[HN Gopher] Finding Your Swagger
___________________________________________________________________
Finding Your Swagger
Author : exolymph
Score : 135 points
Date : 2021-11-17 22:07 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (kevinyien.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (kevinyien.com)
| agd wrote:
| Thanks Kevin for writing this up.
|
| It's very hard to know the exact circumstances from one side of
| the story, but I agree wholeheartedly with voicing opinions when
| important, even if difficult or 'not your place'.
|
| And of course, it's usually a sign something has gone wrong with
| people management if someone is very surprised when they're
| fired.
| julik wrote:
| It is impressive how, when we get into situations like this, an
| executive first absorbs all the knowledge we can provide, then
| swindles the employee (because they have firing power) and then
| it is _on the employee_ to feel bad, to regurgitate and to
| reflect "how to improve oneself". Brings tears to my eyes.
| mrdobalina wrote:
| What a great story... sounds like the guy learned how to like the
| smell of his own farts after being fired by an exploitative
| (typical startup bs) employer.
| keeptrying wrote:
| Kevin, we met in SF. you have a habit of being hard on yourself
| and giving others the benefit of a doubt.
|
| I agree with others here - this was a toxic work culture. None of
| this was your fault but your method of building back up your
| confidence seems useful.
|
| Also anyone who fires someone with a pregnant wife is a repugnant
| human being.
| Bhilai wrote:
| > [6] Fortunately, the company agreed to provide COBRA which
| would cover our insurance costs for the delivery.
|
| This is so crazy and why employer based insurance cannot be a
| safety net in the case you end up needing an expensive treatment
| while also losing your job.
| gambiting wrote:
| It's even more crazy that you can be just fired on the spot
| like this. American employment system just fills me with dread
| when I think about it. But I guess people advocate for it
| because "it will never happen to them"?
| piaste wrote:
| From what I heard - anecdotes from my online friends' parents
| and grandparents - in the mid-20th century it _used_ to be
| ridiculously easy to get a job, for all social classes.
|
| One anecdote that stuck in my mind was someone's grandfather
| in the 1950s quitting and going to work to a different
| factory _only_ because they gave one week 's pay in advance
| and they needed the money to take a girl on a date that
| weekend.
|
| Nowadays I hear things have changed a _tiny_ little bit. But
| if you 're a software engineer who reads Hacker News, you
| probably still don't need to worry much about finding a job
| at all, only about finding an enjoyable job in the right
| place that ensures a sufficiently upper-class salary.
| sangnoir wrote:
| If we're in a one-sided class war, insurance and share-based
| 401k's are the capital-classes trojan horses.
| zaphar wrote:
| Many folks are rightly pointing out that the picture of the
| company painted in this article sounds pretty toxic. I want to
| mention one point about confidence or as Kevin calls it swagger.
|
| Confidence, let's you say I'm valuable enough that I can find
| another job. It gives you negotiation leverage. Confidence
| empowers you to write to the CEO and say things like: It is
| beginning to look like my expertise and skills are no longer
| valued here. As a result, I started looking around and I have an
| offer from another company where I feel like I can better
| contribute. Confidence changes things so that you are never
| really trapped at at toxic company.
| roopawl wrote:
| I hope OP realizes this is a toxic work environment
| tibbar wrote:
| Management failed him. Getting slowly shut out for months, one
| bit of cryptic feedback from the CEO, and then fired a few months
| later without warning? This is how a company destroys its talent
| base.
| sunir wrote:
| I'll take it further. Who cares about the company? It's how
| people destroy human beings.
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| I appreciate the honesty of the post.
|
| For myself, I don't think having "swagger" is particularly
| constructive. Ego is a mind-killer. It is selling smoke.
|
| I'm quite good at what I do. In some things, I am _very_ good;
| but at many, _many_ other things, I still have a lot to learn,
| and in other areas, it's best I stay out of the kitchen,
| entirely.
|
| In the areas in which I excel, I often exude great confidence,
| which is sometimes mistaken for arrogance.
|
| The key difference, though, is that I'm quite aware that I have
| yet to reach the summit. False confidence is a lie, but so is
| false humility. I'm good at what I do. I want people to feel
| assured. Confidence is a trait that helps to add to a team
| environment. Arrogance is corrosive. It damages a team.
