••• Praiseworthy job skills that can hurt your career - this is not a joke •••

[breadandwine]

Not to be believed but true, here is a report (link below) by experts on laudable jobs qualifications that should be highly appreciated but instead could be detrimental to your career. Like basically, you need to be a lowly serf, don't try to be hard working, imaginative and ambitious, recognize that you are just a lower class cog in the machine, keep down, maintain a low profile, and don't get too big for your britches, buddy. That's how we like our slaves. There's only so much room at the top, we're there, you're not, so shut up and sit down!

Good job skills that are bad for your career:

#1: An ability to multitask.

Why is this a bad trait? "Because constantly switching from one undertaking to another prevents you from giving your entire focus to any one task." This is weird because multitasking MEANS handling multiple responsibilities simultaneously. It is a skill that does NOT mean having dissipated focus. "Listening in on a conference call, responding to email messages, and composing a project update for your boss" suggests that you are being uppity and not the stupid single-focussed PEASANT we EXPECT you to be. Don't be a wisenheimer or we might have to raise your salary above minimum wage you little servant. Besides. WHO TOLD YOU TO THINK?

#2: A strong work ethic.

"While logging overtime is sometimes necessary in many jobs, making a habit of it could be a sign that you're unable to prioritize assignments." We like our workers dumb and lazy, man and boy. If you're trying to work too hard, what are you trying to pull???? WE'RE at the top of the Totem pole, not you, you worthless little piece of garbage......

#3: A can-do spirit.

Can't have THAT! It could be a sign that you are secretly making promises to your superiors that you can't keep! Don't have vision! Try to be ..... REALISTIC. If you don't have a slave mentality, you have not been suitably ZOMBIFIED for this firm. GET OUT.

#4: A knack for building visibility.

Are you trying to make sure your employer is aware of your contributions? You wouldn't by any chance be expecting something in return, NOW WOULD YOU????? You could be stepping on co-workers by standing out. THEY learned how to be tired, conformist, shuffling slaves. Why can't YOU? What if they ALL tried to stand out? WHAT IF THAT WERE TO SPREAD???? Besides. We fire people REGULARLY. If it ever got out that some of the people we fired were exemplary it could cause an insurrection. Remain SERVILE and UNDERPAID. That's an ORDER!


More, believe it or not ---

http://hotjobs.yahoo.com/career-articles-5_job_skills_that_can_hurt_your_career-1311


If you have heard of anything similar to this report, links or personal experiences, please kindly post below. And don't forget to be a good little grunt and vote Republican. If you have less than $10 million you're lower class, so get used to it and stay in your place, buddy.

[breadandwine]

1. Thanks for the rec.

....

[Demeter]

2. I Had a Boss that Expected Me to Hang Around Overtime

because it made him feel better--there was nothing to do! That business failed in the 80's.

As a young married woman with a 45 minute commute, I was not impressed.

[cartach]

113. I had a Boss - - -

who usually convened a meeting every night about 10 or 15 minutes before quitting time. Usually the topic was forgotten after a few minutes and they became casual and social bullshit sessions lasting for about 45 minutes until the Boss would decide it was time to go home. These continued for some time and we all thought they were a waste of our valuable time especially if we had things to do on the way home. One day during a discussion about which were the best sun glasses to buy the Boss let it slip that he hated to drive home at quitting time because he faced an 8 mile drive heading due west and the sun was usually shining directly in his eyes. Turns out that was real reason for his convening the meetings at quitting time,he just wanted company for about 45 minutes. Needless to say we all started having excuses,true or not,that we had to leave right at quitting time. As he was a great guy to work for I don't think he consciously thought he was inconveniencing anyone and as we were in management and expected to work a bit of overtime for free anyway, we could all sit around,have a BS session and keep him company.

[Xipe Totec]

117. I had a boss who would call meetings on Friday at 5:00PM

To tell us what reports he expected to see on his desk on Monday.

[peace frog]

3. Un.fricking.believable

Just when you're sure you've heard it all...you haven't. Chalk this one up in the "damned if you do, damned if you don't" column.

[breadandwine]

4. Yup. It's all about a feudal "It's my money and you can't have it!" mentality.

Instead of a creative and productive company being more than the sum of its parts.

[peace frog]

24. "The floggings will continue until morale improves"

No matter how well you do your job, your employer is only too delighted to remind that you are definitely not too big to fail.

[Lucky Luciano]

95. ..or you could ignore this thread altogether and excel at what you do.

Just be good at politics. That is what it takes primarily.

[On the Road]

108. Don't Take it Too Seriously

It's ridiculous. If a department is going to start laying people off, of course they're going to start with the can-do, multitasking technically-oriented person with visibility and a high work ethic, right?

It is true that being overly technical can prevent you from getting promoted, but most people's concerns today are more about retaining their job. I've just survive five layoffs in the last few years by following as many of these unrecommended behaviors as possible.

[Blue_Tires]

135. I'm beginning to believe that none of these 'experts' know the truth about anything

related to getting hired...the only place where i see MORE absolutely contradictory info from so-called "experts" is in the stock market...

[wyldwolf]

5. "team player"

Really, a playa? You're going to hit on your team members - maybe even the boss's wife??

[hobbit709]

27. That's the one they always used on Donna

when they needed an extra hand due to poor planning, she was expected to stop her work and help out. But when she needed help, she was suddenly a team of ONE.

