19 ms·

As managers, we've had many individuals tell us "everything's fine; I like it here..." and then leave because "I'm ready for something new." So we often hear "I

• yobbo 5y ago
  Here is some autistic-level honesty that would be impossible to say out loud. It is probably the basic perspective of all disgruntled workers: "I want to be recognized and compensated proportionally to the value I create on your behalf. Furthermore, I suspect that the tasks/goals you choose for me are wasting opportunities for me to learn and for you to grow. Hence, I am bearing the long-term risks of your investment-decisions in my time, and you are reaping the short-term benefits. "Because you seem to be unable to recognize the value I produce, and because you are squandering the opportunity of my time, I do not believe you are suitable for your job. It is possible there exists a job definition for which you are 'killing it', but it is not apparent from my perspective. "So it is impossible for us to have an open honest conversation."
  • johnnyanmac 5y ago
    >I want to be recognized and compensated proportionally to the value I create on your behalf. but who calculates this "value"? And what is it relative to? That's partially why stocks exist, to try and answer that question.
    • evilos 5y ago
      The fact that a lot of workers are able to find an employer willing to give them a raise to come work for them indicates that there was perceived unrealized value. If you cannot find a better deal, then that probably means you are operating close to your "true perceived value".
    • yobbo 5y ago
      As long as there is disagreement, it's difficult to move forward. Managers could help show where/how value is created by collecting and sharing information. To understand, explain and illuminate how value is created should be one of the first basic tasks for managers. Part of the purpose is to eliminate as much disagreement with and among "reports".
    • MattGaiser 5y ago
      Stocks determine a value by constantly trading on the market. The value is whatever price the asset last sold for. That is how we end up with our high turnover culture today.
      • zaphar 5y ago
        The value is whatever price the asset will sell for today. This is informed by but not determined by the price it was last sold for. This difference is important.
  • pnut 5y ago
    You're right, this approach is going to fall flat. Imagine someone coming to you and saying it.
• hdhjebebeb 5y ago
  In my experience companies don't have long-term plans or vision for their products, and it leads to work becoming tedious. You come in excited with no understanding of the product, you get knowledgeable and learn what's good and what's bad. Eventually you fix the bad you can fix and learn what bad you can't fix, and then the frustration outweighs the enjoyment. I've tried to bring up these kind of big picture frustrations with managers before, but they're always focused on surviving the next 3-6 months.
  • Jasp3r 5y ago
    A hundred times this. Bad management is so painful. I work at a design agency acquired by a fortune 500 company. People starting leaving because the culture they liked vanished as everything became enterprise-y. The response from the management team after >30% of employees resigned was: ....nothing. Nothing to retain employees, nothing to acquire new ones, nothing to retain the DNA of the original company.
    • jhpankow 5y ago
      I'm sure it would make sense if you saw the balance sheet.
    • throwawayboise 5y ago
      Acquiring companies normally don't really want to preserve the culture or DNA of the acquired company, in my experience (even when they say they do). Ultimately, they want the whole company running by the same policies and procedures. They don't want to maintain carve-outs for subunits that used to be separate companies.
      • ornornor 5y ago
        True. I am always amazed at the “we just got acquired by $HugeEnterpriseyCorporation, it’s been an amazing journey and nothing will change we remain the same, just as a part of $BigCompany” As soon as the delayed bonus to the execs is due (usually 1–3 years), everyone quits in troves and it’s downhill from there.
• bogdanoff_2 5y ago
  Did you consider the possibility that both of those statements could be sincere at the time they are made? "This work is good enough for me for now, but in the future it might not be anymore, in which case I'll want to take it into my own hands to find something new. But since for the moment I like the work, I'm not necessarily thinking about that possibility in the future."
• bitwize 5y ago
  > The first step is creating enough trust and openness in the relationship to get past this communication impasse. How do you propose doing that given that a manager -- by their very job description -- does not have your best interests at heart and will happily use those interests against you if doing so answers "yes" to the central question: "But Is It Good For The COMPANY?"
• pkulak 5y ago
  Oh my God, so many games. Why can't I just do good work, get paid, and everyone get on with their lives?
  • a3n 5y ago
    Because you're in capitalist competition with everyone, laterally, vertically, and chronologically.
• melenaboija 5y ago
  I personally can't have any respect for managers that clearly understand what "everything is fine" means and say they they want drama-free employees. "Drama" is a way to express personal emotions, and probably wishes to change things to better, which I really hope my manager cares about.
• slg 5y ago
  >"everything's fine; I like it here..." and then leave because "I'm ready for something new." If we aren't taking people at face value I don't know why we should assume the second comment is the truth. "I'm ready for something new" sounds like the "It's not you, it's me" of reasons for leaving a company. It often doesn't benefit an employee to give a real reason they are leaving and many times those reasons have nothing to do with how their employer handled career progression. For example, if a engineer works at a large company (i.e. one in which a single engineer or manager has no real power to push for organizational change) there is little reason to voice their opposition to the overall direction of the company during performance reviews. It also doesn't make sense for that person to burn bridges by unnecessarily criticizing that direction on the way out the door.
• bproctor 5y ago
  If you keep prying after "I'm fine... leave me alone" then you'll quickly become the reason for them going from "fine" to "not fine".