|
| Regardless of how good I get, I've learned that kindness,
| respect, and empathy never go out of style. I can always listen
| to others, and treat them well. And, even more important; _I
| always have something to learn._
|
| If I am working for others; either as an employee, or under
| contract, _they are the boss_. They may make rash, uninformed
| decisions, give terrible orders, and treat me (or worse, my work)
| like crap. _I have to tuck in my bib, pick up a spoon, and engage
| in coprophagy_. It sucks, but that's life. I had to deal with it
| for a long, long time, and am grateful that I am finally free of
| it.
|
| I was a manager for a long time. I was a very good one, but I
| _hated_ that job. I did a _lot_ of open-source work during that
| time, as it kept me sane. Being humble was not a problem. I
| wasn't that high on the food chain, and my bib was quite stained.
|
| During a long career, filled with bad decisions and mistakes, I
| have learned that there's really no substitute for the kind of
| self-confidence (and humility) that is wrought by _experience_.
|
| _"Good judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from bad
| judgment."_
| jimbokun wrote:
| > In the areas in which I excel, I often exude great
| confidence, which is sometimes mistaken for arrogance.
|
| Isn't that how the article defines swagger?
| [deleted]
| mattcwilson wrote:
| The unegotistical, realistic, quiet, but firm self-confidence
| you're describing seems to me to be exactly what the author's
| labelling "swagger." Is this maybe just a terminology quibble?
|
| > What is swagger? For me, it's knowing what you're good at and
| acting accordingly -- earned confidence. But it's not
| arrogance. Your behavior and ability are in lock step.
|
| > Be assertive and opinionated even when you aren't as sure. Go
| back to having strong beliefs. Know your beliefs. Hold onto
| them.
|
| > Don't be an asshole about it, but push for what you need and
| don't give in to every request.
|
| Separately, and speaking as a current manager: the _last_ thing
| I want is for the people on my team to just blithely go along,
| "just following orders," if (when, and probably frequently) I'm
| asking for something shortsighted, ill-considered, or just
| plain stupid. I _crave_ feedback from the talented experts on
| my team because it helps make sure we're not suffering from
| blind spots, silos, or echo chambers. Like you're saying:
| experience has taught me that I always have something to learn.
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| You are correct. I just don't like the term "swagger." Like I
| said, I really appreciated the article, and its tone.
|
| It's just that words matter. In my experience, many folks run
| with the first dictionary listing, and ignore any nuances.
|
| https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/swagger
|
| I prefer "confidence."
|
| https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/confidence
|
| And, to your second point, one of the reasons that I was a
| good manager, was because I actively solicited and valued
| pushback from my employees. This was seldom a luxury that I
| was given, by my superiors.
|
| And, as a "gentleman of a certain age," I'll lay odds that a
| big reason for ageism in tech, is because most tech managers
| don't want to hire people that may have the ability,
| backbone, and judgment to push back on badly-formed
| strategies. I managed a "tiger team" of experienced C++
| engineers. I _had_ to pay attention to them, and treat them
| with respect.
| simonbarker87 wrote:
| This is something that military officer training (at least
| in the UK) teaches very well. You may have a degree and
| have gone to Sandhurst but woe betide any junior office who
| doesn't listen to their experienced NCOs.
| SavantIdiot wrote:
| > Ego is a mind-killer. It is selling smoke.
|
| I think you might be misunderstanding ego.
|
| That's like saying, "The engine in your car is bad." It's not
| good or bad, it's a part of your car. Ego is part of the triad
| of the Freudian model of the human mind.
|
| When people use ego the way you are using it, they are usually
| referring to a narcissistic personality disorder. Instead,
| cognitive behavioral therapists will refer to "ego strength".
| Which is important for healthy functioning.
|
| "Ego strength" is what the author is referring to. It is how we
| act assertively, instead of aggressively (bad) or passive-
| aggressively (also bad). This is a widespread confusion on HN,
| people think being assertive is the same as being aggressive,
| or being a narcissist.
|
| A person with low ego strength will act in a passive-aggressive
| way rather than be forthcoming, they will allow their
| boundaries to be ignored. Ego strength is how we hang on to
| ourselves.
|
| Ego strength is critical for a mental well-being. That is what
| this article is about.
