Career Chat V: the Common Ruin of the Contending Classes

[Tywin et al.]

9 minutes ago, Chataya de Fleury said:

My job is strange in that it is a months-long lull of reading The Financial Times and watching Bloomberg News and doing various background sh1t, and then, for 30 days at a time (75 days after year-end) is balls to the wall 20 hours a day insanity. Oh, and an insane streak can also occur at any time that my overlords decide to restructure our debt, acquire another company, or issue equity.

I do love my job. I love the insanity.

I am not a buttoned-up, structured, month-end close accountant. That would drive me batsh1t.

I've asked you this before, but why? There isn't a single I-O psychologist in the world that would recommend this kind of workload. The quality of work degrades so rapidly that by day three you're probably less useful than if you took a few days off and came back. 

Edited June 24, 2022 by Tywin et al.

[BigFatCoward]

I'd be surprised if I do more than 2 - 3 hours work work day. I'm mainly here 'in case shit happens'. 

[Chataya de Fleury]

14 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

I've asked you this before, but why? There isn't a single I-O psychologist in the world that would recommend this kind of workload. The quality of work degrades so rapidly that by day three you're probably less useful than if you took a few days off and came back. 

Two reasons: the first is the nature of the work. There is a hard filing deadline that can’t be missed. The second is that the information that I need (example: solid Q2 numbers) comes extremely late because we are terribly understaffed.

[Iskaral Pust]

On 6/23/2022 at 11:36 AM, Inkdaub said:

Don't say anything at all. Just hold out your hand and when he gives you the document, before he even turns away, immediately throw it in the garbage and go back to what you were doing.

I like this approach.  His attitude is inexcusable even if he has a genuine misapprehension about your relative seniority.  Unless he knows @Chataya de Fleury is his assigned administrative assistant, he has no business giving her menial administrative tasks.  Better to have a short, sharp correction early on.

[Tywin et al.]

4 hours ago, Chataya de Fleury said:

Two reasons: the first is the nature of the work. There is a hard filing deadline that can’t be missed. The second is that the information that I need (example: solid Q2 numbers) comes extremely late because we are terribly understaffed.

Which is what I expected. Can it not be fixed?

[Chataya de Fleury]

On 6/24/2022 at 5:59 PM, Tywin et al. said:

Which is what I expected. Can it not be fixed?

Not at this time. It’s extraordinarily difficult to find qualified candidates. Or candidates that have realistic expectations.

Honestly, a recession might correct the labor market a bit. 

[Tywin et al.]

50 minutes ago, Chataya de Fleury said:

Not at this time. It’s extraordinarily difficult to find qualified candidates. Or candidates that have realistic expectations.

Honestly, a recession might correct the labor market a bit. 

But isn't that an example of a fail business model? You work in a thriving industry for a very profitable firm. You should be able to hire more individuals and in theory there should be a ton of qualified candidates. So where are the wires not being crossed correctly?

[Chataya de Fleury]

1 hour ago, Tywin et al. said:

But isn't that an example of a fail business model? You work in a thriving industry for a very profitable firm. You should be able to hire more individuals and in theory there should be a ton of qualified candidates. So where are the wires not being crossed correctly?

Please take a look at what the credit markets are doing in the US before you say the words “thriving industry” and “very profitable” 

Our industry is also very niche, and there are very few qualified candidates.

[Iskaral Pust]

On 6/26/2022 at 12:02 PM, Tywin et al. said:

But isn't that an example of a fail business model? You work in a thriving industry for a very profitable firm. You should be able to hire more individuals and in theory there should be a ton of qualified candidates. So where are the wires not being crossed correctly?

I work for one of the most profitable businesses on the entire planet — certainly if measured by profit per employee.  We work long hours and have some intensely busy periods, even though we could comfortably afford to hire many, many more people.

Don’t underestimate the drive of the people in a place like this.  We don’t want an easy 9-5.  And we don’t want to dilute the quality pool by adding randoms — it’s definitely not easy to continue to find more people at the same level because there aren’t that many of them out there and they’re mostly locked up in their own very similar firm.  We would much rather have a narrower, more focused pool of really excellent colleagues who push each other hard and then share the profits across this smaller pool, even if it means working more — which isn’t viewed as a bad thing most of the time anyway.  The desire is to stay sharp and fully immersed.  Once you start just ambling along then everyone can tell and it’s time for you to get onto a different, slower track elsewhere.

Anyone at my firm who is my peer or more senior could retire tomorrow or find a low stress, low pay job just for enjoyment.  But very few of them do.  It’s more enjoyable to continue doing what we do until we’re absolutely burnt out.  If you leave any sooner then you feel like you left too soon.  Some brains are just hardwired to want that level of stimulus all the time.

[Tywin et al.]