[WolverineDG]

89. BTDT

so much so I finally left. Apparently they think I'll be back at any moment, as I've heard that my work email (also not touched in almost a year) is still "live."

dg

[breadandwine]

6. Okay. There were two recs on this, thanks, and then somebody unrecced so now there's just one.

I have always thought that in our society the accused have a right to face their accusers.

Who would unrec this thread and why? No negative comment, just an unrec from the shadows.

[CTyankee]

26. Sadly, this is now life at DU. I suggest that you just ignore it because as long as we have Unrec

in its present form, this is going to happen. It has nothing to do with you --- when I posted (in terrible grief) that my dear former sister in law had just died suddenly, somebody unrecced it. Since I don't pay attention to unrecs on my posts I didn't even know until another poster commented on it.

If you ignore it, they can't come back at you. If you mention it, they will accuse you of "whining."

There are other things in life besides reccs and unreccs on DU!

[breadandwine]

66. That's awful, CTyankee. I hope you can find peace and comfort.

How cruel of them.

Elsewhere on this thread someone said he unrecced because he didn't want this to make it to the greatest page. Who's talking about the Greatest Thread or not?

My personal feeling is that if one doesn't have anything nice to say they shouldn't say anything at all. The unrec button is just a way for people to be nasty and do it anonymously.

[CTyankee]

79. Hey, bread, ya gotta rise above it, really...

please, believe me, it's OK if somebody unrecc's your post. So what? Isn't it THEIR problem, not yours?

I hope you get some peace with this because it shouldn't be a worry for you. There are people out there that will do this unreccing. Let them be. Just let go of them. They don't influence your life, really.

I really don't care if anybody rec's or unrec's me. It doesn't even occur to me...try for that...

[CTyankee]

83. My understanding is that these people are just the way they are. You can't change that.

So what? Let them be, in their own private hell or whatever they are in, I don't know and I don't care. It's just life on DU, that's all.

Really, as soon as you get over this thing about Rec and Unrec you will be happier...it happens...yay!!!!

[Lilith Velkor]

67. It was probably unrecced by accident

I've unrecced when I meant to rec, and vice versa.

So sorry about your sis. :hug:

[CTyankee]

78. Thanks. I didn't mean to call you out...and in many ways I don't care.

My feelings for her completely outweighted my feelings about some unrec, believe me. It's been a hard time...but this one thing is a lesson learned...

[1Hippiechick]

81. Maybe somebody read your post, recommended it, pondered it, and then decided to unrecommend.So what?

Sorry, but why would you be watching the numbers of recs or unrecs? Are those numbers that important to you? So what if no one recommends or unrecommends. I don't know a more polite way to say "Get over it!"

[Liberal_in_LA]

92. I remember that! people unrec just to be assholes

[cartach]

114. How does it go? What evil lurks in the hearts of men?

Only the Shadow knows. Who the hell cares any way? Is this some kind of contest?

[elocs]

121. Why the hell are you whinning about your OP being UnRecced less than 20 minutes after posting?

Here's a clue: if you do not agree with a thread and give it an UnRec, unless you had something important to say about it why would you kick it by responding?

Nearly a day later your thread is on the front page with 82 Recs. Doesn't that make you feel a little silly about complaining about an UnRec? The thing is that after 24 hours nobody can either Rec or UnRec your thread so responding and kicking it is more important.

Also, I'm sure that whoever gave the UnRec appreciated your bringing it to everyone's attention. Had you not mentioned it I would never have known about it.

[donco6]

7. All signs you're working at the wrong place. n/t

[breadandwine]

9. According to the report, these absurd attitudes are common in many firms.

...

[Lucian]

8. Well, my employer won't have to worry about that.

I don't give a shit about the company, so I'm not going to put in any extra effort. I'm just there to do the least amount of work possible and get paid for it.

[breadandwine]

10. Lucian, you're our kind of employee.

Welcome aboard.

[Lucian]

50. I work for Walmart.

'Nuff said.

[lunatica]

11. Where I work it takes provable three acts of God to get a raise or promotion

So they really like it when you work hard. And because no good deed goes unpunished, the harder you work the more work you get because it's a virtual certainty that you will never get a raise or a promotion.

The only way to work your way up is to apply for higher jobs in other departments. I know employees who haven't been promoted or given more than the lawful raise in 20 years because they stayed in one department. Yet they do the work of employees at much higher levels.

[breadandwine]

15. So, lunatica, does your department promote people from OTHER departments?

Awfully stupid of them if they won't do it from your own department.

[lunatica]

64. That's not how it works

You have to wait till someone retires or drops dead at their computer and their job is listed internally.

[breadandwine]

65. How lovely.

...

[breadandwine]

12. We're now up to 3 recs but it was 4. Thus, at this juncture there have been 2 mystery unrecs.

Amazing that some people don't have the guts to say what's on their minds while throwing spitballs.

[cartach]

115. Relax !

Stay off that wine,it's actually a depressant and you may have had too much.

[riverdale]

118. shut up already

I don't recommend, I don't unrecommend. I couldn't give a shit about rec and unrec. I barely am aware of their existance and completely ignore them. What does bother me is people complaining about how many recommendations they are seeing. SHUT UP

[Fumesucker]

13. Being a brilliant and unstinting sycophant.. The only job skill you *really* need..

That's the skill that will take you the furthest, all the other stuff is just icing on the cake.