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| _> I don 't think you understand what ego is._
|
| Be kind. I thought we weren't supposed to do this stuff,
| 'round these parts; but I'm often wrong.
|
| Actually, I know about the Freud stuff, and the _scientific_
| meaning of "ego."
|
| Basically, the meaning that almost no one actually ever
| attributes to the word.
|
| Words tend to adapt to the meaning that is most often applied
| to them. Dictionary be damned. It's _how people actually use
| the word_ , that defines it.
|
| For example, look up the etymology of "nice." (It made me
| change "be nice," to "be kind").
|
| _> This is a widespread confusion on HN, people think being
| assertive is the same as being aggressive, or being a
| narcissist._
|
| My take on "the Modern Societal Zeitgeist," so to speak, is
| that aggressiveness, narcissism, avarice, arrogance, and just
| plain ol' bein' cruel, are traits to be _admired_ , and
| emulated; especially amongst the types of people that run
| businesses.
|
| Those of us that speak to being kind, empathetic, or
| generous, are often attacked, and mocked as being "weak."
| SavantIdiot wrote:
| > Be kind.
|
| Would "I think you might be misunderstanding ego" have been
| a better way to phrase it?
|
| > are traits to be admired
|
| Oh I agree, I am not making a claim about what HN-types
| revere, I was addressing how two very distinct
| psychological terms are often misused. Like, for example,
| if I kept calling C an interpreted language; or claimed
| there's no difference between TCP or UDP; that's the same
| as equating assertiveness and aggression that I quite
| frequently see here.
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| _> Would "I think you might be misunderstanding ego"
| have been a better way to phrase it?_
|
| No.
|
| "The way that I understand the word 'ego,' is thus..."
|
| If you _really_ can 't live without applying a slap, may
| I suggest:
|
| "I feel that this word is often misused. The way that I
| understand the word is ... If it is applied in the way
| that I understand it, then ..."
|
| I'm a fairly decent chap. I have some experience and
| knowledge, relevant to the OP. I'm not at all interested
| in being a bloviatasaurus, and, if presented with
| corrections, or alternative points of view, I'm always
| more than willing to concede the point. I'm not really
| interested in being a foil to someone's strawman.
| hinkley wrote:
| As I read this I kept finding my mind pulled toward
| metallurgical concepts. A rigid ego gets people into lots of
| trouble. They lead people down dark alleyways. They break
| instead of bend, leaving sharp edges everywhere that hurt
| everyone around them.
|
| Flexible people can either be door stops or assertive, and
| which they are has to do with how much they think of their
| own opinions and abilities.
|
| Strength doesn't have to mean rigid, and there are multiple
| neuroses depending on which mix you're discussing. 'Ego-
| strength' suggests one dimension which IMO simply muddies the
| waters.
| SavantIdiot wrote:
| The difference is "ego strength" is a real term used by
| real mental health professionals, and your analogy to
| metallurgical concepts is something you invented. Ironic,
| that in a discussion about ego and narcissism you would
| dismiss medical terms as "muddying the waters" and try to
| replace them with your own beliefs to benefit your opinion.
| atoav wrote:
| > "Good judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from
| bad judgment."
|
| And if you are clever you also get your experience from bad
| judgment _others_ make.
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| Yup.
|
| Another favorite aphorism:
|
| _" A fool never learns. A smart man learns from his
| mistakes. A wise man learns from the mistakes of others."_
|
| One problem that I have with people being given huge
| responsibility, before getting much experience, is that we
| haven't had time to see others make mistakes.
|
| One key reason that I was a good manager, was that I had many
| bad managers, and learned what _not_ to do.
| smilekzs wrote:
| Somehow reminded me of "Getting in the room, and stay there".
|
| https://staffeng.com/guides/getting-in-the-room
|
| Funny, because someone with a similar role from my workplace just
| recently left for roughly the same reason (at least peacefully).
| Basically when the gatekeeper(s) of The Room made it clear that
| you are not welcome, there is little you could do other than
| walking.
| pc86 wrote:
| > _I let my title, rather than my beliefs, dictate my actions._
|
| On the flip side, I've worked with junior and mid-level
| developers who want to have the entire context of every executive
| decision, and worse want to second-guess and judge those
| decisions rather than implement the feature or fix the bug they
| were told to.
|
| I think more information is almost always better, but sometimes
| you just need to get your work done. Titles are a very rough and
| arbitrary way of trying to draw those boundaries between what
| you're supposed to decide, what you're supposed to influence, and
| what you're supposed to accept.
| [deleted]
| strogonoff wrote:
| From more of an engineering standpoint, those meetings with the
| COO seemed like textbook knowledge transfer to me, except the
| context (that the subject was not made aware of the nature of
| this event and his upcoming firing) reflects really bad on this
| company's management.
|
| It reads as if the upper management treated the employee as a
| highly unpredictable individual who would undermine the company
| out of spite. They might have thought: if the author were to be
| informed in advance about potential firing, he would become...
