17 replies to this topic

[XxXAbsolutZeroXxX]

Quote

Being a troll in-game translates IRL, finds developer

Riot has used the behaviour of its employees when playing League of Legends to identify potential problems in the workplace, finding a high correlation between those who are toxic in-game and unacceptable workplace behaviour, Re:Work reports.

Because all Riot employees play League, and have the same persistent player records as everyone else, it's a relatively easy matter to take stock of which employees have been attracting bad feedback from team mates and opponents. That done, Riot looked back at the dismissals it had made over the last year and found a correlation between poor in-game reputation and problem behaviour at work - a quarter of all fired employees had been unpleasant players. Toxic players tended to be toxic employees, even if the reverse wasn't always true.

Following that realisation, Riot took a proactive stance, looking at the most problematic LoL records of current employees and examining their workplace behaviour. Looking at the traits exhibited, snarky passive aggression and over authoritative behaviour were found to be the most common negative associations, with some employees 'pulling rank' on other players to intimidate them. This behaviour tended to fluctuate with mood, unsurprisingly, but the situation was bad enough that the company singled out the 30 worst offenders and separated them into two groups: those who needed a warning, and those who needed to leave.

These 30 employees were brought into resolution meetings and confronted with their chat logs. Most, the company reports, were appalled when asked to justify the behaviour, showing contrition almost across the board.

"Pretty much everyone we spoke with was appalled at their own behaviour. We actually received some essays from employees vowing to change their ways and become not just more considerate gamers but better people," said Riot's Talent head Jay Moldenhauer-Salazar.

Now, the logs form an active part of recruitment. All prospective employees are asked for their in-game account names so their behaviour can be tracked. All are then rated on a traffic light system to highlight any potential troublesome proclivities. In addition, Riot is now using the study to try and find out which players work best together, identifying the best team players to create more efficient employee groups.[/color]

http://www.gamesindu...toxic-employees

Interesting.

Edited by I Zeratul I, 10 June 2016 - 10:41 AM.

[Davegt27]

Hmmm I wonder what and who Riot is?

[Tarl Cabot]

http://www.riotgames.com/

http://www.riotgames.com/our-games

[XxXAbsolutZeroXxX]

Davegt27, on 11 June 2016 - 03:13 PM, said:

Hmmm I wonder what and who Riot is?

Riot Games is the developer of LOL - League of Legends.

League of Legends is kind of like Defense of the Ancients. Same genre.

[Mister Blastman]

Cowards. Those employees should have stood their ground when brought in for questioning. It is kind of bizarre how they questioned off-work hours behavior.

Edited by Mister Blastman, 13 June 2016 - 08:50 AM.

[Heffay]

Mister Blastman, on 13 June 2016 - 08:49 AM, said:

Cowards. Those employees should have stood their ground when brought in for questioning. It is kind of bizarre how they questioned off-work hours behavior.

Cowards? How do you figure?

Once they realized that there would be real life consequences for their behavior, they took stock of their situation and adjusted appropriately (at least in most cases apparently). Consequences... they actually work! What a concept!

[Mister Blastman]

Heffay, on 13 June 2016 - 09:35 AM, said:

Cowards? How do you figure?

Once they realized that there would be real life consequences for their behavior, they took stock of their situation and adjusted appropriately (at least in most cases apparently). Consequences... they actually work! What a concept!

If you say something, mean it. They were being terminated anyways. Look, sociopathic behavior can't be cured with "promises" or "training." It is an illness and permeates the upper echelon of corporate society. If some of the employees internally are sociopaths, there's not much the company can do to change it--that is, other than promote them into management where they'll flourish and grow.

[Heffay]

Mister Blastman, on 13 June 2016 - 09:46 AM, said:

If you say something, mean it. They were being terminated anyways. Look, sociopathic behavior can't be cured with "promises" or "training." It is an illness and permeates the upper echelon of corporate society. If some of the employees internally are sociopaths, there's not much the company can do to change it--that is, other than promote them into management where they'll flourish and grow.

They weren't being terminated. Well, some of them weren't. They were broken down into 2 groups, with one group being told they can continue to work there if they behave better.

And people should generally be given a chance to redeem themselves. Even you. If you're never allowed to walk back a statement you made in the past, you'll never be able to grow. You'll be stuck in a permanent state of stagnation, forever hamstrung by childish beliefs you held in the past.

Companies apparently can do a lot to change that as well. They can terminate employees who refuse to adapt and grow. And that's probably a really good thing.

[Mister Blastman]

Heffay, on 13 June 2016 - 09:50 AM, said:

They weren't being terminated. Well, some of them weren't. They were broken down into 2 groups, with one group being told they can continue to work there if they behave better.

And people should generally be given a chance to redeem themselves. Even you. If you're never allowed to walk back a statement you made in the past, you'll never be able to grow. You'll be stuck in a permanent state of stagnation, forever hamstrung by childish beliefs you held in the past.

Companies apparently can do a lot to change that as well. They can terminate employees who refuse to adapt and grow. And that's probably a really good thing.

If you say something in a game, you should mean it. And if you do mean it, be man enough to admit it. Sociopathy, by the way, can't be cured without extensive psychological help and even then, it most likely can't.

Redemption isn't achieved through acts or works, it is only granted through seeking forgiveness from the ones you slighted. Only after being forgiven may you seek atonement through works and action. If those employees were truly seeking redemption--along with the employer, they should first expose the employees and what they did to the public, apologize to the public and then gauge their reaction.

[Heffay]

Mister Blastman, on 13 June 2016 - 10:09 AM, said:

Redemption isn't achieved through acts or works, it is only granted through seeking forgiveness from the ones you slighted. Only after being forgiven may you seek atonement through works and action.