42 minutes ago, Iskaral Pust said:

I work for one of the most profitable businesses on the entire planet — certainly if measured by profit per employee.  We work long hours and have some intensely busy periods, even though we could comfortably afford to hire many, many more people.

Don’t underestimate the drive of the people in a place like this.  We don’t want an easy 9-5.  And we don’t want to dilute the quality pool by adding randoms — it’s definitely not easy to continue to find more people at the same level because there aren’t that many of them out there and they’re mostly locked up in their own very similar firm.  We would much rather have a narrower, more focused pool of really excellent colleagues who push each other hard and then share the profits across this smaller pool, even if it means working more — which isn’t viewed as a bad thing most of the time anyway.  The desire is to stay sharp and fully immersed.  Once you start just ambling along then everyone can tell and it’s time for you to get onto a different, slower track elsewhere.

Anyone at my firm who is my peer or more senior could retire tomorrow or find a low stress, low pay job just for enjoyment.  But very few of them do.  It’s more enjoyable to continue doing what we do until we’re absolutely burnt out.  If you leave any sooner then you feel like you left too soon.  Some brains are just hardwired to want that level of stimulus all the time.

Dude, I've spent prolonged periods working >12 hours per day with no days off. And for shit pay, so please...

 

Why would you want to completely burn yourself out? That sounds miserable. Shouldn't you try to make the next 15-20 years rather enjoyable while maximizing your earnings within that space?

[Iskaral Pust]

29 minutes ago, Tywin et al. said:

Dude, I've spent prolonged periods working >12 hours per day with no days off. And for shit pay, so please...

 

Why would you want to completely burn yourself out? That sounds miserable. Shouldn't you try to make the next 15-20 years rather enjoyable while maximizing your earnings within that space?

Because it’s fun while you’re doing it, and it feels like a loss to step away.  You don’t stop until you feel burnt out. Any earlier is too early.

[Tywin et al.]

5 hours ago, Iskaral Pust said:

Because it’s fun while you’re doing it, and it feels like a loss to step away.  You don’t stop until you feel burnt out. Any earlier is too early.

Eh, being on the other side I can understand it's fun while you're doing it, but when you step away you'll ask yourself WTF were you thinking.

[VigoTheCarpathian]

7 hours ago, Tywin et al. said:

Dude, I've spent prolonged periods working >12 hours per day with no days off. And for shit pay, so please...

 

Why would you want to completely burn yourself out? That sounds miserable. Shouldn't you try to make the next 15-20 years rather enjoyable while maximizing your earnings within that space?

Teachers would like to have a word about shit pay, and healthcare workers would like one about burnout.

There is something valid to say about burnout and balance, but that is at an individuals discretion. If you love the game you are playing, or are in it for a different reason (i.e., the mission of the organization or field), there’s a sense of identity and/or enjoyment that override a lot of discomfort, and tend to make you engaged and better at what you do.   Which also tends to maximize your earnings…

[Chataya de Fleury]

Isk and Vigo have stated perfectly what I just couldn’t articulate.

Also, share grants come out tomorrow. If I’ve been screwed over, I will play nice for precisely as long as it takes for me to find a great role somewhere else. 

I also relayed my concerns about New Guy to the CEO. CEO and I are going to talk when he’s back in the office. If he doesn’t say what I want to hear, please reference the above statement.

I have no qualms in walking away from unvested shares if I’m not happy. I can make the same cash money somewhere else, and get stock somewhere else, even if I am sadly then also leaving 2022 bonus behind me (if I left in August, I forfeit bonus, because that pays out in March 2023).

Edited July 3, 2022 by Chataya de Fleury

[RhaenysBee]

So I have this, let’s say project team, because agile terminology makes my skin crawl. It’s a complete disaster in terms of both productivity and cooperation. I’m sort of at my wit’s end about what else I could do to harness the mess without stepping on other people’s toes and forcing my ideas, rules and way of working on others. It’s a general problem that there are 6 overly nice women on this team, we are in desperate need of some ExTJ brains and direct, blunt communicators. Whenever my task orientation button switches on, I can and will dominate the scene to kick them through a meeting and show some results, but it does make me feel like I’m the unkind, pushy bad guy who doesn’t consider the others and oversteps her own role. I keep discussing this with the others and my manager, and I still can’t decide if I should keep pushing or recognize that pouring effort into something without result is a waste of resources and just let go. Most unsuccessful and unpleasant project of my working life. 