| "problematic", hold a grudge, sabotage knowledge transfer, leak
| something, or use the advance notice for some diversion and
| future legal action.
|
| On the face of it, this would point to insecurity or nearly-
| psychopathic tendencies in the employee--but, I suspect, it
| actually points to somebody in upper management who, probably due
| to childhood trauma, operates this way in life and hurts others
| by presuming they're the same.
| notreallyserio wrote:
| On the other hand it could have been the COO trying to give
| Kevin a chance to show he's on board with the product
| direction, and the whiteboarding showed otherwise. Who knows?
| djur wrote:
| "Who knows?" is exactly the problem here. No transparency.
| notreallyserio wrote:
| Sure, but it's a blog post. I don't think we can expect to
| get both sides of the story here.
| aj7 wrote:
| I saw elements of my own experience everywhere here.
|
| But:
|
| "4] This is a weird but recurring behavior of mine. When sitting
| with a (professional) group for the first time, I will always put
| myself at the edge. It's not because I'm avoiding the "power
| position" or anything. It's that I prefer to observe everyone
| first. And the best place to do that, is from the edge."
|
| No. No. In American society, this 1-1.5 sigma deviant behavior.
| You were broadcasting, "I'm considering, on my terms, whether or
| not to join this group." Consider overriding this strategy, even
| if it is "work." In a group, I would consider trying to sit as
| close to the center of mass as possible.
| nothis wrote:
| I'm sorry, but I can't connect the dots in that story.
|
| 1) He did great (like, there's actual metrics mentioned)
|
| 2) Others wanted a different direction (even though he did
| great?) and didn't tell him
|
| 3) They excluded him from meetings
|
| 4) They fired him
|
| 5) He blamed not "re-centering" himself
|
| In the notes, he mentions that one of his later decisions
| (splitting engineering) was a bad choice. So isn't that the core
| of it, then?
|
| The way he describes it, it sounds like the problem was him not
| being himself but it sounds like it's a simple management error
| that the others were too socially awkward to point out to him,
| instead firing him outright.
| roland35 wrote:
| I hope no one comes away after reading this thinking it is a
| good way to run a company. It is not!
|
| If you are making any decision, it is on you to seek out and
| include all relevant stakeholders and include them. People
| should not have to walk around sniffing for meetings that they
| weren't invited to and pushing their opinions in so that they
| feel heard.
|
| I trust my coworkers to include me if they want my opinion, and
| I trust them to make a good decision on their own if they
| don't!
| bambax wrote:
| Yes, it's quite obscure. The meeting with the COO that asks for
| a brain dump and then fire him the morning after is the most
| troubling.
|
| Did the COO want to get what was on his mind so the company
| would lose nothing by firing him? Or was he utterly
| disappointed about said mind?
|
| I really don't understand what any of this has to do with
| swagger.
|
| Yet it is true you have to find it, and it's not obvious. Many
| times, what you're good at is what you can do better than
| others with less effort. But we can't see it because we
| associate value with effort; if it's easy for me then surely
| it's worthless?
|
| Well, no. If it's easy for you (and difficult for others) then
| that's your trade.
| [deleted]
| xyzzy123 wrote:
| Mainly it sounds like a failure to connect with everyone else
| and read the room.
|
| This is "getting kicked out of the tribe" 101 and people are
| normally very sensitive to this. But as a new leader it's hard
| to understand all your status relationships (and that the
| happiness of the people under you on the org chart affects the
| happiness of the people listed above you).
|
| You can disagree with everyone else, you can be overridden (and
| quit, or disagree and commit or whatever you have to do) but
| not to see it coming is to live in a fundamentally different
| reality than your team.
|
| One thing I notice is a lot of words devoted to senior
| leadership and the author's personal leadership experience but
| not much focus on the experience or input of the (100+) people
| doing the work. The reason you don't fire a really good leader
| is because they'll take the team with them! The blog post is a
| bit of a Rorschach test but for me that's how I parse the blind
| spot.
|
| I actually think it's a great blog post due to the Rashomon
| effect it seems to provoke among people who read it.
| dkarl wrote:
| I have had a hard experience with that (as an IC) as well,
| finding myself isolated at my current job and unable to exert
| any influence. All the developers I work with have been at
| the same job for 5+ years and don't have a clue that the team
| is massively underperforming, their release and operational
| support processes take much more work and are less reliable
| than the same processes at other companies, the codebase
| seems almost intentionally hostile to new contributors (to
| the point of caricature; any description would come off as
| comic exaggeration,) but they think they're doing great and
| have all the answers, and every time I suggest improvements
| they respond like, "Well, actually, the reason it's better to
| do it our way is because..." and from that point on they are
| talking and not listening. All the other developers they
| hired in the last five years are gone, probably because they
| weren't listened to.