[deutsey]

14. Actually, I hate multi-tasking

But I write and edit for a living, so I value immersing myself in a document with a singleness of focus and purpose. Running around trying to keep three or four things going at once just ends up exhausting me and results in a lot of half-ass work.

[breadandwine]

16. I concur, deutsey. It can be satisfying to be single-focussed.

But if there are many responsibilities and someone can be multi-focused and do it well, not everyone can, why should that be penalized?

[deutsey]

23. I agree. I just hate the assumption people make in the workplace

that everyone should be multi-tasking. The kind of work I do and that graphic designers I know do, etc., is hurt by others who expect us to work on three or four things at the same time.

I've actually had people say to me (and friends of mine have had the same experience) that it makes them nervous to see us "calmly" doing our work. They mistake "busyness" with getting the job done.

[breadandwine]

28. Wow, deutsey. Yeah, like, how dare you work calmly and effectively? I agree.

Well, graphic design is a very creative job that requires a lot of single minded focus to do well. That's the nature of creative work. I have a relative in the literary field and they work on assignments in a cue, one at a time.

But if someone works in an office where their duties include dealing with a lot of things that require multitasking, I'm sure it's more stressful because they have to switch gears repeatedly. Only some people are cut out for that. But otherwise, they would have to be replaced by multiple employees. So it's hard to swallow the idea that an employer would actually be annoyed by a multi-tasker if he can handle it. I think such annoyance has a truly feudal quality to it.

[Coventina]

30. Actually, the latest research has shown that there's no such thing as "multi-tasking"

You cannot do two things at once.

You can do different things in rapid succession, but not two things at once. Further, the studies have shown that the more tasks that are juggled, the more poorly they are done. For example, if a secretary tries to type a document while talking on the phone, both tasks will suffer. This even applies to people who feel that they are superior multi-taskers.

[breadandwine]

36. I'm sure that's true, Coventina. Basically, working for some employers is slavery.

I would much rather be single focussed. But where an employer needs someone who can do a lot of things to fill a need without hiring many employees, he should in that situation appreciate the multi-tasker, or appreciate that someone is CAPABLE of multi-tasking in a crisis or emergency. I think the best thing that can be said about multi-tasking is that it would be better not to have to do it, but if there is a need, those who can should be appreciated for it. Given the choice, I'd much rather do something in a creative, individualistic way without distractions.


I've been in job interviews where NO MATTER WHAT YOU SAID they found fault with it:

"I've had many job experiences."

"Why? Can't you stay in one job for very long?"

On Wall Street they have what are called "stress interviews." In a stress interview they deliberately smack the applicant around and challenge everything he says on any excuse, just to see how tough he is. They don't stop until the applicant yells back. Literally. Then they know he's tough enough and they hire him. This is not a joke.

[mzteris]

101. I disagree -

I could type (back in the day) over 100+wpm while talking on the phone.

For a really good typist who is typing copy, it's input eyes and output fingers and your concious brain doesn't really have to be engaged at all.

Same I way I used to be able to play the piano and carry on a conversation.

[Hosnon]

48. I can't multitask - my brain just doesn't work that way. nt.

[Terry in Austin]

59. Multi-tasking -- pfff!

Sure, you can do two things at once, but only half as well

B-)

[kurtzapril4]

86. Multi-tasking is BS

How are you supposed to focus your special eyes on more than one thing at once and do them all justice?

I used to work for a company called In***mation Resou**es in Chicago. At orientation, we were shown videos, both of them with John Cleese. One of them was about sexual harrasment. The other was about multi-tasking, and what a bad thing it was. You can keep your eyes on the prize. It's much harder to keep your eyeses on the prizes.

[guruoo]

119. Google "The Myth of Multitasking"

http://www.google.com/#hl=en&source=hp&q=myth+multitasking&aq=f&aqi=g1&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=ClHmkvTEjTN2WGYKmzgTyn8zDCgAAAKoEBU_Qvmwt&fp=c8411ce5a7e9a208

[breadandwine]

17. I think I figured it out.

The unreccers are ..... employers.

[Kievan Rus]

39. Or right-wingers who believe the Horatio Alger nonsense....

and think they'll be at the top one day, too.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

49. or people who think of this more as an op-ed piece and not front page news.

fluff.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

18. I unrec'd.

Sounds like a load of crapola to me. I could not do my job, if I was not visibly multi-tasking. Can't never could do nothing and I need the OT.

Sorry but to me, this article reads like a Joke.

And yes, I know that I am a low class buddy but I do not stay in my place and I think this whole thread borders on a call out of hard working people. You have a very snide attitude, imo.

Flame away.

[wtmusic]

19. The article is flamebait

Got everyone's dander up real good, it did.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

20. it is hilarious. I can't believe people are taking it seriously and

to actually give it a rec.......................:rofl:



it is "good" joke but not rec-worthy imvho.

[Wednesdays]

51. I can't believe people take *you* seriously.

Where's this all coming from? :shrug:

[Tuesday Afternoon]

52. I promise to Never

ever try to explain Why I Unrec a thread. It is not worth the effort.

[Omar4Dems]

55. Indeed

I wonder what attracts corporate apologists to DU

[Fumesucker]

21. I see it more as a call out of *management*, not workers..

These are all management decisions that are being held up as ridiculous, not the workers that exhibit the skills.

