3 ms·

>For his part, Hurwitz himself resigned from a job at one point. He turned down a counteroffer from his boss. Six months later, he quit his new job. He got his

by jere 13y ago

>For his part, Hurwitz himself resigned from a job at one point. He turned down a counteroffer from his boss. Six months later, he quit his new job. He got his old job back, in part because of his decision to turn down the counteroffer. “The boss told me it was because I hadn’t played games and had acted ethically,” Hurwitz said. Wot? His company gave him a counteroffer with the attitude that accepting their offer would be unethical?

jasonwocky 13y ago
Well, he could have hemmed and hawed and led them on. Sounds like maybe he didn't do that; perhaps he just gave them a simple "no" and they respected that.
smacktoward 13y ago
Counteroffers are frequently made out of desperation more than anything else. "Holy shit, Bob is leaving?!? I didn't even know he wasn't happy. Quick, put together something that'll keep him around." The problem with this is that the people making the counteroffer often feel they are doing so, effectively, at gunpoint: give me a bag of cash right now, or lose a key cog in your machine. "Nice company you've got there. Sure would be a shame if something were to... happen to it." So they are often made grudgingly, which leads to bad feelings. And if they are accepted the bad feelings go deeper, because now the people making the counteroffer feel like you put one over on them. So paradoxically, taking their counteroffer can hurt your relationships with those people pretty deeply, while rejecting it can keep them stable or even improve them -- when you walk away, they can interpret it as you choosing not to put one over on them. None of this makes any logical sense, of course, but we're talking here about emotional decisionmaking, which has very little to do with logic.
- dllthomas 13y ago
  It makes some sense - leaving demonstrates that pushing them for the counteroffer wasn't your intent at the outset.
jrs235 13y ago
Perhaps he said he needed a change (not more money) because he was feeling burnt out or lost motivation on the project he was working on and perhaps in an attempt to keep him his employer tried throwing more money at him. Perhaps he turned down the more money offer because it really wasn't about money. Perhaps 6 months later he was rejuvenated and because his boss could see his leaving 6 months earlier wasn't just an attempt to "extort" more money but legitimately about burn out he hired him back on. Perhaps it would make more sense if it said "because he hadn’t played games and hadn't acted unethically"
rhizome 13y ago
No, that him turning it down was ethical according to Hurwitz, that he acted on his own terms. There is no such thing as "unethical." There is always an ethic involved unless the person is acting completely without reason and randomly, such as when they are insane (and even then there is probably still some kind of reason in their mind). In this way, a person conducting themselves in an "unethical" way is likely on the verge of death or incarceration.

by jere 13y ago

jasonwocky 13y ago

Well, he could have hemmed and hawed and led them on. Sounds like maybe he didn't do that; perhaps he just gave them a simple "no" and they respected that.

smacktoward 13y ago

Counteroffers are frequently made out of desperation more than anything else. "Holy shit, Bob is leaving?!? I didn't even know he wasn't happy. Quick, put together something that'll keep him around." The problem with this is that the people making the counteroffer often feel they are doing so, effectively, at gunpoint: give me a bag of cash right now, or lose a key cog in your machine. "Nice company you've got there. Sure would be a shame if something were to... happen to it." So they are often made grudgingly, which leads to bad feelings. And if they are accepted the bad feelings go deeper, because now the people making the counteroffer feel like you put one over on them. So paradoxically, taking their counteroffer can hurt your relationships with those people pretty deeply, while rejecting it can keep them stable or even improve them -- when you walk away, they can interpret it as you choosing not to put one over on them. None of this makes any logical sense, of course, but we're talking here about emotional decisionmaking, which has very little to do with logic.

dllthomas 13y ago
It makes some sense - leaving demonstrates that pushing them for the counteroffer wasn't your intent at the outset.

jrs235 13y ago

Perhaps he said he needed a change (not more money) because he was feeling burnt out or lost motivation on the project he was working on and perhaps in an attempt to keep him his employer tried throwing more money at him. Perhaps he turned down the more money offer because it really wasn't about money. Perhaps 6 months later he was rejuvenated and because his boss could see his leaving 6 months earlier wasn't just an attempt to "extort" more money but legitimately about burn out he hired him back on. Perhaps it would make more sense if it said "because he hadn’t played games and hadn't acted unethically"

rhizome 13y ago

No, that him turning it down was ethical according to Hurwitz, that he acted on his own terms. There is no such thing as "unethical." There is always an ethic involved unless the person is acting completely without reason and randomly, such as when they are insane (and even then there is probably still some kind of reason in their mind). In this way, a person conducting themselves in an "unethical" way is likely on the verge of death or incarceration.