|
| I don't know if the isolation happened suddenly or gradually.
| I realized it all at once, but by the time I did, it had been
| happening for so long I don't know how it started. Somehow
| people stopped telling me what was going on and stopped
| consulting me on new decisions. I am the last person to find
| out about anything. One part of their existing pathology is a
| background churn of unilateral, unannounced, shuffling-the-
| deck-chairs "improvements" that cause a lot of errors and
| interruptions without making a worthwhile difference, but
| this is different. Even the changes that are formally talked
| about are talked about without me.
|
| I know that leadership has my back (they came into the
| picture more recently and can see that the team is
| underperforming) and they are planning changes that include
| me, but other than management, which is detached from day-to-
| day work, I'm on an island. Reading between the lines, I
| think I was brought in to try to fix the team, but without
| any management authority (and management not involved day-to-
| day) and with the team just ignoring my ideas and trying to
| assimilate me into their way of doing things, I have
| accomplished almost nothing on that score. Meanwhile, my
| social isolation is such that I can't stand to stick around
| much longer. I am going to go somewhere where I can be part
| of a team again.
|
| EDIT: Reading the article through fully, I think I should
| learn from his characterization of "swagger" (though I don't
| think the word is quite right.) When I wasn't listened to
| after repeated attempts to make the same point with the
| people who needed to hear it, I shouldn't have stopped
| talking. I should have kept saying the same thing whenever it
| was warranted. I should have talked louder. I should have
| taken my points to venues that included a larger audience
| than just the people who needed to act on them. I should have
| pressured management to put their weight behind me. I didn't
| do these things because I didn't want to be an asshole, and I
| didn't want to alienate people, and maybe because I was
| afraid of inviting open aggression against myself, but I
| should have been prepared to stand up to that. Why was I
| avoiding confrontation instead of inviting it? Maybe because
| I wasn't confident in my ability to argue my points in the
| face of hostility, but if that's the case, I should be
| practicing it more, not avoiding it.
| ilteris wrote:
| I have a similar problem in my workplace. I have a hard time
| reading what's going on in the room or the relationships
| between ups and downs. It's exhausting. Is there a playbook
| for this type of thing?
| khafra wrote:
| The book Moral Mazes is the best guide I know of. The basic
| takeaway is that if you're in middle management, it's
| already too late, you poor sucker.
|
| https://hbr.org/1983/09/moral-mazes-bureaucracy-and-
| manageri... https://www.lesswrong.com/tag/moral-mazes
| hitekker wrote:
| I strongly recommend Moral Mazes. It's great reading for
| anyone who wants to achieve some level of honesty as a
| manager. It also arouses the ire of dishonest or
| duplicitous managers, which is another useful social
| signal to account for.
| [deleted]
| [deleted]
| le-mark wrote:
| For convenience;
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rashomon_effect
| soneca wrote:
| I think the "lost swagger" thing is that there was a decision
| made behind closed doors that he knew was bad and chose not to
| speak up. So when that decision indeed caused something bad, he
| emailed the CEO explaining why they should have know it was bad
| from the start. And the CEO complained that he was hired to
| "speak up" and he didn't. And instead of bouncing back, he
| spiraled downwards (presumably doing a very bad job and
| justifying his firing).
|
| If he had the confidence to come back to who he was, even after
| being targeted by jealous executives and messing up with one
| decision (splitting the eng team), he would have done a better
| job.
|
| That's my take of it
| mistersquid wrote:
| > So when that decision indeed caused something bad, he
| emailed the CEO explaining why they should have know it was
| bad from the start.
|
| Given the meetings where decisions were being made were
| happening behind closed doors, he very well may have
| complained about a direction the CEO had chosen.
|
| Too many blind spots.
| princeofxanadu wrote:
| I can perceive a lack of openness in the startup Kevin was
| working for. For instance, why did the C.E.O, the C.O.O and the
| team exclude him blindly rather than communicate?
| benjaminwootton wrote:
| I agree with the other commenters that the guy was treated badly
| here. Impulsive hire, no feedback, poor communication, dumped
| unceremoniously. He sounds like a great employee who will do
| better elsewhere.
|
| I do think Swagger/Mojo is important in a work context though, as
| it is in other areas such as sports.