ETA: I've seen all these decisions made by management before in places I have worked, it's really not at all uncommon.

Just go and read Dilbert for a while, Scott Adams gets his material from his readers.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

22. I see it as satire that misses the mark ---

Not to say that, I do not agree with you about management and their ridiculous notions, mind you. :toast:

[breadandwine]

41. Some of the posters here who unrecced are living in deep denial about corporate culture

at a lot of firms.


MAYBE YOU HAVEN'T BEEN KEEPING UP WITH CURRENT EVENTS but...........


There's a little company full of smug, lazy, arrogant, "small people"-hating snots and it is called:

BP.

Ever hear of them?



No. I guess BP is as figment of everyone's imagination.

They would never DO a thing like that!

They're saints!!!!!!!!


I think there is really an ingrained DLC mentality in some of the unrecs that just can't get their mind around the idea of what ASSHOLES some of the management in this country are.

It's okay. Don't worry. TRUST BP. TRUST the company heads, the managers, the chief executives. Corporatism is just fine.


Who needs government?

In fact, who needs the Democratic Party? Let's all throw out the Democrats and put in the Republicans. Business people know best.............


After all, the volume of oil in the Gulf is small compared to the volume of the oceans..... Who cares if the world gets a little oily?

Like this:

[Tuesday Afternoon]

42. wtf?

never mind. Just as rec is anonymous so is un-rec.
I just did not feel that this thread was Greatest page worthy. Simple as that.

BFD

[breadandwine]

45. So because you didn't think it was THE GREATEST you told everybody not to view it?

You have an odd idea of free speech. And you don't know what the rec system is all about.

Meanwhile, here's another example of our exemplary corporate culture.


Would you buy a used car from this man? -----

[Tuesday Afternoon]

47. are you saying that people Only read the Greatest page?

sense. You make none and imo neither did this article. Get over yourself. In the scheme of things this is a fart in the whirlwind.

on edit: your thread has already made the Greatest page so I really do not understand your worry.

[breadandwine]

43. Your enlightened business management hard at work:

[breadandwine]

46. Your trustworthy corporate leaders hard at work ----

workin' HARD ---






and this ----

[KittyWampus]

25. Multi-tasking is a survival skill but it is NOT efficient or as effective as singular focus.

Starting with such an egregious error puts the whole written piece in doubt.

[treestar]

29. that's hard to believe

Number 4 is perhaps trying to describe annoying behavior of some kind - trying to make it about yourself and your greatness rather than getting the job done could get in the way of getting things done - other than that, just not believable.

[breadandwine]

31. treestar, there could well be innocent explanations for some of these points.

But look at the pattern of them all. Not exactly "In Search of Excellence" is it?


The employers implied in the article seem to be one itchy finger away from being a banshee wailing through the company on a downsizing kick.

[Berry Cool]

32. Ordinarily, I'd agree with you that this is bullshit, but I think you're being harsh.

These suggestions can be interpreted in a much more positive way. To wit:

1. Don't try to do so much at once that you do a half-assed job on everything. If you fear you've got too much to do at once to do all of it well, tell your boss he/she's going to have to either give someone else some of the work or suffer the consequences. Speak up for yourself when you feel overburdened.

2. Don't fall into the trap of thinking that you have to work long hours to prove your dedication. If that's the only way to get ahead with your employer, you might want to rethink sticking around. This employer may value the APPEARANCE of working long and hard over efficiency or actual accomplishment.

3. Saying you can do everything you're assigned to do with a cheery grin can backfire when your boss overburdens you and you finally hit your limit. You're probably better off telling your boss at some point "Look, I can't possibly do all this. You need to give some of this to someone else."

4. Don't hog all the praise when you're part of a group of people that does a good job. Acknowledge the work of others.

5. Don't be a geek. Know how to work with people as well as stuff.

6. Finally, taking all of this advice could get you fired. But if it does, maybe you need to get out of the corporate world anyway. It's Wacky Land.

[breadandwine]

54. Maybe, Berry Cool. But on your #3 ---

"Saying you can do everything you're assigned to do with a cheery grin can backfire when your boss overburdens you"

--- Whether or not your boss overburdens you, I can think of many a boss who, if I had said I can't do this or that he would have been REALLY PISSED.

I don't see how it is realistic to tell a superior all about how you can't do this and that.

So I think it's a catch-22:

Say "Yes I can" and they think you're too big for your britches.

Say "No I can't" and they have it in for you for THAT.

Basically, either way, you're fired. We were looking to downsize ANYWAY......

[drmeow]

56. Glad to know I wasn't the only person

who was reading it basically this way. To me it sounded a little bit like "how to try not to be insane in an insane world."

In every case the article seems to be saying "moderation"

[Born_A_Truman]

33. I have #1, 2 & 3 Fail on #4

Never could manage that one; I left that to others.

[Scuba]

34. Don't forget 'compassion'. Showing compassion toward subordinates will get you the axe.

[dccrossman]

53. Compassion will get you in trouble

The manager of my group at a previous job got dressed down for taking the side of her team. She took some concerns to management and got a lecture on not telling the team that she's "on their side", because she wasn't and shouldn't be.

Was a real eye-opener.

[Scuba]

58. I got fired for allowing an employee to work from home while she was recovering ...

...from breast cancer surgery, even though it was reasonable for her to do her work remotely for a few weeks.

