A lesson learnt
I’ve finally had to face up to the question of what path to take in life. Nobody said deciding on a path through life was easy, and I never expected it to be - but how you manage the human relationships on which your decision process depends can dramatically affect the outcome. This is a lesson recently branded upon my brain, likely very painfully: as I write, a door seem likely to be closing to me that I would have absolutely loved to take, as a result of cowardly mismanagement of one such relationship.
I’ve been faced with a short term opportunity to work with a fantastic bunch of people in a company with a great mission, with a position doing something reasonably interesting. It wouldn’t pay much, in a city that’s (in)famously expensive to live in, and the outcome is highly uncertain and might leave me in a financially unsustainable city with no job. What I’ve been trying to do is greatly reduce the risk by trying to line up a job for winter ‘09 onwards - in an industry which I think would suit me, career-wise. So it comes down to balancing the short term and the long term.
Having been offered the short term position, the long term position dragged their feet, taking their time to organise interviews, get back to me with decisions (and in fact they still haven’t, despite the matter being supposed to have found some sort of closure a week ago).
Rather than having the maturity and openness to communicate what was going on to the startup I wanted to work for over the summer, I in turn stalled them and they were left in the dark about what was going on. I had absolutely no idea what the consequences would be of admitting to a company offering me a position that I was seeking alternate offers. Partly, the issue was that I was slightly leaning towards the view that if the long term path was unwilling to give me time to work for the startup over the summer, I might, to my extreme chagrin, have to sacrifice the short term experience for the long view option.
Keeping them in the dark until I had all the options laid out before me was not a conscious strategy, but rather, a reflex equivalent to sticking my head in the sand. It was a ’strategy decision’ that was made unconsciously, played out over several weeks, as I waited for new information from the long term factor, stalling the startup at every point, thinking I was getting close to a resolution [which hasn't even arrived yet!]
In retrospect it was a cowardly and naive thing to do, completely blind to the needs and feelings of my summer employers - a startup needs to execute fast, smoothly, and with access to the fullest information potentially available to it (hence the importance of openness in all dealings with them) - and I gave them nothing but uncertainty, delays, and a feeling of being played and manipulated as I sought “alternatives” (when really I was seeking a safety net to enable me to work with them at a [reduced] level of personal risk that I could find to be workable).
Furthermore, they were hiring me for a position which demanded great communication skills with outsiders, in addition to the openness and honesty of emotion that working in a small team demands. I’ve demonstrated neither of those in the very turbulent past few weeks that followed my uprooting from a stable, 4-year stretch at university.
Unsurprisingly, they’re mighty pissed off and I’ve greatly shaken their confidence in me, and the chances that this opportunity is still open seem very remote.
Managing your options and the relationships attached to them is no simple task, especially when they each have their own resolution timelines (remember, I’m still waiting to hear back from the long term opportunity), expectations and outcomes. It’s not a simple set of simultaneous equations you can solve and find the right solution to - you often have to make a decision without all the information and options clear to you. There’s a life lesson in risk and decision right there, for sure. And neither is communicating with the people offering you the options - I’ve never known how to explain jobseeking alternatives to potential employers.
But what I’ve learnt here - potentially very painfully if the short term opportunity closes to me - is that openness and honesty would have been the best policy, daunting and impossible though it may have seemed at the time. People would have been more understanding than I feared, had I been open with them and found the right way to explain what was going on, to dispel - or at least minimise - their fears. Obscurity and stalling is the confused coward’s way out - and I fell for its lure; hopefully, if I’ve learnt my lesson, for the last time.
Related:
- Oxford Geek Nights 5
- Should have practiced my talk! Then maybe I would have realised it wasn't even close to being under 5 minutes. Video and slides on the OGN page. Despite the talk being a disaster, it was, from an objective standpoint, successful: I'm getting somewhere with my public speaking jitters, and lots of people came up later to talk about it. I met some really interesting people and heard some great talks. Conversations of note: Stelios Koundoros, founder at Optimor Systems, trying to bring rationality to consumerism with a recommendation system with some interesting maths under the hood. Some interesting standpoints, some refreshingly Internet-sceptic - probably the only ones in the room! Main thrust of his argument was the shallowness and poverty of online interaction versus face to face life. Also disagrees with me about the value of philanthropy where the funder is not also the executor. David Langer, heroic young web entrepreneur fresh out of Oxford, now busy making Groupspaces.com an invaluable social tool for us all! Great tips and stories for someone such as myself looking to follow in his footsteps! Was one apex of a short but interesting triangular debate between he, James Turnbull and yours truly about the...
- Paradoxical lifestyles
- Just came across an interesting behavioural economics paper by Stutzer & Frey. Behavioural science is an extremely 'hot' field of academia at the moment, hitting the mainstream with books such as Freakonomics (Dubner & Levitt), Predictably Irrational (Ariely), Blink (Gladwell), Nudge (Thaler), etc), and with increasing influence in politics, notably within the Conservative Party here in the UK. The key finding is this: Our main result indicates [...] that people with long journeys to and from work are systematically worse off and report significantly lower subjective well-being So you make yourself systematically worse off, and much unhappier, by buying a large suburban house (with long commute) with an extra bedroom for the rare occasions when your parents come to visit, instead of a short-haul townhouse - even though at the time of purchase, going for the larger suburban house seemed like a totally rational decision. Same deal with getting a highly paid city job in Canary Wharf or on Wall Street or Madison Avenue even though it dramatically extends commute time - when we would lead a happier job working a 'worse' job locally. The conclusion is not totally unexpected, but it's an interesting example that makes you think about...
- EXTEND music copyright?? What is the European Commission smoking?
- News comes via ArsTechnica that the EU may be prepping a move to shift copyright protection up from the standard 50 years to a whopping 95 years. Why 95? Psychologically easier to stomach than a nice, round HUGE number like 100? We're seeing an incredible rebirth of the creative commons in society, an explosion in DIY creativity, often by people whose inspiration is not the basic act of creation but delivering incredible mashups and remixes. Why then seek to stifle this with even heavier copyright restrictions? Perhaps it's a double bluff - make copyright even more onerous so that creators instead start looking at copyleft principles (espoused by Creative Commons, which I ardently support). There's no evidence that extending copyright would patch up our ailing music industry, which is currently going through very well-publicised hard times at the moment. Their problem is people who flaunt copyright - I dare say they're more concerned about the next Arctic Monkeys album being pirated, than musicians in their old age not getting royalties from songs they performed ab initio or just covered over half a century ago (songwriters, meanwhile, are protected for life+70). Intellectual property is not ostensibly about fairness, it's about putting...
Related posts brought to you by Yet Another Related Posts Plugin.
Add New Comment
Viewing 10 Comments
Thanks. Your comment is awaiting approval by a moderator.
Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.
Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.
Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.
Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.
Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.
Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.
Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.
Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.
Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.
Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.
Do you already have an account? Log in and claim this comment.
Add New Comment
Trackbacks
(Trackback URL)