[Iskaral Pust]

On 7/2/2022 at 4:57 AM, RhaenysBee said:

So I have this, let’s say project team, because agile terminology makes my skin crawl. It’s a complete disaster in terms of both productivity and cooperation. I’m sort of at my wit’s end about what else I could do to harness the mess without stepping on other people’s toes and forcing my ideas, rules and way of working on others. It’s a general problem that there are 6 overly nice women on this team, we are in desperate need of some ExTJ brains and direct, blunt communicators. Whenever my task orientation button switches on, I can and will dominate the scene to kick them through a meeting and show some results, but it does make me feel like I’m the unkind, pushy bad guy who doesn’t consider the others and oversteps her own role. I keep discussing this with the others and my manager, and I still can’t decide if I should keep pushing or recognize that pouring effort into something without result is a waste of resources and just let go. Most unsuccessful and unpleasant project of my working life. 

As someone who tests very strongly as ENTJ for operating and ENTP for ideating (I hate that word, and I blame McKinsey for it even if they didn’t create it), that situation sounds deeply unpleasant and frustrating even if it wasn’t unproductive too.

There is a middle ground between tolerating badness and totalitarian rule.  Convene a group meeting with an explicit agenda that you perceive the group operating dynamic to be sub-par and include examples.  Then ask the group do they agree* there is need/room to improve and ask for their suggestions how.  Don’t presume to impose your own unless you are nominated to lead, but do force the discussion and sneakily assign people ownership of certain ideas to improve.  Negative externalities need owners, any owner, or else they will continue to fester unresolved.

Ask them to agree a shared constitution for the group.  Nothing elaborate but include simple professionalism like committing to deliverable deadlines, specifying group goals & priorities in writing to remove ambiguity or subjectivity, how to reach group decisions quickly, and accountability tracking & enforcement.

*If they disagree there is a problem even after you give examples and put them on the spot to opine, then the problem is not excessive niceness.  They may have lower professional standards or they may be passive-aggressively sabotaging each other.  Remove yourself from the project.

[RhaenysBee]

18 hours ago, Iskaral Pust said:

As someone who tests very strongly as ENTJ for operating and ENTP for ideating (I hate that word, and I blame McKinsey for it even if they didn’t create it), that situation sounds deeply unpleasant and frustrating even if it wasn’t unproductive too.

There is a middle ground between tolerating badness and totalitarian rule.  Convene a group meeting with an explicit agenda that you perceive the group operating dynamic to be sub-par and include examples.  Then ask the group do they agree* there is need/room to improve and ask for their suggestions how.  Don’t presume to impose your own unless you are nominated to lead, but do force the discussion and sneakily assign people ownership of certain ideas to improve.  Negative externalities need owners, any owner, or else they will continue to fester unresolved.

Ask them to agree a shared constitution for the group.  Nothing elaborate but include simple professionalism like committing to deliverable deadlines, specifying group goals & priorities in writing to remove ambiguity or subjectivity, how to reach group decisions quickly, and accountability tracking & enforcement.

*If they disagree there is a problem even after you give examples and put them on the spot to opine, then the problem is not excessive niceness.  They may have lower professional standards or they may be passive-aggressively sabotaging each other.  Remove yourself from the project.

Yeah, we did this twice or three times already and keep slipping back into the same patterns. Just an example, we agreed that we would always write memos to keep agreements, tasks&owners in written form, bring absentees up to speed and we would rotate the role because writing memos is tedious. I wrote 3-4 memos and when I was absent or said I couldn’t take notes  today, nobody else did. They recorded the meeting, so I could listen to 2 hours of unstructured rambling and still have no idea what happened or what would be next. Then they even forgot to push the record button. And I entirely gave up note taking last week when we had a good half hour with decisions and a plan, and the next day the PO said she wanted to do the exact opposite and three more things after wasting a full hour on having four people read through a pdf in real time. I’ll stop ranting, I could fill books with all the shit that’s not working. 

That said, we never assigned ownership to the things we wanted to improve, that’s certainly a takeaway. And yes, you’re correct, there’s a fair measure of passive aggression as well, because everybody is frustrated to hell and back. As for tracking accountability and enforcing even the gentlest, most modest agreement, it would be the holy grail, and I think it’s not unreasonable that we would expect the PO to do this, but we are all drowning in this fake-feel-good, fake-consensus, laissez-faire sub-culture. It drives me nuts even though I’m both “I” and “F”,  if I want to keep abusing MBTI labels. 

anyway, thanks for your response, it was both helpful and supportive. 

Edited July 4, 2022 by RhaenysBee

[Iskaral Pust]

16 minutes ago, RhaenysBee said:

Yeah, we did this twice or three times already and keep slipping back into the same patterns. Just an example, we agreed that we would always write memos to keep agreements, tasks&owners in written form, bring absentees up to speed and we would rotate the role because writing memos is tedious. I wrote 3-4 memos and when I was absent or said I couldn’t take notes  today, nobody else did. They recorded the meeting, so I could listen to 2 hours of unstructured rambling and still have no idea what happened or what would be next. Then they even forgot to push the record button. And I entirely gave up note taking last week when we had a good half hour with decisions and a plan, and the next day the PO said she wanted to do the exact opposite and three more things after wasting a full hour on having four people read through a pdf in real time. I’ll stop ranting, I could fill books with all the shit that’s not working. 