[lumberjack_jeff]

110. Yup.

I tried to look like a hard-ass but they saw right through it.

... so now I build boats.

I like managing people, and by any relevant measurable criteria I do it well, but upper managers want to see that glimmer of psychopathy in their mid-managers, and it can't really be faked.

[notesdev]

35. That's my experience to a "T"

working for agencies of the federal government. Anything that stands out in any way is a threat to the status quo; if your boss likes it, your co-workers won't, and vice versa.

[snooper2]

37. your spin on this is pretty weak...

really weak to be honest...

[obxhead]

38. aka Quit working so hard, you're making me look bad. nt

[breadandwine]

69. Wow, that's sounds pretty on target, obxhead.

Yeah, some managers see excellence as a threat to them because some higher up might give their job to the subordinate.

Or something along those lines.

Makes sense. Though it's pretty paranoid.

[obxhead]

72. It is. I've been told that in all seriousness before. nt

[mzteris]

102. I had a group of ladies

tell me that. AND they were pissed I didn't "take a coffee break". I told them I could drink coffee at my desk, that I wasn't being paid to take a break. I was a temp after all at the time. They had the boss call the supervisor at the temp agency to tell me that I had to take a 15 minute coffee break 2x a day. :sigh:

[boppers]

111. Dunno about law where you are...

..but at some places, allowing employees to work through required break time is a labor law violation.

[mzteris]

132. this was some - okay - a lot - of years ago.

As a temporary, I was being paid to work. I had to clock out for my lunch. It felt like stealing to "take" another 1/2 hour for something I didn't want or need anyway.

[Nay]

120. By federal labor law, you *ARE* to be paid for taking two 15-minute

breaks per 8-hour shift, and you are to have a half-hour lunch break, which can be unpaid. I suppose you can take a break or not, but be reminded that people DIED getting you those basic rights in a workday. It's not just some frivolous thing.

[mzteris]

133. i understand that. This was quite some time ago.

I'm not sure that was a law back then.

[hunter]

40. Best (or worse) temp job I ever had...

It was a long time ago and the company was a darling of investors and had a lot of cash to burn. The warehouse manger controlled access to his territory with an iron fist. No outsiders were allowed in because it was "too dangerous." You know, unescorted visitors might get hit by a forklift or something. Or worse, they might be tempted to steal high value product.

His bosses never visited, they were probably too busy having parties with investors or sex with vendors' reps, but their accountants would get terribly upset if temps were sent home early because that meant the company was hiring unnecessary temps.

So sometimes we'd spend half the day playing broom hockey or cards or reading paperbacks in some out of the way place.

At first it made me crazy. I'd look forward to the rare days when there was plenty of work. The temps who couldn't stand idleness usually quit. The best card and broom hockey players were offered permanent positions, usually to replace people who went on to higher paying jobs with defense contractors or who burned out on drugs and alcohol.

So far as I know the company still runs that way because it's not about the actual product, most of which is cheap as dirt, it's all about the marketing to both the consumer and to the investor. The package is much more important than the stuff inside.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

44. I'm willing to believe these don't look good on a resume, because they look like padding.

"works well with others" and "good communication skills" might take up room on a two page resume for something that could be more meaningful.

But are they actually bad skills to have? Pff.

[breadandwine]

70. Well, if a manager thinks these skills are just padding, he can always ask the applicant

about those skills to verify them in the interview.

[closeupready]

57. I veer away from listings that seek 'someone who can multi-task'

not because I'm lazy, but because it typically means you will be doing the job of 5 people.

[Kat45]

62. Unfortunately, these days it's in just about every job description.

This makes it tough for me to find a job.

[Greyhound]

60. K&R

[rainbow4321]

61. Promoting work safety and patient privacy

Apparently look good on paper but I try to carry these out and I'm told I am not "supportive" of other nurses or being "positive".
I've found and reported used needles either laying around the clinic or hanging out of needle containers, heard a patient being forced to discuss his private parts in a high traffic area by a nurse, have found soaking wet refridge with wet vaccine boxes, found a nebulizer machine with no expiration date in it's filter, a patient appointment entered in the computer with the wrong drug written in it.
Yet what does the manager allow to be.said about me in a meeting? That I'm not supportive of other nurses, that I need to not be nitpicky, that I need to focus on the positive and be protective of the nursing staff.
I left the meeting feeling like I've just been thru an alternative universe. I still refuse to see myself as the bad guy.
But this is not unexpected. We often have nursong meetings where we are scolded for 55 minutes and told in the last 5 minutes "good job, good job"

[Dawson Leery]

63. All signs of our corporatist system.

They must stifle innovation as it may challenge the status quo.

[otohara]

68. Brought to you by The Inhuman Resource Departments

of corporate America.

This what they teach the freaks that head HR departments - The HR people in the radio business are some of the scariest women I've ever met.

[breadandwine]

71. Yeah, truly, otohara. Ever read "Up The Organization" by Robert Townsend?

Great little book about how to run organizations in an idealistic way. By the former head of Avis Rent-A-Car.

[Name removed]

106. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[otohara]

134. I Should Have Known

there would be at least ONE HR Director on DU who would take this personally, and I am shocked to find out that HR people get along with other HR people.

So now that you've taken this all personally, let me tell you my experience with a couple HR Mgrs.

I was a disabled worker, my experiences with HR directors has been nothing short of nightmarish, one even telling me to "if you're in so much pain, why don't you go on government disability" rather than grant me a simple ADA request. Oh and I especially loved being yelled at by the HR director "it's not my fault you had polio". To guarantee a parking space for me at one job, I had to go buy my own Handicap Parking Only sign. Does this sound like good HR policy?.

Nothing makes a disabled gal feel better than knowing your replacement is 23 years younger, prettier, has two perfect legs, no experience, yet gets paid $15,000 more than you did.

You could probably answer this question for me, why are disabled workers discriminated against more than their able-bodied peers? Why are the disabled paid less than the able bodied?

You know it's true, there's plenty of research which says so.

[tridim]

73. In IT these days, if you only know 4 languages, you had better know 20.

And it's not just a matter of adding new words to your resume, you will be tested on the spot.

Imagine going to an interview for a "French-English translator" position and the boss asks if you can also speak every other language on Earth fluently. If you say yes, he asks you a question in Mandarin Chinese. When you fail to answer in Mandarin, you're done. If you say no, you're done because the next applicant (from the massive pool) may know Mandarin in addition to French. Lucky him.

That's what most of my interviews have been like, and it's killing me.

[newtothegame]

74. Wow, talk about a misleading post. If you're going to misconstrue an argument, don't link to it.

Not only did you leave out the majority of the text on each section, but you also left out the main point of the article. For those who fell for it, here's the actual text of the article:

"Without proper moderation, even the most beneficial skills can harm, rather than help, you on the job. Here are five abilities that will set you back professionally if taken to the extreme:"

[tblue37]

90. Yep. The article is actually about how people who

promise too much and spread themselves too thin end up not doing any of their tasks adequately; how people who step all over their co-workers to grab the spotlight end up creating resentment; how people who overdo the multitasking cn end up doing a crappy job on each task, since their focus is scattered, etc.

In other words, the OP completely misrepresents what the article is actually saying! The article's points are simply self-evident, inoffensive, and unremarkable. Of course, most readers on this thread are accepting the OP's misrepresentation at face value, gasping, and clutching their pearls rather than following the link and reading what the article actually says.

[ElboRuum]

96. OP's reading comprehension...

...leaves much to be desired.

[Bennyboy]

75. Wow.

[The_Casual_Observer]

76. This is one of those daily advice things that shows up on my email front page

I often wonder who it is that writes this stuff. It's always the same kind of "quirky" supposedly counter-intuitive crap dreamed up by some faceless entity.

[Curmudgeoness]

77. What is interesting about this is that just a few years ago,

we were all told that we should have these exact same skills/abilities. Good/bad/good/bad, I get confused.

[CTyankee]

80. I think that's interesting , too! Cover your ass, maybe? nt

[1Hippiechick]

82. Gawd! That's TODAY'S thinking?!? I am old school, and all those traits have served me very well

over the years, leading to promotions.
If these are the "new rules" that explains the apathy amd slovenly behavior in our country and why we are where we are now--nowhere.

[MissDeeds]

84. Disgusting, isn't it?

When I was in grad school, I nearly killed myself to get good grades. I was teaching full time and driving 60 miles to campus to take classes two, and sometimes three times a week. In the summer, I took a full nine hour load. Late in my PhD program, my major professor called me in to his office and told me that having a 4.0 gpa wasn't necessarily a good thing - that 'no one wants to hire someone that could be seen as a threat'. I had worked my butt off, reading texts at the kitchen counter because it hurt too bad to sit another minute, and I was told to scale back. Nowhere in my life had I ever received the memo that said 'mediocrity wins the day'.

Hey breadandwine - Forgot to say K&R!!!

[breadandwine]

124. I think you kind of hit it on the head, MissDeeds, in your post #84. And thanks for the K&R!

I've been told that an Ivy League education is a big problem because employers don't want to hire someone who is too well educated. I've been told elsewhere that if you have worked like a dog to make yourself more qualified that then you are OVERQUALIFIED and they don't want you because they want a subservient slave and if you are highly qualified they are afraid you'll move on soon to something else and they'll lose you. How does one figure out how to be EXACTLY the right level of qualification when a competing applicant might be a little better qualified and get the job instead of you?

I've also taken economics courses where the instructor casually remarks that in this or that particular situation the company or manager was, um, "not acting as a profit maximizer." As if this were some little footnote to how economics works. Like, who'da thunk?! In the world of supply and demand, doesn't EVERYBODY naturally do what is most profitable?

NO!!!!!!!!!!

They're all screwed up with being at the top of the hill, maintaining a stratified structure instead of a team effort, being on an ego trip and all kinds of other MAJOR NEUROSES that have nothing to do with being a rational profit maximizer. Or maybe they ARE a profit maximizer BUT they intend to GET their profit out of YOUR pocket even though you are on THEIR TEAM.

Some of the posts above, the ones throwing spitballs at this thread, seem to be in DEEP DENIAL. They splutter indignantly that this discussion doesn't describe their company. That's wonderful. I hope they have wonderful lives. I think their experiences are the exception to the rule. It's amazing to me that they have no idea inside their little bubble that many companies are as decadent and determined to suppress excellence as I am suggesting. They are also in deep denial because they are trying to look at the trees instead of the forest and try to look for the silver lining in my OP-linked article. The experts quoted in the article may indeed have EXCUSES for why they are giving such advice but it still doesn't obscure the big picture, the overall PATTERN of their career advice, which can still be summed up this way:

Keep in your place, don't make waves, don't try to excel, and ---

STAY IN THE BASEMENT, CINDERELLA!!!!!!!!!!!

