion.
Key Definitions
Determination:
Determination is the unwavering desire to contribute and work through a project. It’s about sheer resolve—nothing will stop you from completing the task. Key point: Determination is neither emotional nor time sensitive. It’s not about the future or the success of the project. It’s about the here and now: getting things done.
Optimism:
Optimism builds on determination by adding hope for a better future. It’s the belief that, despite challenges, there’s a goal worth striving for. Key point: You might not be happy about the present situation, but you’re confident it will improve. Optimism is forward looking and success oriented.
Cheerfulness:
Cheerfulness is optimism combined with happiness. It’s an outward expression of positivity—not just believing in a better future, but also radiating joy and enthusiasm in the present. Key point: Cheerfulness is upbeat, engaging, and contagious, making it a powerful tool for boosting morale.
Application to Management Styles Now we have definitions, how do these traits translate into leadership and project management?
The Cynical Optimist
A cynical optimist maintains hope for the future but is realistic and grounded. They don’t sugarcoat challenges or pretend everything is fine. Instead, they acknowledge the hard work ahead while believing in the eventual outcome.
The Cheerful Optimist
A cheerful optimist is not only hopeful but also exudes enthusiasm and positivity. They inspire others by creating an energetic, uplifting environment, making challenges seem less daunting and the goal more attainable. At first glance, you might assume that a cheerful optimist would naturally be a better leader—someone who motivates and energizes their team. However, the effectiveness of either style depends on the audience.
Audience Matters
The best leadership style is often dictated by the needs and expectations of your team or stakeholders.
Technical Teams, such as Information Technology or Business Analysts:
These individuals are typically pragmatic and focused on the realities of their work. They’re not easily swayed by cheerfulness and can see through superficial positivity. What resonates with them is honesty and a grounded no nonsense approach. For these teams, cynical optimism works best:
Acknowledge the challenges.
Communicate that success is possible with effort.
Avoid overly cheerful reassurances that might come across as dismissive of their workload. Example: “Yes, this will be a grind, and it’s going to be tough. But with persistence, we’ll get there.”
Non-Technical Stakeholders such as Customers or Senior Managers:
Stakeholders often value reassurance and confidence. They’re less concerned with the technical details and more with the perception of progress. Cheerful optimism can prevent unnecessary panic or doubt, making it easier to keep projects on track. For these groups, cheerfulness is more effective:
Inspire confidence in your ability to deliver.
Reassure them that challenges are under control.
Create a sense of enthusiasm about the project’s future. Example: “We’re making great progress, and while there are challenges, I’m confident we’ll deliver excellent results.”
The Importance of Adaptability Ultimately, the best managers are adaptable. They adjust their style based on their audience and the situation.
Be honest and pragmatic when dealing with teams that value transparency and realism.
Be cheerful and reassuring when dealing with stakeholders who need confidence and enthusiasm to stay engaged.
It’s all about balance: conveying optimism without dismissing reality and bringing energy without losing credibility.
Does anyone else have thoughts on this? How do you balance cynicism, optimism, and cheerfulness in your leadership style? Disclaimer: As always these posts are not aimed at anyone client or employer and are just my personal observations over a lifetime of dealing with both management and frontline associates.