|
| Some people seem to make 1 or 2 good decisions, make a good
| impression, then their charisma and confidence propels them to
| leadership positions in a virtuous signal despite them being
| nothing special. They will then get to ride off the backs of
| others success if the project is going well.
|
| I've had a few jobs and projects myself where I seem to go from
| success to responsibility and respect undeservedly so, then
| others where I just can't seem to get the virtuous circle
| spinning. It's totally down to X factors like perception,
| confidence and personal fit rather than ability and decision
| making.
|
| As a manager I've even seen his the cards can be stacked in the
| early hours or weeks of a new gig. If someone comes in, is
| switched on, personable and makes some good decisions, it is
| incredibly difficult to stop that virtuous circle even if it
| isn't deserved.
| xutopia wrote:
| Your performance at a job is not limited to solely your behavior
| but that of the team. If the team is not leveraging your skills
| and sideline you then of course you're going to feel bad... just
| like you think it's not healthy to blame them... it's not healthy
| to blame yourself. Sometimes it's simply not the team you're
| going to be doing your best work with.
| oliv__ wrote:
| I appreciated the honesty in this piece but something in the way
| the author places all blame on himself struck me as inappropriate
| (at least if I were putting myself in his shoes):
|
| _" I thought about my best moments. I thought about my worst
| moments. I derived the behaviors and attributes that led to each.
| I wrote a list of personal values"_
|
| I don't think it's right or even helpful to try to quantify and
| reduce a human being to a list of values and pluses or minuses.
| Saying that you "lost yourself" and need to find it back sounds
| like agreeing with the premise that you fit in this neat mold
| that the CEO and COO have defined for you and puts you in danger
| of "losing your shape" whenever those people decide so.
|
| It sounds like a very externally-oriented appraisal of one's
| self.
| yobbo wrote:
| > When you spend time alone, you are left with nothing but
| yourself. And only from there can you find yourself, and your
| swagger, again.
|
| Not always. Some depend on others to "build them up", and they
| crumble if isolated.
|
| Also, what is good for the company is not necessarily good for
| you. But this is true for all employees, therefore there is
| nothing contradictory with people being "justifiably" motivated
| to take actions that are detrimental to the company. For example,
| excluding and railroading you.
|
| The only solution with those people is to enter into political
| dramas. If that doesn't sound attractive, go elsewhere.
|
| > knowing what you're good at and acting accordingly -- earned
| confidence
|
| It's possible to make the mistake believing that competence holds
| currency. In some environments (maybe like in the company in
| question), it's rather "swagger" or "momentum" that is rewarded.
| 5754797 wrote:
| This is the cycle at all companies.
|
| People join, politics gets played out, people leave or are fired,
| those in power consolidate their position.
|
| I've never lacked swagger but I've been the powerful and I've
| also been the fired.
|
| It's not personal, it's politics. Just find somewhere else that
| you fit better.
| Lurkynerd wrote:
| Fast hire, fast fire.
|
| OP is taking way too much on himself. I understand, and to a
| point respect the personal responsibility he takes, but he's
| going way overboard here. Perfectionism is the enemy of growth
| sometimes.
| Toutouxc wrote:
| Kevin, I'm sorry that you had to go through this. If going
| through this brought you some fresh kind of insight or helped you
| grow as a person and a professional, then great, but I feel like
| going to the COO's house and pissing on their doormat would also
| be a pretty appropriate response to what they did to you.
| kubb wrote:
| He challenged an egomaniac boss (by private email) and got fired,
| did I get it right?
| Rastonbury wrote:
| Not sure if it was the boss or the political players whispering
| in the CEO's ears and wanting to take him down.
| treme wrote:
| The way CEO responded to his letter doesn't make it like he was
| an egomaniac.
|
| Sounded more like COO & his clique felt threatened by him and
| he got out maneuvered politically.
| marcvizcaino wrote:
| srgsdf
| marcvizcaino wrote:
| asdfd
| keeptrying wrote:
| This kind of "brain dump" meeting is a great signal that you are
| possibly getting fired.
|
| It also means they find you very valuable.
|
| A good thing to highlight are all the things that could go wrong
| + associated costs to company and what you're actively doing to
| manage those problems.
|
| That'll give them pause.
| avtolik wrote:
| Guys, you talk about his previous company and boss, but I don't
| think this was the focus of the blog post.
| roland35 wrote:
| It's good to be resilient, but I think it is also important to
| see the example workplace as what it is too. It is just as much
| a factor in this story.
