Earlier quoted context omitted.
So in the year 3000, a 20-year old has over 200 careers ahead of them?
Yes.
Sounds exhausting
Tell HN: Beware 'Ungrowth' in Your Job
271–280 of 293 posts
Re: Tell HN: Beware 'Ungrowth' in Your Job
#272Nice message. After being fired from like 6 jobs or something, I've tried to emphasize this vocally. I have abysmal short term memory, miserable sleep management, and I lose track of calendar stuff and different task tracking systems easily. But I can code, and I can communicate pretty well. So I try to emphasize this if it comes up. I deeply suck at managing communication in support requests with customers, and expecting me to be as good anyone else will just be telling me to start looking for another job, because I'll try and burn myself out only to fail. If it's absolutely crucial I never miss a meeting, as dumb as it is, I'm going to miss some here and then.
I like trying to get better at the things I've discovered some way to get progress at, but I hate trying to push myself to try and be perfect at something I can't.
Re: Tell HN: Beware 'Ungrowth' in Your Job
#273Earlier quoted context omitted.
Some. But there is also that thing where manager is supposedly paid for superior social skills. And lately I am realizing, that good 80% of communication work in the manager-developer relationship or within team is on developers. I mean, yeah, partly it goes with power differential where person lower on hierarchy has to do that work and management simply dont have to. But seriously, it would be nice if managers would…
Agreed, it is a two way street... but that means both have to participate for it to work too. Sometimes I think the fact that some devs move into management / senior type roles, not always great for communication. Yeah they can talk about bits, but the rest gets lost at times.
> Sometimes I think the fact that some devs move into management / senior type roles, not always great for communication. Yeah they can talk about bits, but the rest gets lost at times.
Not a single person I had in mind was previous developer. Just to be clear. As much as it is popular to knee jerk assume that developers dont have social skills, this one is much LESS pronounced with developers.
Re: Tell HN: Beware 'Ungrowth' in Your Job
#274Earlier quoted context omitted.
If a company won't promote me, and I'm clearly exceeding the standard for the next role, I take that experience, and describe myself as that level on my resume for the next job. Seriously. If you're doing the job, you're doing the job even if they won't officially give you the title.
Do you put down "staff engineer" if you're not officially a staff engineer?
Titles don’t mean much. I used to be a “Test Associate” and put “QA Engineer” on my resume. Whenever I get a title like Software Engineer IV, I just put Sr. Software Engineer on my resume. If I was leading a team as a developer, I’d have no problem calling myself Lead Developer, regardless of what my title was. As long as your experience maps to what you’re selling yourself as, there shouldn’t be much of a problem.
The only time I’d be mildly concerned would be in reference checks and background checks. I just tell my reference what I’ve been calling myself so it’s not a surprise and put my official title in the background check.
If your grossly misrepresenting yourself, make it through a subpar interview process, and you manage to get the job, you’ll simply be miserable & stressed out because your underperforming & worried about getting fired.
Re: Tell HN: Beware 'Ungrowth' in Your Job
#275Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, my biggest problem with how promotion processes work at big companies is this. How you're supposed to perform at your currently level is pretty well spelled out by your manager - exactly what your expectations are, etc. However, you're supposed to perform at the "next level" prior to being promoted. Expectations are less clear here. This leads to you doing a lot of things you think will get you a promotion (most…
If a company won't promote me, and I'm clearly exceeding the standard for the next role, I take that experience, and describe myself as that level on my resume for the next job. Seriously. If you're doing the job, you're doing the job even if they won't officially give you the title.
I find titles not that meaningful since they can have wildly different responsibilities depending on the organization.
Re: Tell HN: Beware 'Ungrowth' in Your Job
#276I've left 3 teams over this, and as a manager would encourage my people to try other teams if they feel ours isn't a growth direction.
Sometimes jobs change on you too. One position used to be for you, and now they need someone different. You should almost never strive to become that someone different.
Re: Tell HN: Beware 'Ungrowth' in Your Job
#277Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes.
Sounds exhausting
Not really. By then either we’ll live to 300 (or potentially forever, depending on how you define living), and/or have essentially auto-executing micro-factories and perfect markets so ideas become products with little effort, or we’ll all be batteries for our AI overlords, in which case this discussion is moot.
Re: Tell HN: Beware 'Ungrowth' in Your Job
#278Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your job should be your identity. You do it 8 hours a day. Your growth is extremely important. Ideally your job aligns with your values. If you haven't found this job yet you should keep searching. Do not complicate this with "economic arrangements" - you're just afraid.
> Your job should be your identity if your job is your identity then be sure and put away some savings for therapy. The moment something happens to your job outside your control like getting laid off, company going under, workplace harassment, even nasty office politics then a mental crisis will soon follow.
Typical worst case scenario thinking that prevents you from even trying.
Re: Tell HN: Beware 'Ungrowth' in Your Job
#279Re: Tell HN: Beware 'Ungrowth' in Your Job
#280Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'd have told him that what he was doing was very inappropriate (without buy-in from the team), and if he doesn't back off I'll quit. The reason not to do this is that you're very likely to provoke a defensive response and have the other person dig in their heels. A gentler approach is more likely to get results, less likely to create tension in the relationship, and sets the tone of future decision making as adver…
Well the magnitude of your response should be calibrated to the magnitude of the grievance. A new boss coming in and changing everything in a way nobody signed up for or is on board with is very egregious, and I _will_ quit if they don't back down, so I'm going to tell them that. It's a statement of fact. If they don't stop, and I quit, and I didn't say that ahead of time, then I haven't communicated what I meant to.
> Well the magnitude of your response should be calibrated to the magnitude of the grievance.
This is where I disagree. The magnitude of response should be determined by the likelihood of achieving the desired outcome. Sometimes that requires drawing a really firm line, but usually it does not. And I'd argue that it virtually never involves drawing that line as your first strategy.
Like I said, you should absolutely be willing to make that threat, and to walk away, but I don't think there's any benefit to yourself in leading with it. If your initial attempt fails, then try something more drastic until you either get your desired result or quit.
I don't think you can expect people to be rational all, or even most of the time. Just because something is a fact does not mean it is necessary or beneficial to say it.