Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

If you are useful, it doesn't mean you are valued

betterthanrandom.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 372 posts

Re: If you are useful, it doesn't mean you are valued

#261

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

strken wrote: post #200
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #114

I feel like "useful" and "valued" are very poor terms for the situations described in the article. I think a much better explanation is that just because you may excel in one role (and be recognized as such) does not necessarily mean you'll excel in another role. And heck, I think it's important to recognize these qualities and limitations in yourself . Calling this being "useful" or "valued" puts an emotional/moral…

Sometimes you're an investment, sometimes you're insurance, and other times you're a luxury or even an impulse buy. I think this is a better framing because it explains some behaviours that are otherwise baffling: if I'm hurting for cash, I'm going to stop adding to my savings before I cancel all my insurance, even if the expected rate of return is higher.

I really like this comment and I think your framing is the correct way to think about it.

For example, when I look through the pattern of folks in my LinkedIn network who have been hit hard by layoffs, it's clear to me that a lot of roles were "luxuries" or "impulse buys" during the ZIRP era, and so many of those roles have vanished over the past 2 years or so.

Re: If you are useful, it doesn't mean you are valued

#262

Post by baxtr »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #114

I feel like "useful" and "valued" are very poor terms for the situations described in the article. I think a much better explanation is that just because you may excel in one role (and be recognized as such) does not necessarily mean you'll excel in another role. And heck, I think it's important to recognize these qualities and limitations in yourself . Calling this being "useful" or "valued" puts an emotional/moral…

I think there is a difference though. I have seen people who are useful but not perceived as being valuable.

Key differentiator in all these cases was bad or missing communication.

Do good stuff and make sure enough people notice. If you don’t self-market yourself, others who are less useful to the company for sure will.

Re: If you are useful, it doesn't mean you are valued

#264

Post by wat10000 »

I thought this would be about what you actually do versus what you're perceived as doing.

That's how I'd interpret these words. "Useful" means you do something that's beneficial to the company (or at least your management). "Valued" means that the company (or at least your management) believes you do something that's beneficial to them. In a well-run company, these match well. In many companies, they don't.

Being valued is a big part of what drives advancement. If you're seen as beneficial then the company (or management) will usually try to keep you, and offer you opportunities to expand that benefit. If management sees and understands what you do, then being useful can suffice here. Otherwise, the gap between these things means you need to be political and ensure that your usefulness is seen and understood.

The article seems to be talking about leverage, collaboration, and reach. Your usefulness on your own is limited. Beyond a certain point, the only way to become more useful is to start acting as a multiplier to other people's efforts. That's what it describes as "valued," but that really doesn't seem like the right word at all.

I'd put it like this: success on the job depends on how you're seen, not just what you do. Be mindful of how those are connected at your particular position. And your impact, both in terms of practical outcomes and visibility, can only grow so much on your own. If you want to go beyond that, you need to work with others and multiply their work.

Re: If you are useful, it doesn't mean you are valued

#265

Post by yibg »

eitally wrote: post #183
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #114

I feel like "useful" and "valued" are very poor terms for the situations described in the article. I think a much better explanation is that just because you may excel in one role (and be recognized as such) does not necessarily mean you'll excel in another role. And heck, I think it's important to recognize these qualities and limitations in yourself . Calling this being "useful" or "valued" puts an emotional/moral…

I actually don't agree, but I'm open to being convinced otherwise. I posit that there's an employer expectation that every employee will be "useful", but utility is a fungible characteristic and the majority of managers and employers treat job descriptions of standardized roles just like that. Employees in those roles are susceptible to both replacement and career advancement, depending how "useful" they are, and how…

It seems the difference is just the degree of usefulness / value. Rather than being different terms, I think they're just different spots on the spectrum. What's the difference between someone being "useful" vs "valuable", one is 6/10 the other is 8+/10 (made up numbers).

A sales person that consistently hits quota is useful. A rainmaker that keeps bringing in million dollar deals is valuable.