| beingflo wrote:
| You're right. But the story is presented as a personal failure
| without critically examining if the environment had a part in
| this.
| f4stjack wrote:
| Maybe so, but his previous company's attitude is sticking out
| like a sore thumb it overshadows the focus you saw...
| roland35 wrote:
| This was a tough post to read, and I am glad the author was able
| to recover and land on his feet again. But, I can't help but
| think that this was an awful work environment.
|
| First of all, no one should feel blindsided and fired like that!
| It sounds like the only feedback he ever got was some received
| was some vague 'get your mojo back'. Also, having to force
| yourself into meetings is just a sign of toxic politics to me. It
| certainly doesn't need to be a formal top down structure, but
| when people start getting exclusionary and territorial that is a
| bad sign.
|
| I understand this is a startup, but there were 100 people! If the
| company is counting on everyone to impulsively take initiative
| that sounds like total chaos. Even when I worked at a company
| with 10 people I would think through proposals, then discuss them
| with my manager or the CEO before actually executing.
|
| The last thing is that having swagger shouldn't replace
| authenticity. People have a good ability to sniff out a phony, so
| be yourself. If you end up in some wild chaotic environment where
| you have to fight to survive, the best option may be to leave!
| f4stjack wrote:
| Kevin I am sorry but you are not the one that is fault at here.
| There are several red flags but most noticably your ex firm lacks
| accountability. You shouldn't be hired with an impulsive
| decision, there shouldn't be closed doors decision making andyou
| should not be blamed because you executed the decisions made
| without your input.
|
| And getting fired after a whiteboard session with no heads up?
| Even though he knew he is going to fire you the next day? Man,
| you are BETTER off without that company. There will be other
| jobs, there will be other gigs but nothing is worth this.
|
| My 2 cents anyway.
| BlackjackCF wrote:
| This workplace sounded VERY toxic. I feel bad for Kevin and how
| much this workplace destroyed his self-confidence.
| beingflo wrote:
| Exactly my thoughts. They expected him to show initiative at an
| executive level while actively being excluded despite only
| being a PM in rank and presumably salary. Sounds like they were
| exploiting him.
| groby_b wrote:
| So much this. Congrats, you just learned what a corporate
| backstabbing feels like. (And a particularly nasty one. What
| they did to you? You escaped from a place run by sociopaths.)
|
| Also, please let go of the thought that companies will be in
| any way kind to you. That you got COBRA? Your company is
| legally obligated to extend that option. They did, literally,
| the bare minimum they were forced to do by the law.
| aj7 wrote:
| And you paid for it, too.
| anotheraccount9 wrote:
| Sounds like an impulsive CEO, with mixed levels of trust with
| his (vertical) team. A functional team doesn't get to be
| intermittently inclusive, while sending mixed signals on your
| responsibilities and expectations.
| rendall wrote:
| I came here to say exactly this, only not as well stated!
| Kevin, this comment is _it_.
| Moto7451 wrote:
| Completely agree. Good leaders don't run around saying "well
| you should have told me" right after giving a pretty clear
| signal that they don't want the input.
|
| Likewise, barging into meetings like a metaphorical Koolaid Man
| or Cosmo Kramer is not going to win alignment in a Leadership
| meeting.
|
| That whole situation was no win for the author and is an
| unrealistic standard to set, especially if the company grows.
| toyg wrote:
| _> getting fired after a whiteboard session with no heads up?
| Even though he knew he is going to fire you the next day_
|
| Clearly the actions as described, and the choice of words
| ("complete download"), hint at the fact that they had decided
| months in advance that he would go, and just put in action a
| transition plan without telling him (COO more involved, etc).
| Absolutely cynical move.
| crnkofe wrote:
| One day you're family, next day you're on the street. Never treat
| company too intimately. If money is tight everyone becomes a
| waste product. I'm pretty sure the writer did the best he could
| but in the end it wasn't good enough for some reason. I don't
| think his ability or performance had much to do with it. I felt
| kind of similar when at some point I got fired and got told
| management made a mistake in calculating some financials. **
| happens. Take a walk, make an attempt to travel, procrastinate a
| bit. Everyone's got an agenda so don't treat those exit
| interviews and last final words too much to heart.
| dustinmoris wrote:
| We obviously don't know like 99.9% of the full story, but the
| fact that he had a long session with the COO one evening and then
| got fired the very next day in the morning is just plain evil and
| wrong. It's not how you treat a human. It's disrespectful to say
| the least. The employee went home feeling good, so the COO
| basically charmed him up the day before firing him in order to
| get out the last ounce of what they considered was worth getting
| out of this employee before discarding him. That's disgusting
| behaviour and I personally would never want to work with such a
| COO or company at all.
