Hacker News Reader

Comment by fsk | Hacker News Reader

One difference is, in school, if you get marked down on a Math a Computer Science test or homework, there's almost always a clear reason.

In a job, if your boss just doesn't like you for whatever reason, there's no clear feedback for why you're failing, at least not in the same form you get feedback in school.

For example, on a job interview, the hiring manager will say something vague like "bad cultural fit" when he really means "This candidate knows more than me. If I hire him, then my own job might be at risk."

I always thought "Work hard, study hard, do your best job and things will always work out for you." It's a bit of a shock to realize that's a lie.

View on HN

    > in a job interview, the hiring manager will say
    > something vague like "bad cultural fit" when he really
    > means "This candidate knows more than me. If I hire him,
    > then my own job might be at risk."

Rationalising people's poor reactions to you as their being scared of your superior intellect is going to stop you from dealing with the underlying issues you're having with social interaction.

Several commenters are jumping on this. I don't interpret it as "'Bad culture fit' always really means X", and certainly not "The only reason people could dislike me is because they know I'm superior to them." It was merely an example of the arbitrary, unfair, unstated, maybe even unconscious reasons you or your work might be rejected as an adult, which might be difficult to cope with if you are accustomed to well-reasoned, principled, and kindly explained criticism from school.

On the other hand, some people complain about arbitrary treatment in school, too. I can't think of any egregious experiences like that for myself. Maybe these complainers are the type who make excuses for their own failings? Maybe school vs. adult work isn't a good contrast after all? Anyway, I found it a better analogy than you're giving it credit for.

Also, I think your tone is a bit strong. Maybe you didn't mean to, but it sounds like you're accusing this person of having "underlying issues with social interaction" and that they often feel they're mistreated by others and are superior to them. That seems uncalled for, given that the original text wasn't that direct or personal. It was just an example. If you feel that it implies a certain attitude of the author that you feel needs correcting, there might be more helpful ways to say it.

Actually, a recruiter recently quoted the interviewer telling her precisely this as the reason for declining me.

"For example, on a job interview, the hiring manager will say something vague like "bad cultural fit" when he really means "This candidate knows more than me. If I hire him, then my own job might be at risk.""

I'm not sure if you're being serious here but is it really hard to believe that you might not be a good fit for a company?

For example, if a company told me they like working weekends and 10 hours a day, and I said I value working smart and think that working too many hours leads to poor quality code, I'm pretty sure both of us would think it's a poor fit.

You've been fired several times. Are you sure that maybe you don't have some sort of "doesn't play well with others" issue?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9442157

How do people keep tracks of who says what on HN ? With such a large crowd I don't understand how that is done. (or was it luck ?)

I don't think there are that many prolific posters here that you can't start recognizing the regulars.

You click on their name.

I have to wonder if someone started trawling the GP's post history looking to discredit him/her. I know technically how to dig up old posts, but I wonder what the motivation or sequence of events was for this instance. Edit: This is not an accusation, more a cynical statement that I'm not seeing a more likely reason someone would happen to know somebody else posted about being fired.

Or they wanted a more holistic impression of him in order to better help him. But yes, your theory is likely too.

There are no objective metrics nor particular reasons in life in general. It's an ad-hoc mesh of people interaction. Some consider it a game. People choose their friends and put them on some scale of close friends vs. acquaintances based on how much they like them and how well they connect with them. From an individual's perspective, people are never equal or the same: people are nice and interesting wildly unequally.

The same works for employers, employees, and co-owners: they want people with whom they can connect enough so that they can work with them. If you do connect with a person, you end up hanging out with him/her, and this opens the door for creativity and new ideas and projects.

Conversely, nobody wants to spend time with people they don't particularly like or connect with, even if they are highly skilled. Interviews are always very personal in the end, even if people want to back up their choices with seemingly rational and objective analysis. That's why there's an array of diplomatic answers to why the candidate was rejected. But basically it often comes down to "I didn't get a good feeling of him", and that hunch is likely to be correct in most cases (I'd personally venture to say "in all cases") but you're not allowed to say it aloud.

In life you don't win by getting the numbers right: you win by letting go of too much idealism, seeing instead what works 1) for real and 2) for you, and then by hopping on to the right carriages while journeying on.

I usually see 'bad culture fit' to mean either... too old, too independent (not submissive to 'company culture'), not quirky enough, not upper middle class enough, or too arrogant.

I think existentially I would feel a lot better if I got nixed because I was too smart, rather than, for example, not being lucky enough to be culturalized in an upper middle class setting.

> I always thought "Work hard, study hard, do your best job and things will always work out for you." It's a bit of a shock to realize that's a lie.

It's not quite a lie. It most certainly is code for you having applied to the wrong position.

There are plenty of places where the hiring managers will know more than you, or if they don't, understand that specialization is probably going to turn out OK, and that you're not a threat but a possible asset.

School provides you with skills and credentials, and marks are just to measure a baseline of confidence and motivation. Performing well technically won't necessarily be enough to satisfy you, your peers, or your bosses.

I think school gives the illusion of direction. Tying your mental well-being too tightly to your performance is precarious. In a way, all guarantees are lies that the lessons of living eventually correct.

Maybe next time you get the axe you should try to get on at a large organization that has things like structured performance reviews and so you can get feedback on what you need to do to improve.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com