Is my advice too mercenary?

I can imagine a lot of new graduates having trouble with this:

> I think many people, especially those newer to the working world, underestimate just how ruthless and sociopathic our late-stage Capitalist working conditions really are [...] I’d love to live in a world where less mercenary advice wasn’t dangerous, but that’s not our world.

If you are lucky you will land in a place that has empathy and you will work with people whom you can trust, but those places are hard to find and even in the best places there will be ruthless actors.

If you are going to say something on exit it is best to say it to someone who has power who you trust. If you have access to a VP or CEO, for example. HR’s job is to quickly make problems go away and minimize risk to to the company. Them passing along helpful information to impact change is the opposite of making something go away, it creates a complication. No one hires HR people to create complications.

My reaction reading "Exit Interviews Are a Trap" is that the danger was overstated a tad which left too little room for the value of potentially benefitting people that are not yourself. To me it wasn't so much as "thinking about yourself" as it was "overstating the risks to yourself".

But I think it's still the advice people need to hear despite that. I agree with your article that people have rose-colored glasses on when going into those meetings and speaking their mind.

On a personal note: Jacob and I worked at a company that to me fits the description of the one in the article. I'm very curious if it's the same one.

I'm 46 and never in my whole career have working conditions been less ruthless nor less sociopathic than they are today. I'm constantly barraged with acceptance training, "human connection" training and calls where the expectation is to "share and connect" by telling the group something personal. I'm not with a bunch of kids either, these are all upper management very high 6 figure types.

I don't want to be one of those "back in my day" types but it use to be up-or-out. You came in at the bottom and either went up the corporate ladder at the proper rate or you were fired. That was sociopathic and bread ruthlessness in the workforce. Today it is touchy feely to the point of being confusing on what the actual expectations of the job are.

I'm assuming this is by design to keep the US population "on their toes" and at work doing productive things. Otherwise why would it be tied to employment?