|
| Now on the topic of swagger. I agree, it's important to know who
| you are and be comfortable to be that person. Every human
| contributes in their own way. Swagger doesn't mean ego or
| arrogance, to me swagger means you know your strengths and feel
| comfortable to play your role in your team/community/family/etc.
|
| Some people are great critical thinkers, some are great
| motivators, jokers, conservatives and risk averse planners, etc.
|
| You need all of them. Everyone has their own swagger. Some people
| are quiet and sit in the corner of a room and throw in a critical
| question at the right moment of a meeting which others might find
| annoying but in the end everyone knows it was good that it
| happened. Some talk a lot, walk into a room and make jokes and
| struggle to sometimes focus on the topic at hand but they lift up
| spirits and soften the mood when things get heated. Like there is
| really no perfect human being. You need all those different
| characters to contribute and it requires everyone to be accepting
| of the other person in order to really become a great team. This
| is how it works in strong families who go through thick and thin
| and this is how it works in great performing teams.
|
| Know yourself and know your swagger!
| dbsmith83 wrote:
| > You need all of them. Everyone has their own swagger...
|
| Love this. It's also interesting how when someone leaves a
| team, oftentimes teammates will step in a little to fill in the
| role the ex-teammate used to provide. It is kind of like a form
| a growth. I find myself thinking "What would ____ say about
| this?"
| Nekorosu wrote:
| Really emotionally heavy read. I'm not sure how it is properly
| called in psychology but it reminds me of Stockholm syndrome.
| Sometimes it's hard to acknowledge you've been ***.
| quickthrower2 wrote:
| Reading this make me sad. Like the bullied kid at school vows to
| be tougher next time. Maybe the bully was wrong instead? Good to
| get tougher but not good to put it all in youself.
| coldtea wrote:
| Sorry, but this is internalized "blaming the victim".
|
| Yes, you could have stood up when they started excluding you, but
| they could have just as easily fired you for standing up too.
|
| The environment was toxic - they excluded you behind your back,
| the CEO blamed you for being excluded, the COO fired you
| summarily after listening to your ideas, and they even did it as
| your wife was 7 months pregnant (which I'm sure they knew).
|
| That's not a company to work for, Swagger or not.
| keeptrying wrote:
| Confidence is a choice till it becomes a self fulfilling
| prophecy.
|
| If confidence is failing you, think about the work your grandad
| did to make a living. ( Mine used to toil away on 3 acres of land
| for his entire life.)
| DeathArrow wrote:
| It is not very clear why did they fire him. Did he not fulfill
| his duties?
|
| Being fired for not speaking when he was previously excluded from
| those discussions seems absurd. Anyway, he was hired as a PO, he
| wasn't a CTO or COO and wasn't responsible for the company
| strategy.
|
| Maybe he was fired because they didn't like him and he didn't go
| well along with the others? That would explain also why he was
| excluded from the discussions.
| toyg wrote:
| At managerial level, the reasons for firing can range from "his
| underlings hated his guts and he was bakrupting the company" to
| "he looked at me funny". If the upper management team doesn't
| feel the connection with the mid-level, all bets are off.
| That's why the relationships are often feudal: "I am faithful
| to Mr. VP because I know he will protect me". If you are not
| protected by a robust chain going all the way to the C-level,
| then you're like grass waiting for the lawnmower.
|
| In this case, it's clear that at some point upper management
| lost faith in the guy and excluded him from steering decisions.
| He didn't fight back. When shit finally hit the fan they gaslit
| him by saying it was his fault, then proceeded to put in place
| a covert transition plan without telling him. He was naive in
| not seeing it coming, mis-identifying a series of brain dumps
| as "reconnecting", and when they felt they had everything they
| needed, the axe fell.
| fnord77 wrote:
| > Be assertive and opinionated even when you aren't as sure.
|
| this is terrible advice.
|
| Anyway, this post reminds me of the subplot in the show
| Succession where the son-in-law thinks he's going to be promoted
| to CEO (from some meh position) and is strutting around like he's
| king... but in reality it is his wife that is on that track...
| and everyone is mocking the SIL behind his back.
| ryanackley wrote:
| They had to offer you COBRA because it's the law. In fact, COBRA
| is an acronym for the name of law that requires it (Consolidated
| Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act). There is no reason to be
| grateful.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2021-11-18 23:03 UTC)