Live data from Hacker News

In a high-stress work environment, prioritize relationships

wqtz.bearblog.dev

41–50 of 229 posts

Re: In a high-stress work environment, prioritize relationships

#41
post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

plural noun: malcontents :- a person who is dissatisfied and rebellious. In Silicon Valley that is called a Founder.

And you don’t hire founders.

Pithily true, but what about acquihires?

Re: In a high-stress work environment, prioritize relationships

#42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an interviewer it's too hard to tell if a candidate was indeed a victim of circumstance, like an acquisition that turned into a shitty job, or if they are just a disgruntled malcontent who will also be disgruntled and malcontent at your company. The downside of hiring a malcontent is huge. An interviewer can assume that most quality candidates are also aware of this dynamic and will wisely choose to represent the…

So you are saying it is better if the candidate lies. Otherwise you will be forced to reject him because there might be a possibility that the problem was him. Seems like you are hiring the best liars. Or at least the best at playing an arbitrary game of saying and not saying the correct things that won't trigger a rejection. At this point, are you even needed? Maybe we could replace the interview process with a lott…

> the best liars

Maybe, but I think there's a piece where you can be genuinely demonstrating in the interview context that you know how to reflect positively on an experience which obviously wasn't that all great or why would you have left it.

As an interviewer I'm not looking for IT WAS THE BEST WOO but rather "these were the elements I most appreciated, these were where I had opportunities to grow and push myself and here's what I ultimately got out of it." Yes, the "what went wrong" will be discussed too, but that's a different question, and as interviewee I look to pitch the downsides less in terms of "I had the worst boss/colleagues/projects/clients/whatever" and more of a circumspect kind of "elements A and B that had been really good early on were less of a priority later in my tenure, and I felt that management and I had differing priorities which was increasingly leading to unhelpful compromises in how things were done; although I stuck it out for some time to ensure as smooth a transition as possible, ultimately I came to feel that my seat would be better filled by some more aligned to the company goals."

Re: In a high-stress work environment, prioritize relationships

#43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you are saying it is better if the candidate lies. Otherwise you will be forced to reject him because there might be a possibility that the problem was him. Seems like you are hiring the best liars. Or at least the best at playing an arbitrary game of saying and not saying the correct things that won't trigger a rejection. At this point, are you even needed? Maybe we could replace the interview process with a lott…

Constant negativity kills team morale. Even if the complaints are about things which are individually valid, the pattern is toxic. Imagine a sports team. After running around for 45 minutes you're all probably tired. Would you rather work with someone who says "I'm tired, it's hot in here" or someone who focuses on encouraging those around them and talking about the team's accomplishments? Part of the interview is pr…

Yes, and toxic positivity obliterates morale - being unable to acknowledge the negative outcomes of decisions means that you are just working towards some idiot's dream until you go play the roulette wheel again to figure out what the next people are not telling you about this place.

This is what literally makes tech workers go dream about farming.

Re: In a high-stress work environment, prioritize relationships

#44
post #3

Similarly, once you’re looking for a new job, assuming you’re looking for roles with the same job title you had before, do everything you can to paint your previous job in a positive light even if it was miserable. If you don’t, interviewers are left wondering how to interpret your dissatisfaction at your previous job.

When I interviewed people I took this the other way.

Someone who is going through the pain of looking for a new job is not going to like their current job.

If when asked, their answer is satisfaction with your current job, when most jobs are miserable, then i m thinking you're being dishonest with me.

Re: In a high-stress work environment, prioritize relationships

#45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As an interviewer it's too hard to tell if a candidate was indeed a victim of circumstance, like an acquisition that turned into a shitty job, or if they are just a disgruntled malcontent who will also be disgruntled and malcontent at your company. The downside of hiring a malcontent is huge. An interviewer can assume that most quality candidates are also aware of this dynamic and will wisely choose to represent the…

So you are saying it is better if the candidate lies. Otherwise you will be forced to reject him because there might be a possibility that the problem was him. Seems like you are hiring the best liars. Or at least the best at playing an arbitrary game of saying and not saying the correct things that won't trigger a rejection. At this point, are you even needed? Maybe we could replace the interview process with a lott…

> So you are saying it is better if the candidate lies.

