undefined | Better HN

0 pointsgiantg24y ago0 comments

Yeah, but most of success in today's world is built off of the perception that others have of you.

In fact, some of the feedback I have gotten throughout the years is that I have lots of potential, I'm smart (smarter than I really am), well spoken (for an IT guy), etc. It doesn't mean anything because they always seem to think that I should be driving every meeting or conversation. If there's another person in the meeting with more knowledge in that specific area and I agree with their direction, why would I take over? So their perception is that I'm smart, but that I lack some other quality. My perception is that I'm dumber than the other guy but just smart enough to know to defer to their expertise. It leaves me stuck and unsuccessful.

I'm stupid enough to ask certain questions... which I suppose makes them stupid questions. If we are a company notorious for value shopping, and the company says we're seeing deadlines or capacity slip due to not filling open positions, and is costing the company money, risk of tech debt not being addressed... it's stupid for someone like me to question that, but I do. If it were really costing the company money, then wouldn't we increase pay or not force people back to the office to increase headcount? There seems to be a contradiction here, and the people in power don't have an answer that makes sense (possibly because there are things they can't tell a peon me).

0 comments

6 comments · 2 top-level

icegreentea24y ago· 2 in thread

For your first part, you don't need to take over. But you should find a way to contribute. At the very least if there's an expectation that you drive meetings, but you want to defer because someone else has more knowledge in a specific area, you need to make it clear why you're deferring.

For your second part, it seems like the questions are you asking are not stupid in themselves. Rather they are uncomfortable and/or threatening to the audience. Like your question is driving at a real point which is that likely no one actually sat down and tried to rationalize (quantitatively or however) the cost and benefits of their course of action. The "stupid" part is poking at this sensitive topic in ways that don't give people a graceful way to interact with it. Most people do not want to admit that they're just autopiloting a decision that might have made sense as a quick heuristic based on assumptions (which are okay!) that have since provided to be wrong and have just been running with it ever since. Or that no, they've never actually sat down and quantified (ballpark) how much company the strategy is costing them, and that they're just making stuff up.

To back up to your original point, uncontrolled curiosity can definitely be harmful. You absolutely need to temper and control it, especially when interacting with human systems. That doesn't mean that curiosity is bad though. I do sympathize that the usual formulation of "there are no stupid questions here" is almost always misleading, and encodes a pile of unsaid assumptions.

giantg2OP4y ago

There really shouldn't be a need to explain the deferral for each occurrence. I have explained it in general to my manager and participated, in my opinion, appropriately. They have not given concrete steps that they would like to see me take. For context, I'm only a midlevel dev.

"The "stupid" part is poking at this sensitive topic"

Exactly, but without bringing it up, that curiosity wouldn't be satisfied. They talk about being candid as a positive trait. It appears that isn't true - just typically corporate doublespeak.

lazide4y ago

Everything is contextual, and I think you may be missing a bit EQ bit?

You can drive a meeting while still deferring to experts by driving the meeting, and then bringing them in for their expertise when you know it is in their area - which you know when that is and who they are, because you would be an expert in knowing that.

You seem to be sitting back in the meeting and waiting for something to add, which… yeah doesn’t add much? That’s inherently passive.

And if they ask you to be candid, and then recoil when you are, that is potentially because you’re not wrapping up what you’re saying in a way they can process/handle - it could be overly abrasive, or verbose, or whatever.

The reason you may not be getting any actionable advice is they are giving you why they see as actionable advice. But you’re missing a connection here because you’re missing the EQ piece?

1 more reply

dfxm124y ago· 2 in thread

You can drive a meeting among others who are more knowledgeable in certain fields. Leading meetings is a different, and in my experience, more unique, skill from expertise in a specific IT field; leadership is harder to replace than domain specific knowledge.

giantg2OP4y ago

I guess what I mean, is they want you to talk... a lot. Apparently it's one of the ways they measure "engagement" - how loud is someone.

lazide4y ago

I very much doubt that is (actually) the case - but that you perceive it that way may be at the root of the problem.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

6 comments · 2 top-level

icegreentea24y ago· 2 in thread

giantg2OP4y ago

"The "stupid" part is poking at this sensitive topic"

Exactly, but without bringing it up, that curiosity wouldn't be satisfied. They talk about being candid as a positive trait. It appears that isn't true - just typically corporate doublespeak.

lazide4y ago

Everything is contextual, and I think you may be missing a bit EQ bit?

You seem to be sitting back in the meeting and waiting for something to add, which… yeah doesn’t add much? That’s inherently passive.

The reason you may not be getting any actionable advice is they are giving you why they see as actionable advice. But you’re missing a connection here because you’re missing the EQ piece?

1 more reply

dfxm124y ago· 2 in thread

giantg2OP4y ago

I guess what I mean, is they want you to talk... a lot. Apparently it's one of the ways they measure "engagement" - how loud is someone.

lazide4y ago

I very much doubt that is (actually) the case - but that you perceive it that way may be at the root of the problem.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse