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

321–330 of 372 posts

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

#321

Post by eurekin »

pixl97 wrote: post #270
ionwake wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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/desi…

> and expects others to knife them in the back

Sounds a lot like a projection, of what they would actually do

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

#322

Post by schmookeeg »

jmyeet wrote: post #318
schmookeeg wrote: post #280

I have traded within a quite tight comp band for my entire 30 year tech career. I am useful in general. I have been valued by being offered "promotions" and "strategic instead of tactical" positions, but I always chafe. I enjoy the work. I enjoy solving specific problems in tech. I do not enjoy the "business" of tech and have no interest in any of it. I definitely have inadequate drive to grow a business and make oth…

I've thought about this issue a lot. What's become clear to me later in life is that I have ADHD and probably autism. This has not only hindered social relationships, it's lethal to your career to. Why? Because a bit of autism tends to make you good at your job but allistic people can always seemingly tell you're "off", no matter how well you (try and) mask. And ultimately career progression is a social game. It's no…

Thanks. I already retired once at 39 with this exact view in mind. I'm frankly amazed I'm still overemployed at 48. But yes, I've been super bearish on the remaining chapters in my career. I've hedged by paying off a (argh, low-interest) mortgage, stacking the bank, and I have a very well developed and near-tech-money side hustle that is ageism resistant.

I keep waiting for this shoe to drop. It hasn't yet. Now the pendulum has swung far enough that I want to preserve my time more than I want to stack more bricks. Amusingly, it's a source of tension with my wife who plans to work for another 15 years and will not be excited to see me out playing without her. (her people live into 100 on the regular. My people die in their 40s and 50s with alarming frequency -- our horizon perspectives are very different :D )

All good problems. If I lose all my tech jobs tomorrow, I will be grateful for the run and not be going hungry. I half expect I'd be relieved.

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

#324

Post by drdec »

yibg wrote: post #265
eitally wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I think you have missed the subtle difference between "valuable" (which you introduced) and "valued" (which is the subject of the article)

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

#325

Post by jimmydddd »

mancerayder wrote: post #283
schmookeeg wrote: post #280

I have traded within a quite tight comp band for my entire 30 year tech career. I am useful in general. I have been valued by being offered "promotions" and "strategic instead of tactical" positions, but I always chafe. I enjoy the work. I enjoy solving specific problems in tech. I do not enjoy the "business" of tech and have no interest in any of it. I definitely have inadequate drive to grow a business and make oth…

The relationship between a contractor and a business is more honest: exchange labor time for cash. Between an employee and employer, enter ideology: I do this because I love it/love helping clients/ working communally to improve the business. Or competition: my bonus is 50 percent of my salary and we're stack-ranked. Or fear: oh my god, I got only Meets Expectations in my review. Will my pay be flat? And contractors…

I had one job as a contractor where I got hired as a temp. After 6 months they wanted me to join as an employee, but I turned it down because it would have meant travel. They kept re-upping me for 6-month intervals, and it was a good feeling to know that they truly wanted me there. Also, I didn't get a year end review, so I just got to keep working while the other engineers got called in one at a time and then came out pissed off about their lower than expected raise. :-)

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

#326

Post by roncesvalles »

jimbokun wrote: post #221
JadeNB wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure this is a reliable guide. I'm in academia, and the people who really can't be replaced are the administrative staff with hard-won institutional knowledge and connections--but they're valued far less than splashy big-name faculty with no institutional loyalty.

Why would administrative staff ever be valued over the people providing the core purpose of the institution?

I agree. It sounds like lack of documented processes and leadership oversight have made that corner of the organization a kind of personal fiefdom of the administrative staff.

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

#328

Post by roncesvalles »

47282847 wrote: post #46

“ I distinguish four types. There are clever, hardworking, stupid, and lazy officers. Usually two characteristics are combined. Some are clever and hardworking; their place is the General Staff. The next ones are stupid and lazy; they make up 90 percent of every army and are suited to routine duties. Anyone who is both clever and lazy is qualified for the highest leadership duties, because he possesses the mental cla…

Unfortunately I've found that big tech companies are stuffed with "stupid and hardworking", an inevitable consequence of perf eval cultures that value work output over anything else.

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

#329

Post by fc417fc802 »

0xEF wrote: post #134
fc417fc802 wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The domain of the email in your profile seems to be dead at the DNS level FYI.

Thanks. It was the domain for an old blog that I took down awhile ago. If you were trying to contact me privately for some reason, I can provide a working email if you give me a brief idea of what you wanted to discuss in a comment.

I wasn't. It was just a clever domain so I tried to pull it up out of curiosity. HN profiles often link to some interesting stuff.

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

#330

Post by roncesvalles »

ionwake wrote: post #60
47282847 wrote: post #46

“ I distinguish four types. There are clever, hardworking, stupid, and lazy officers. Usually two characteristics are combined. Some are clever and hardworking; their place is the General Staff. The next ones are stupid and lazy; they make up 90 percent of every army and are suited to routine duties. Anyone who is both clever and lazy is qualified for the highest leadership duties, because he possesses the mental cla…

I worked as a small elite unit in a world leading airline, team of about 5 poeple that went down to basically 1 ( after I was finally labelled as "difficult to work with" - ( I actually was always quiet calm friendly used to working in critical teams and worked basically close to 12 hour days. Eventually a deadline was missed and "someone had to be blamed". Having worked in countless companies I was ready for this an…

I've noticed a strong trend that newly hired managers suffer from imposter syndrome more than anyone else. Rocking the boat, lighting fires, picking fights with their reports or people outside the team - these are common symptoms.
Post reply on HN