I think the reason some people on this thread have expressed confusion is because a lot of these managers are hypocrites. They SAID they wanted excellence but they didn't really mean it or they had second thoughts. Or their class warfare ideology got in the way of clear thinking.

Do you know how Japan began making good cars and then began swamping the US with better cars everyone wanted while Detroit stagnated? Because the Japanese went to our good schools like Harvard Business School where they taught a relatively idealistic creed of team effort, quality circles and so on and the Japanese took all that more seriously than the bloated, calcified corporations in the Unites States.

I won't disagree with the assertion that some companies are really run well, have an avant-garde corporate culture, aren't self-destructively greedy and self-destructively overcome by a need for penny-wise, pound-foolish immediate gratification. But actually, a great many companies I've worked for do have those very problems.

I think the unwritten assumption of many managers is:

"This company functions well not because you excel and may threaten to take from me my perch on the hill, but because we have plenty of slaves and livestock that we can mooch off of and suck their blood. I may try to give you an incentive in promising you could move up the totem pole but I sure as HELL didn't mean it."

[femrap]

85. And never try to

solve a problem. Just sit there....maybe shrug.:shrug:

[ZombieHorde]

87. A buddy of mine told me he won't hire smart people.

He hires for a local restaurant. He says people who are just smart enough to do the job are perfect; smart people are more likely to become disgruntled.

[Lucky Luciano]

88. Dumb thread If taken seriously. Those traits will

Definitely get you promoted at my company.

[JoePhilly]

91. Yup ... cornerstone of why I have a "career" and not a "job"

[Curmudgeoness]

93. I think the point was that it will not GET you the job. After that, it all changes. nt

[Lucky Luciano]

94. Nope - being very aggressive, proactive, and a good thinker

would be a prerequisite to get hired at my firm. If you do not show such traits, you will not get in either.

[alp227]

97. so i won't get interviewed just because i am honest and overplay my capabilities.

wow the bosses really are so power hungry they don't wanna be overpowered. gotta remember this. thanks for posting.

[jp11]

98. Kudos hotjobs/yahoo

way to make job seekers even more neurtoic.

[mzteris]

99. don't show initiative.

don't try to fix any problems you find when that's "not your job" to do that.

never ever discover where the information being disseminated by the company is completely and totally WRONG and try and make your supervisors aware of that.

never go beyond "your assigned job duties" in trying to get the job you've been assigned done correctly. Better to do the job incorrectly within your "duties" than do it right and "overstep".

oh - and it doesn't pay to understand more about any damn thing than the people who are supposed to be your supervisor.

[Kind of Blue]

100. Figured dummies rule in my work experience.

So headed out on my own and haven't looked back since. Nice to see after 10years going it alone that my assessment wasn't far off. Thanks!
KnR

[wackywaggin]

103. Sad ,but exactly the position I am in at work!!

I would add that being smart and innovative are immediate signs that you are not a "team player."
I want to know when team player came to mean you had to be dumb, incompetent, and blindly follow a supervisor's lead without questions. I can't wait to tell my superiors where to shove it when I finish law school and give them a little suprise back.

Heretic Wack

[notadmblnd]

104. Corporations want them young (cheap pay) and dumb (won't question authority)

[gtar100]

105. This is not America

There was a time
A wind that blew so young
For this could be the biggest sky
And I could have the faintest idea

-David Bowie


But instead this is now the consequence of shallow lives lived for money and pleasure, driven by envy and greed. For why would anything such as a culture and wisdom be of importance when there's money to be made and a sucker born every minute. Out of my way! For I must spit in a gold sink!

[Blue_Tires]

107. kick for comment later....

[uppityperson]

109. #2 gave me burn out @ my last job. How about expecting only 8 hrs work in 8 hours, boss?

"While logging overtime is sometimes necessary in many jobs, making a habit of it could be a sign that you're unable to prioritize assignments."

My priority was keeping people alive and healthy. Their priority was "of course, and make sure you get the paper work done, and we now have more paperwork to do so make sure you do that, and we're short staffed today but do the best you can. Remember to prioritize and get everything done."

[DefenseLawyer]

112. Looks like you've been missing a lot of work lately, Peter

Oh I wouldn't say I've been missing it, Bob.

[bobburgster]

116. I think yoy forgot something.

:sarcasm:

[elocs]

122. None of these things have been the case where I have worked.

I am confident that in my area most of those traits are still praiseworthy and will help to get you a job. I've never heard anyone here claim otherwise.

[quaker bill]

123. Not a particularly good rendition

of the original article text. However, being a boss, virtually nothing that you have written is true about working for me. A Pollyana attitude would probably be the only one that might cause a problem, as my folks are paid to find and deal with problems. TO do this well, they need to multi-task, show initiative, creativity, and work hard. In exchange for doing this I sell them upward for recognition, raises, and bonuses. But then people like working for me, so I rarely have an opening to hire.

[SkyDaddy7]

125. The only one I personally found to be true...

#1...And not really for the reasons stated above...If you are seen to be able to more than one thing at a time then you will be asked to do more work for the same pay!