• kazinator 5y ago
  > "everything's fine; I like it here..." and then leave because "I'm ready for something new." However, often that something new is just the same type of work. E.g. imagine that the tech organization is an orchestra. All you play is the same small set of Bach concertos. Your lead violinist likes it just fine, until she leaves because she is ready for something "new". Turns out to be some place where they play the same dozen Vivaldi concertos. Or not even that, but just a different selection of Bach. E.g. an embedded developer leaves "for something new", where something new is working on a bluetooth driver, exactly like now, but on a different SoC, with a different BT chip, and two kernel versions higher.
• tomaskafka 5y ago
  As en employee, to be honest to my manager requires 1. that I trust her/him 2. that I believe he can actually push the change that would help me through the company 2 has been a problem far far more often.
• HeyLaughingBoy 5y ago
  Exactly. I've found that it's important to probe any hint of discontent. Sometimes it's just a badly-phrased comment, but other times, the employee is (consciously or subconsciously) trying to tell you something. A phrase I used a lot is "what would you like to differently, or what would you like to learn?" That's often an opening to getting someone the kind of work they'd prefer to do, but are reluctant to bring up.
  • nine_zeros 5y ago
    > what would you like to differently, or what would you like to learn?" That's often an opening to getting someone the kind of work they'd prefer to do, but are reluctant to bring up. Just to give insight into why some ICs don't respond to this question. I asked my manager for promotion, he kept stringing me along. One of the reasons for said string-along was that the kind of stuff I want to work on is not big enough. Why couldn't he tell me this 6 months ago? I have no clue. But I have learned to never trust managers with this experience. Managers will have to work hard to earn my trust.
    • sokoloff 5y ago
      There’s an art to discovering mutually beneficial arrangements. If an employee loves working at their current role, is good at, wants to keep doing basically exactly that, is at the right level for the work they’re doing, but wants a promotion, there’s a conflict. Maybe some of that six months was the manager trying to figure out if there was flex anywhere to find a solution that worked for both sides.
      • WJW 5y ago
        There sure is an art to finding mutually beneficial arrangements, but there is sometimes also a point where you need to recognize no such arrangement exists. It seems equally likely to me that the manager may have realized right away that there was no (or not enough) flex in the situation and decided that instead of the team member leaving immediately they could perhaps be strung along and provide value to the company for a few more months. Some of the situations where no real flex exists are: - promotion wish where there is no place. For example, someone 1 level below the CTO wishing to be promoted to CTO will not be able to get their wish unless the current CTO leaves. If they don't, promotion to the desired rank will not be possible without changing companies. - salary demands that can't be met from the budget. Most middle managers do not have significant say over how much budget for raises they are allotted for the year. If one persons raise demand is bigger than the total then not all of it can be met. - As in the GP post, the things the employee wishes to work on do not fit in the wider strategy of the company and/or will not provide value commensurate with the salary received. In this case, depending on how insistent both sides are, sometimes no compromise is possible.
• akomtu 5y ago
  An honest 1-on-1 between two adults who trust each other would go along these lines: - Hey, how's life? What do you think about this project? - Well, it's shitty, to be honest. Didn't expect it to be this boring. And this on-call... I'm looking for a job that would pay 50% more for 50% less work. - Yeah, that's the way it is in this company. The owner is a greedy crook, and the fish rots from the head, you know. We're told to lie to employees that there's no budget for pay rises, while the profits have doubled. It's all bs. But I can refer you to a few places that pay what you want. I'm thinking to leave too, btw.
  • anticristi 5y ago
    This. An honest 1-on-1 between two adults is called an exit interview.
    • shuckles 5y ago
      Sincere question: why be forthright in the exit interview? I’ve always politely left doors open.
      • eric-hu 5y ago
        I have no idea why someone downvoted you. Keeping cards close to your chest in an exit interview seems like a strategic move. Sure, you can sugar coat and hint at things that can be improved, but why spell that out? It might clear things up, but it might just make you look picky and high maintenance, closing the door on a future working relationship.
        • ornornor 5y ago
          And it’s very unlikely to change things for those still stuck there anyway. I can’t think of an upside to being honest in an exit interview.
      • anticristi 5y ago
        I feel you can be more honest -- while still being polite -- in an exit interview, since your alternatives are no longer hypothetical. If you have a competing offer on the table that pays 50% more, then you are no longer demanding, you are informative.
• tkiolp4 5y ago
  I’m one of those “All is fine, leave me alone” who is planning to leave the company soon. My reasons: - I take pride on what I do, I really care a lot about my career, but my main motivation for working 9-5 is my paycheck. I want more money but not more responsibilities (sounds crazy, I know, but the outcome I produce allows me to ask for this). No company out there is going to give me a free salary raise, hence I switch jobs.
  • MaxikCZ 5y ago
    I dont claim to have significant experience with job market, but I wouldnt throw the possibility of "free salary rise" out of the window without even asking first.
    • arvinsim 5y ago
      Most people don't ask because the raise is lower than switching jobs. Some people also believe that their work speak for themselves and they shouldn't have to explicit ask for a raise.
      • johnnyanmac 5y ago
        >Some people also believe that their work speak for themselves and they shouldn't have to explicit ask for a raise. Sure. but closed mouths don't get fed. That's how we end up in the opposite situation that brought about this topic. Or worse, the oft-common "promotion" of a happy IC to management role who frankly isn't a good manager, despite being an amazing IC.
        • selfhoster11 5y ago
          > closed mouths don't get fed IMO, it's the manager's responsibility to advocate on behalf of the employee, especially if they want to retain them. There's also the matter that a raise doesn't need a promotion. Don't promote people upwards unless they are willing and already working at this level. Give them a simple raise instead.