I disagree with that. Your actions matter, and if you're a shitheel and are called out on it, you can make good by not being a shitheel anymore. Seeking forgiveness is nice, but completely unnecessary (and probably impractical in this particular case).

People make mistakes. Let them admit it, make good, and move on with their lives.

[Mister Blastman]

Heffay, on 13 June 2016 - 10:13 AM, said:

I disagree with that. Your actions matter, and if you're a shitheel and are called out on it, you can make good by not being a shitheel anymore. Seeking forgiveness is nice, but completely unnecessary (and probably impractical in this particular case).

People make mistakes. Let them admit it, make good, and move on with their lives.

Seeking forgiveness is imperative for atonement. Without forgiveness--without admitting to your faults to those whom you have slighted, without making it public and placing yourself in their arms, you have avoided the issue entirely.

In the example cited in this thread, the employees were rude to gamers, not their employer. Apologizing to the employer does no good for the acts committed. They aren't being held accountable. The only thing that is happening is their job is being threatened which may or may not matter to the employee. While their behavior at work may change, make no mistake, the employee as a person will likely not change. They will continue to be who they are inside.

So the employee has a few choices:
a. Admit they did what they did and then stand by what they said and insist they were justified.
b. Admit they did what they did, apologize, then admit to the public what they did, apologize and seek forgiveness.
c. Deny everything.

Of the choices above, (a) is the most honest response while [b] seeks to take the high road and better themselves. However, (a) can also be viewed as the high road because perhaps they had a legitimate reason to act as they did. Just because a tyrant twists your arm and tells you you're wrong doesn't make you so--you are only wrong if you feel you are from deep within your heart.

This goes deeper than clean morality--to examine this you must delve into their psyche to see where they are at. Now if what they said was immoral, that again, depends on who is dictating what is and is not moral. This isn't black and white.

Edited by Mister Blastman, 13 June 2016 - 10:21 AM.

[Lily from animove]

so someone figure dout unpleasent people are unpleasent no matter if at work or at home or wherever? Wow such insight. Needs nobel prize.

But seriously, is someone supriesed by this? Whats up with common sense things nowdays receiving news as it were some weird scientific brake through, or new insights.

Edited by Lily from animove, 15 June 2016 - 07:54 AM.

[Rebas Kradd]

Marack Drock the Unicorn Wizard, on 14 June 2016 - 07:08 PM, said:

Probably shouldn't say anything here as I haven't exactly been a shining example on these forums but... yeah you ain't one to really talk Rebas.

I'm not talking about sarcasm and bluntness, I can handle that. What I don't do is walk into threads and derail them with third-grade gripefests while the author is just trying to get feedback on an idea. Tired of that crap. You don't like the game, leave already.

Edited by Rebas Kradd, 15 June 2016 - 08:09 AM.

[XxXAbsolutZeroXxX]

Lily from animove, on 15 June 2016 - 07:52 AM, said:

so someone figure dout unpleasent people are unpleasent no matter if at work or at home or wherever? Wow such insight. Needs nobel prize.

But seriously, is someone supriesed by this? Whats up with common sense things nowdays receiving news as it were some weird scientific brake through, or new insights.

Its surprising to me! I'm not about the troll life.

I always thought most trolls seemed like nice and normal people who came out like mr hyde under the anonymity of the interw3bz.

[Lily from animove]

I Zeratul I, on 16 June 2016 - 04:58 AM, said:

Its surprising to me! I'm not about the troll life.

I always thought most trolls seemed like nice and normal people who came out like mr hyde under the anonymity of the interw3bz.

I guess what we see in intenret is more of their true nature than in RL, so most are disguised in RL by a coat of insecurity and shyness. But deep within most are what they show in the internet.

[Heffay]

Marack Drock the Unicorn Wizard, on 15 June 2016 - 09:45 AM, said:

You are derailing this thread from its purpose Rebas. I.e. you have become what you hate.

What is the purpose of this thread?

[Rogue Jedi]

A few months ago my 12 year old nephew found some videos I had posted to youtube, and there were a few negative comments and insults on the video, he posted replies to those comments including threats and insults and a lot of swearing, and even used his own name to do it, he is not a bad child, but he can be a bit of a handful.
When I asked him why he said something to the effect of "that is how you are supposed to act on the internet".

After carefully explaining why it was a bad idea to act like that, weather face to fact, on the phone or on the internet, trying to avoid it sounding like I was telling him off ^{(after all his goal had been to stick up for me against people he thought were bullying me)} I am pretty sure I got through to him, because he had told and apologized to his mother (my sister) before I next saw her after the incident.

I am pretty sure I got through to him before it was too late to correct that sort of behaviour, in his case I think it was just imitating what he had seen elsewhere but imagine someone had been acting like that from the age of 10 to 25, as I am sure some people have been, and gets into the workspace believing that is just the way to talk and act when using a computer, what do you think will happen?

[Heffay]

Marack Drock the Unicorn Wizard, on 17 June 2016 - 06:13 PM, said:

Well read the OP... that would give you and idea. The point is to discuss this event. Rebas did nothing to add anything, other than shaming another user for being toxic (and thereby becoming a toxic user of this thread himself, making him a hypocrite), thus attempting to derail the thread.

Technically your post did the exact same thing. You are not holding to the *purpose* of the thread. You're just as much a part of the problem. And in fact you're exasperating it by replying, etc.

Not to mention that the original post just had a blurb from an article and no context whatsoever. I don't think there was a purpose stated at all.

Edited by Heffay, 19 June 2016 - 07:21 AM.