Re: If you are useful, it doesn't mean you are valued

#266

Post by joshmlewis »

ricardobayes wrote: post #172
mboto wrote: post #62

What is also useful to keep in mind is the tendency to recreate your primary family life in the workplace. So if you had critical controlling parents who never valued you and everything you ever did was worthless, then you'll tend to select for those places and it is often done outside of awareness. Was your primary family spent being valued and appreciated? Then you'll select for that and when people start to not va…

Incredible comment, thank you. I can't believe I read this for free. This is probably years of distilled behavior science applied to a workplace-specific environment.

It's called attachment theory and does show up in more than just romantic relationships.

Re: If you are useful, it doesn't mean you are valued

#267

Post by magicalhippo »

magicalhippo wrote: post #12

I recently had a bout of this at my current work. For a while I was struggling to pinpoint my discontent, but I ended up realizing it was because I felt I was undervalued compared to the contributions I had made over the years. As it happened, my superiors had come to realize the same, so when I asked for a talk, they preempted my plan by announcing this. As mentioned by the article, I've since been included in much…

Was in a hurry, so realize I forgot my main point.

I wish I had realized the source of my frustration and thus acted on it earlier.

It lead to a quite downbeat feeling, which still lingers a bit every now and then.

Of course this was just before the current mass layoffs, so getting a new job was definitely an option then, which I almost certainly would have taken had they not seen me.

Re: If you are useful, it doesn't mean you are valued

#268

Post by kevinventullo »

77pt77 wrote: post #238
isoprophlex wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll add to the general consensus here that this is an extremely valuable comment. At least for me it closely resonates with things I am only now discovering, at an age close to 40; the (in)ability to set and guard boundaries is super dependent upon early life and upbringing. Thanks for articulating this so clearly.

Setting boundaries is only a thing if you're able to implement them, just like in geopolitics. If you lack the power to implement them they mean nothing. Children can try and set the boundaries they want, but parents, family and society in general can just laugh and ignore them.

You do need a certain degree of leverage. I think especially in the tech sector, people often do not realize how much leverage they have, and how a little pushback can go a long way. It is sometimes worth asking and testing: “Are they really going to fire me for this?”

Re: If you are useful, it doesn't mean you are valued

#270

Post by pixl97 »

ionwake wrote: post #139
eurekin wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> However I will never forget how the one man, who never actually did any work, who interrupted everyone, and who made these accusations, was basically doing everything he could do "seem like he had a job". Judging from your description, you could actually be a threat to his position. So that might be a preemptive strike.

I had not even thought of that! I did accidentally after a 10 hour day - slip for for half a second and said "what!?!?" it was less than a second and I was half way through leaving - it was after working hours, it was a big, complex question and interrupted my flow brashly, I didnt even realise I had said it in the wrong tone and that other poeple may have heard it. I immediately did my best to answer the question, b…

A lot of people in management also have imposter syndrome which makes anyone under them that appears competent seem like a danger to them.

While doing a contract and consulting I've ran into this, but nothing like my wife in her career.

First corporate job as webdev/design, had her boss get fired for embezzlement of about quarter of a mil. Bosses after that kinda sucked so she left.

Second job (marketing manager/design) was fine for a while, until her great boss left and they replaced her with a sketchy character. I listened in on a number of her meetings and we came to the conclusion that he wanted to bring in a contracting group that was going to give him kickbacks. This guy seemed highly threatened by her. She found another job and within 6 months that guy was fired and the people that still worked there didn't know the exact details but there were hush hush whispers of fraud.

Third job (sr marketing manager) was fine with the first boss over her. But as always, that person found an even better paying position and left. Next director had an issue with taking other people's work and calling it her own. Wife did something unintentionally to embarrass the director in a meeting when the director had taken my wife's work and put her name on it and upper level management saw it. A few days later my wife was put on a PIP by her manager the director even though she had got outstanding remarks on the last quarter review that had ended a month before. Needless to say she did the following. Went and got a better job (director level now) but didn't tell them that. Then went to HR and filed a complaint over the PIP and ethics violations. After some back and forth it ended up with her leaving with a severance.

Really everything I've seen in management as you go up higher in the food chain is that it seems everyone is willing to, and expects others to knife them in the back in a lot of companies.

Post reply on HN