This is a toxic framing of an essential test. Constructing polite fictions is an essential skill for collaboration - no less essential than coding. Saying you're leaving in part because "your vision for the product has drfted from leadership's" tells me you probably think they were a pack of moronic baboons and that if you feel that way about some of your future team mates you can keep it under wraps.

Re: In a high-stress work environment, prioritize relationships

#46
post #3

Similarly, once you’re looking for a new job, assuming you’re looking for roles with the same job title you had before, do everything you can to paint your previous job in a positive light even if it was miserable. If you don’t, interviewers are left wondering how to interpret your dissatisfaction at your previous job.

Newsflash, people looking for a job were either fired or unhappy about something.

The insistence on hearing only pleasurable falsehoods is not healthy.

Re: In a high-stress work environment, prioritize relationships

#47
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Constant negativity kills team morale. Even if the complaints are about things which are individually valid, the pattern is toxic. Imagine a sports team. After running around for 45 minutes you're all probably tired. Would you rather work with someone who says "I'm tired, it's hot in here" or someone who focuses on encouraging those around them and talking about the team's accomplishments? Part of the interview is pr…

Yes, and toxic positivity obliterates morale - being unable to acknowledge the negative outcomes of decisions means that you are just working towards some idiot's dream until you go play the roulette wheel again to figure out what the next people are not telling you about this place. This is what literally makes tech workers go dream about farming.

Somewhere between toxic negativity and toxic positivity lies a middle ground and I think some of the comments here are presenting a bit of a false dichotomy.

When interviewing people, it’s usually possible to identify both extremes.

I’d prefer to hire someone who is not toxic. That goes for both extremes.

Re: In a high-stress work environment, prioritize relationships

#48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>is just so inauthentic I agree and resent that work is just a place where I go to get lied to and lie right back. We've found that lying is a highly successful workplace strategy. But the point of the lying game is to never admit we're lying. The pretzels people will twist themselves in to avoid the cognitive dissonance of lying all the time and not wanting to be a lair is maddening. I find facing it head on is a re…

I feel like this is broad enough to make most social interactions lying - if someone asks how you're doing and you say "good" and don't immediately vent about issues, you're trying to create a different impression, and so on? in many polite circumstances people don't want to hear a truth, they want things to go smoothly and easily.

>I feel like this is broad enough to make most social interactions lying

They... kinda are tho. We even have a term specifically for that: "white lie."

Sometimes, like in your "how are you?" example, various patterns of white lie ossify into social protocol where both participants are saying things they don't literally mean, but both participants know the game.

You've probably heard of cases where anglosphere people go traveling, ask people how they are (or use any of our other non-literal pleasantries), and are surprised when a real answer is given.

Re: In a high-stress work environment, prioritize relationships

#49
post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Constant negativity kills team morale. Even if the complaints are about things which are individually valid, the pattern is toxic. Imagine a sports team. After running around for 45 minutes you're all probably tired. Would you rather work with someone who says "I'm tired, it's hot in here" or someone who focuses on encouraging those around them and talking about the team's accomplishments? Part of the interview is pr…

Yes, and toxic positivity obliterates morale - being unable to acknowledge the negative outcomes of decisions means that you are just working towards some idiot's dream until you go play the roulette wheel again to figure out what the next people are not telling you about this place. This is what literally makes tech workers go dream about farming.

I have never had a work environment ruined by toxic positivity—the normal healthy human reaction to that kind of environment is gallows humor, which hits the sweet spot between acknowledging the problem and showing a willingness to be there with your team.

I'm sure there are people out there who do have a toxic positivity problem, but my own anecdotal experience leads me to prefer to err on the side of rejecting unnecessarily grumpy people, because they tend to more frequently be a problem.

Re: In a high-stress work environment, prioritize relationships

#50
post #3

Similarly, once you’re looking for a new job, assuming you’re looking for roles with the same job title you had before, do everything you can to paint your previous job in a positive light even if it was miserable. If you don’t, interviewers are left wondering how to interpret your dissatisfaction at your previous job.

I'm not sure this is always the best approach. You should not vent, clearly; and it takes two to tango. However, some concrete and professional differences in opinion do matter. This could be an opportunity to express how you deal with such a challenge. You might explain (without revealing proprietary information) a difference of how the company's (new?) direction diverged from your professional path, how you informed the organization with an open mind, evaluated options and collaboratively decided it was time to move on, with sufficient notice and transition assistance.
Post reply on HN