Mostly for school or to go to a better job.
[In reply to]
Once it was because they wanted to put me on probation for a "problem" that I didn't know existed and that they had given me no guidance or training to address, but instead had strung me along for five months without saying anything. I called them on their BS and said that it was pretty clear they were just trying to get rid of me, so why didn't I just leave now rather than waiting until it was another month closer to Christmas, when nobody would be hiring.
They agreed, and even authorized me for unemployment benefits. (You don't get unemployment if you leave on your own, or if you're fired for cause.)
from a few jobs. A few of them were due to schooling, meaning I was at a summer position and was heading off to school in the fall resulting in a resignation letter. So those were mostly positive experiences, some I didn't want to leave, others I was happy to be done with. The most significant resignation I went through in my opinion, was the toughest. I had worked as an assistant manager at a retail chain for a while and left it to go back to school, as mentioned. When done school the store I was at had closed, but I was asked back to another location when I was done school. I jumped at the chance, as I got a bit of a promotion and knew some of the folks at that location. Anyway, the job was great at the time, I was getting a chance to improve my management skills and saw a chance for some advancement, maybe even my own location down the road. However, I received a job offer in a totally different career path, which meant a ton more money and much more security down the road. So I took the new job, but tried to work at the old retail store with some reduced hours. Eventually, it was just too much on me, the folks at the retail location knew it. So my boss there asked me to rethink what I was doing, either re-commit to the retail or consider taking less hours to get re-energized. Well, it wasn't fair to the retail location, it wasn't where my heart was in the end, so I resigned. That was a hard thing to do, I loved the store, I loved the product, I loved the company and I loved the people I was working with. The newer job had all of those things as well, with much more money and security, so it won out. I have totally lost contact with those folks over the years, but still search for them on Facebook every now and again. Would be great to catch up. Funny though, in the end the industry I went into completely faltered years later and was almost completely wiped out. I ended up bouncing around, finally found out that I was going to be fired, so I packed up my office one night and waited for the pink slip the next day. The place was so unorganized, that my boss at the time had no idea I was being replaced. But my contacts ran fairly deep in that company, so I knew ahead of time. So my boss at the time had no clue what was going on. Hilariously when they finally faxed over my termination letter to her, it had the wrong name on it all together, and even had 'Mrs.' instead of 'Mr.'....Of course I knew the person that it was addressed to and was able to give them a heads up. The retail chain I had left to take this 'great' job was losing its spot in the market when I left, but have since gone through a bit of a resurgence and have more locations now than ever. Funny how life goes. Anyway, I took my severance package, took a few months off work and landed in the job I currently have....which was about 13 years ago??
(This post was edited by Donry on Aug 21 2012, 11:06pm)
My last boss could be difficult just because of different styles - he was a micromanager and I like being left alone to do my job. Also, I like the feeling of completion on a project; I like to get it done and over with, but he liked to constantly revisit old projects to see if we couldn't improve on them, and that drove me nuts and I wouldn't react well. Over the years we talked this out and even though there continued to be times where we both infuriated each other, we got to where we recognized it as soon as it started and would take a "time out" for a couple of hours, then meet up to talk about it - which usually started with both of us apologizing to the other. One day he said to me "I think ours is the most adult relationship I have."
I had a similar dynamic with my youngest son
[In reply to]
We just had such different styles that we were butting heads constantly - especially since we're both very verbal so both of us would verbalize our frustration rather than just slink away and simmer.
We also worked really hard at trying to understand and take responsibility for how we talked to each other and how we listened to each other (overlooking a perceived tone in order to keep calm, for example). For a 16 year old... he worked really hard, I have to say. Not that I didn't - but I had a lot more years of practice at working things out like this.
For two people who couldn't talk to each other successfully for the first 15 years (yes, as a three year old, he was already telling people how foolish their opinions and tastes were)... we grew into a relationship where we communicated very well. It came to a point where he once told me - out of all his friends, he thought I was the best mother. Believe me, that's all a mom has to hear to die happy.
I think those relationships you have to work hard at - and both parties do it - can be the most satisfying, sometimes.
That is great about you and your son working out your difficulties. I foresee a time when my sons and I are going to butt heads, in different ways. I'm a yeller, The Little Goblin is a yeller, and Little Eruvande is a simmerer.
But Little Eruvande once told me he was glad I was his Cub Scout den leader because I'm fun. I can die happy, too!
I agree that sometimes differing styles can be a big factor.