That said, we never assigned ownership to the things we wanted to improve, that’s certainly a takeaway. And yes, you’re correct, there’s a fair measure of passive aggression as well, because everybody is frustrated to hell and back. As for tracking accountability and enforcing even the gentlest, most modest agreement would be the holy grail, and I think it’s not reasonable that we would expect the PO to do this, but we are all drowning in this fake-feel-good, fake-consensus, laissez-faire sub-culture. It drives me nuts even though I’m both “I” and “F”,  if I want to keep abusing MBTI labels. 

anyway, thanks for your response, it was both helpful and supportive. 

That’s even worse than your original description.  I don’t understand how some people can be as unprofessional as that.  Is that pervasive in the organization?  It sounds like the project members either don’t care about the project and no-one has authority for accountability*, or else they’re clueless about what professionalism should look like.  Possibly both.

In your shoes, I would either try to fix it or walk away.  If walking away, then be explicit that it’s because of dysfunction making it an unproductive time sink.  If fixing it, then you need to locate an executive sponsor who actually cares that the project succeed and make them responsible for introducing accountability consequences.  Carrots and sticks.

*But it sounds now like there is a PO (project owner?) who holds responsibility for this, rather than a leaderless, directionless collective.  So that person presumably has accountability for project success and the functioning of the group, but they’re just not doing it well (or you just disagree with their approach and methods).  If so, you have the same choice to walk away or fix it, but fixing it requires wresting control and taking the PO role yourself because you actually care about the project success.  Is that something the executive sponsor will support?  How confident are you that you can make the group engage with greater discipline?  Will they passive-aggressively resist?

In the long run, most people solve this problem by gravitating toward teams, managers or new employers that match their desired level of professionalism and shared commitment.  There’s a huge informal sorting mechanism by self-selection going on across the entire labor market that leaves capable people who give a fuck trying to work with other while avoiding all of the time wasters.  Some of the capable people stay with the incompetents because it feels good to be needed and cherished but most get tired of babysitting.

[RhaenysBee]

On 7/4/2022 at 2:45 PM, Iskaral Pust said:

That’s even worse than your original description.  I don’t understand how some people can be as unprofessional as that.  Is that pervasive in the organization?  It sounds like the project members either don’t care about the project and no-one has authority for accountability*, or else they’re clueless about what professionalism should look like.  Possibly both.

No, I wouldn’t say so at all. I work in three other groups that are quite okay with no or few and minor dysfunctionalities. They must (have at some point), as we all voluntarily applied to be in this project. That said, this is the third/fourth/fifth extra thing we do beside our “main jobs”, and it certainly doesn’t get the priority it needs or deserves.

There certainly is nobody with  authority, because the PO never claimed it, and nobody poached it either. And no, I don’t agree with her approach or methods and it’s a general unsaid understanding that she’s not great at it. That’s perfectly understandable for a whole baggage of reasons and context, but the point is, nobody will put it on the table, not even the project sponsors because it’s unsupportive. And nobody, including me, would ever usurp the PO role and look in the mirror the next day for the same reason (the group wouldn’t tolerate it either).

I would consider myself stronger at the project management side of things than she is, though this group is quite a challenge, I’ve experienced that every time I ended up taking charge at a meeting. The last effort I can and will do to fix it is volunteer as a default facilitator. If they agree to give that responsibility to me, I can take over all meetings and introduce some structure and see if that takes us anywhere at all. It should at least take some pressure off her, which may give her room to breathe and build on her strengths. That said, the role of vigorous meeting facilitator doesn’t come naturally to me either, I can do it, but it’s quite draining for me. So you know, where’s the cost benefit balance? 

Edited July 5, 2022 by RhaenysBee

[Starkess]

Huh. I had assumed I didn't get the job--after stating they were looking to "move fast" and generally hearing every couple days about interviews, next steps, scheduling, etc, they basically ghosted me since the end of June. Even when I nudged the recruiter I was told I'd be hearing in a week, and then heard nothing for 2 weeks. But to my surprise, she reached out last week and they are in fact still interested! Had interviews last Friday and today, supposedly the final interview. Supposedly should hear this week...things seemed very good (one of the managers straight up told me she wanted me to be hired), but of course I can't know for sure. Playing the waiting game now...

Funny, when things were going well before I started feeling like maybe I didn't want the job. Then when I thought I didn't get it, I was like noooo, I wanted that! And now again that it's a possibility I'm all anxious and questioning everything. Anxiety really do be doing the most.