[gleaner]

126. I have one ...

I used to have a job with the government that involved casework with fairly complicated tax issues. The age of your cases were a big deal to them. You weren't supposed to have a case over 60 days old, even if it was aged almost to that point when it was assigned to you. Fraud cases were the only exception, and even with those you had to write a status report every month even if nothing changed.

I managed to clear my cases fast enough so that I had no inventory to speak of. I also developed Fraud and wrote the frigging reports. My manager called me in one day and said, "You have no inventory." I responded that I closed my cases as fast as I could. I tried to keep within the aging guidelines. I quoted my clearance statistics and they were higher than the employees she was dealing with. She said, "Well, the the ADD has noticed this and we have decided to flood you with cases until you have the same amount of inventory as everyone else." My jaw dropped. I said, "So what you are telling me, is that because I meet your guidelines for clearing cases I have to do more work than anyone else to the point where I can't possibly keep up?" She looked at me without responding. I told her there was no way we were going there. I would just slow down and equalize the caseload that way. She got very nervous. "No, no, we don't want that." I told her I was not going to be "flooded" with cases if no one else was. I would help with some of the overage that the others were fighting if the cases were transferred to me without their time, but otherwise it would be slow and go. She agreed, reluctantly, and I worked the overage. Then they wanted to give me overage from other offices.

At that point I requested to be assigned to work non filed tax returns. I am disabled, I was getting sicker and I was really tired at that point. I hadn't been formally trained to do non filers, and so they couldn't give me bad case reviews for working above my training level. When she gave me my first load of non filers, my manager asked sarcastically if I wanted to write my own reviews. I said it sounded like a good idea, as long as she signed off on them, and she actually went for it. I cleared her cases, her statistics were good, I wrote myself good reviews and she signed off on them. No questions were asked. I could not have gotten away with it now, and I could not have gotten away with it then if I had not been a Union Steward.

I'm not surprised at your list. That mentality was beginning to seep into some of the places I worked even back in the 80s. A styling by Reagan, I think. Also a good reason for unions. They keep the workplace on a parity that you never see anymore.

[breadandwine]

127. A big thanks to those who have been kicking and recommending this thread.

While some people threw spitballs, laughed or unrecommended, with one person actually declaring that he had unrecommended BECAUSE he didn't want this thread on the Greatest Threads list, I can now happily report that this thread is barreling along at a hundred additional views every few minutes and has received thus far a very appreciated:

126 comment posts, more than the other two threads higher up on the Greatest list.

83 recommendations, not as much as the other two but still very appreciated.

4850 views, far more than the other two threads.



Thanks everyone.


Keep adding your own experiences if you care to, very informative. If anyone has any illuminating links on all this, please share. Here are a couple of mine:


I highly recommend this short, idealistic book, written in easy alphabetical topics, "Up The Organization: How to Stop the Corporation from Stifling People and Strangling Profits" by Robert Townsend, former head of Avis Rent-A-Car, which is also in paperback and also had an updated edition called "Further Up The Organization" which is almost the same but with added chapters. Still one of my favorite books after all these years and can be useful for anyone, even if they are at the bottom of the totem pole ----


http://www.amazon.com/Up-Organization-Corporation-Stifling-Strangling/dp/0787987751/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1277380106&sr=8-1


Another of my favorite books, though more theoretical, is "Future Shock" by Alvin Toffler, which says that increasingly organizations are moving away from rigid vertical hierarchy toward lateral relationships and command structure and that this is necessary for getting things done. Increasingly, when something goes wrong in a factory or something breaks, there isn't time for the worker to go all the way up a bureaucratic chain of command and then back down again to get something fixed and he has to be granted from the beginning the authority to call in the repair crew himself laterally, not through a vertical command structure. Lots of stuff like that. He says that in the information age society is moving and must move away from rigid hierarchy toward more lateral relationships. The problem is that some people in positions of authority still can't handle this emerging change ----


http://www.amazon.com/Future-Shock-Alvin-Toffler/dp/0553277375/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1277380697&sr=1-1


Understanding "Future Shock" well requires a lot of reflection but if you take what it says to heart it can impact how you function successfully in any organization.

[breadandwine]

128. The corporate motto: Give us your poor, your tired, your huddled masses ---

and we will make sure they CONTINUE to be poor, tired and huddled.

[zipplewrath]

129. It's all in the presentation

NO one cares if you multitask. They care if you do it while working with them. It suggests to them that you work with them isn't important.

I tend to be cautious about a guy that works alot of unrequested overtime. If it takes that much time to get his job done, what will happen when I need him to do OT for additional scope that appears?

"Can do spirit" is great, except when we're trying to assess the risks of a praticular activity. The "can do" comes after we have decided it is worth doing, not as part of that decision.

"building visibility" and "schmoozing" are very close together. One has value to your employer, the other one doesn't

The fifth one was the interesting one, about "Strong technical streak". I do find it strange that employers tend to want their most talented technical employees to move into upper management.... and stop using their strong technical skills.

[breadandwine]

130. Zipplewrath, interesting and informative comments. But did it ever occur to you that ---

an employee is working overtime because he has to feed that "outmoded" institution called his family? Maybe his overtime implies that his employer is NOT PAYING HIM ENOUGH.

[zipplewrath]

131. Presuming he gets paid

The target of the article most likely doesn't get paid OT for "casual" overtime.