[In reply to]
I have noticed at least 3 types of co-workers/bosses: *task oriented *position oriented *fun oriented
I'm the task oriented type. I come to get the job done and solve any problems and barriers along the way and then move on. I've noted some mild friction with people who are more position oriented. Usually this kind of friction occurs when there is some reason for a problem to continue existing because it is good for a person's position even though it doesn't align with the task goals, or when succeeding at a task is not helpful for someone's position. More often than not, there is a way to work things out in these cases. The third type is more rare. These are the people who "know someone" or "have something on someone" or are otherwise "immune and exceptional" and are not focused on either the completing a task or on maintaining their position because they are guaranteed the position and the performance of the institution is something that they don't care about either. So they just come in to work each day looking to have some fun. I haven't figured out how to deal with these people when they decide that they want to spend their work hours just pushing buttons or otherwise "having fun" with me or others in ways that don't relate to the workplace itself at all.
I'm not against having fun. I just don't know what to do when people decide that what is fun is to do crazy stunts that work against the goals and vision of the institution without any fear of being held responsible for anything they do.
Although I wonder . . . in an earlier job I was part of a large stable of medical writers. We had a workshop once where we all took the Meyers-Briggs test, and found out why all the people with science backgrounds (the SJs) worked so differently from the ex-teachers (the NTs) and the folks from the humanities (the NFs) - and why the NFs and SJs in particular couldn't get along. It occurs to me now that the three groups might correspond to your categories. The SJs were definitely the most-task oriented and thought we NFs were too fun-loving; they said we talked too much and wasted too much time. We also played a LOT of pranks on each other (none against the company's interests). But we got just as much work done, and did it just as well. And we were the group most likely to support and actually DO what the boss asked, while the SJs were most likely to whinge and try to sabotage any new ideas.
Does your "fun" category include people who are just not interested in doing any work at all? Because I've had to contend with my share of those. Although not for long.
It's all good fun until somebody gets hurt.
[In reply to]
I like your idea about Myers-Briggs. My fun category is sort of open and would include: *People who just want to have fun and not work *People who choose a line of work because they think it is fun *People who have fun with other people while the work *People who allow their fun to conflict with the workplace environment
So I guess it would depend on whether you have pranks while you work because it is part of the culture of the position you are in and that is something you enjoy together - or if that is what it takes to "get the job done" - or if your primary goal is to come to work and mess with people because that is what you do.
I don't think it is always bad to be a "fun oriented" worker. I guess that it can help build morale and team-cohesiveness and bring out the best in people. It's also really nice when people find their work to be fun. It makes everything work out better.
I am an NF, actually. But I am an NF who chooses to do work that I have fun doing (and then I get totally absorbed in it as far as I am permitted to do so) But I am also a J - so maybe that puts me on track with some of the SJishness. As far as cooperating with what is asked of me, well there are those things that are "officially" asked and those that are "unofficially asked" because there is some reason that it can be asked officially . I'm good at "not understanding" those things which fall in the second category . And I'm a champion of the first category. It does get tricky when one has more than one boss, though, if they can't agree on what is asked officially. I have been accused of "not being open-minded and flexible". This happened in a situation where I took on numerous differing positions and changed my plans and schedules at the last minute. But I didn't bend on those "unofficial requests". I was a champion, leader, and supporter of numerous, numerous new ideas (even in cases where those ideas met opposition), but I was not a supporter of one particular new idea (and I was not alone in this) that was filled with all kinds of this "unofficial motivations" that had nothing to do with the official objectives of the school and instead dealt with a host of other things that I generally avoid in the workplace ... pretending the stuff isn't there and ignoring it since officially challenging would mean first officially identifying it and it is officially "unofficial" stuff that can't be dealt with in this way ... if you get my meaning ...
So I'd say your categories are on the right track for something - but the Myers-Briggs divisions you mentioned might create a slightly different partition of the workforce compared to my task/position/fun divisions - with some overlap.
I love to read how other moms and sons find out how to get along. When my kids were in grade school, I was the "bus" driver and drove 6 kids back and forth every day - only 2 of them mine. At 3:00 pm both my son and I are hungry and cranky. We would fight all the way home, every day. I couldn't bring a snack for him without bringing snacks for all and the budget did not allow that. So we had a rule, #1 Son and I were not allowed to talk to each other on the drive home, not until we got home and had a snack. I can still tell when he is hungry and cranky. In fact, I can tell when his son is hungry and cranky. And Mr. Tennie can tell when I am hungry and cranky! I can finally recognize it myself now and kind of control it.