I’ve been thinking about my career too and it caused an argument with my SO the other day. I like where I’m working but I don’t get to do much programming or circuit design, things I went to school for. I just got to one year being here and now I feel like it’s time to start thinking of where I should go next
I should also add that I’m sorry your situation has caused an argument with your SO. You don’t have to give more details if you’d prefer not to, but I am curious, I confess, how that happened. If your current place has no paths for growth or change, then there is nothing wrong with looking elsewhere or finding out what you need to acquire to make that change - whether it’s elsewhere or at the same company. Life is to short to stay in unhappy jobs; I believe it’s what has caused a lot of health problems in our parents’ generations.
A while ago I watched this video about tech careers and it mentioned that working at a big tech company is a huge benefit for your resume. So I mentioned to my SO that I think it’d be good for our future if I can get a job there and we live in California for a year or two. When I caused the argument I brought up California for the second time and just talked about two benefits I thought of at the time. My SO previously told me she doesn’t feel like she gets any say just because I make more money. I thought we were just having a conversation but she felt like I just didn’t care about what she thinks. It ended up being a good chance for me to grow, I’ve been working on improving my communication and I apologized.
One of the issues at hand is this: employers now have things structured where there are only so many roles and only so many people in those roles, and so someone has to leave before you can level up in any way. And even if you can demonstrate that a new role is needed and how you are the natural candidate to get that new role going and grow with it, in order “to be fair”, they have to open interviews because they no longer promote people just on merit, you have to apply for everything. I think that for some roles that’s a perfect strategy, but I think that giving people opportunities to grow based on their performance should also be a thing. Otherwise, you end up in a position like I am in.
This is the third time I have interviewed for another internal role. My boss knows I am seeking to grow. I am kickass in my current role (boss’s words) - so is the other person I suspect was my competition (they tried to play it off as though there were several candidates, but I’m pretty sure it was just one other) - but instead of being rewarded or given a growth opportunity of any kind, I was left the option of competing for the chance to grow. It makes me kind of resent the extra I put in that I didn’t have to because what was the point? The other person did not put in that extra, and they either have the job or are at least going forward.
My boss has offered a feedback meeting if I want one, but I wonder if there’s a point. There is no guarantee of a timetable for another position like this opening up in the near future, and even if it does, my implementation of their feedback won’t make that much difference (I’ve tried that track twice already) because I will have to compete for it anyway, and twice already those efforts seem to have no influence on their decision.
Companies complain about talent leaving, but then restrict all growth to singular paths gated by competition with one’s coworkers instead of a person’s own drive and abilities, even if it was that person’s efforts that showed the need for the position.
As I said, I am grief-staging right now. Bitterness is one, right?
I’ve been thinking about my career too and it caused an argument with my SO the other day. I like where I’m working but I don’t get to do much programming or circuit design, things I went to school for. I just got to one year being here and now I feel like it’s time to start thinking of where I should go next
I should also add that I’m sorry your situation has caused an argument with your SO. You don’t have to give more details if you’d prefer not to, but I am curious, I confess, how that happened. If your current place has no paths for growth or change, then there is nothing wrong with looking elsewhere or finding out what you need to acquire to make that change - whether it’s elsewhere or at the same company. Life is to short to stay in unhappy jobs; I believe it’s what has caused a lot of health problems in our parents’ generations.
A while ago I watched this video about tech careers and it mentioned that working at a big tech company is a huge benefit for your resume. So I mentioned to my SO that I think it’d be good for our future if I can get a job there and we live in California for a year or two. When I caused the argument I brought up California for the second time and just talked about two benefits I thought of at the time. My SO previously told me she doesn’t feel like she gets any say just because I make more money. I thought we were just having a conversation but she felt like I just didn’t care about what she thinks. It ended up being a good chance for me to grow, I’ve been working on improving my communication and I apologized.
One of the issues at hand is this: employers now have things structured where there are only so many roles and only so many people in those roles, and so someone has to leave before you can level up in any way. And even if you can demonstrate that a new role is needed and how you are the natural candidate to get that new role going and grow with it, in order “to be fair”, they have to open interviews because they no longer promote people just on merit, you have to apply for everything. I think that for some roles that’s a perfect strategy, but I think that giving people opportunities to grow based on their performance should also be a thing. Otherwise, you end up in a position like I am in.
This is the third time I have interviewed for another internal role. My boss knows I am seeking to grow. I am kickass in my current role (boss’s words) - so is the other person I suspect was my competition (they tried to play it off as though there were several candidates, but I’m pretty sure it was just one other) - but instead of being rewarded or given a growth opportunity of any kind, I was left the option of competing for the chance to grow. It makes me kind of resent the extra I put in that I didn’t have to because what was the point? The other person did not put in that extra, and they either have the job or are at least going forward.
My boss has offered a feedback meeting if I want one, but I wonder if there’s a point. There is no guarantee of a timetable for another position like this opening up in the near future, and even if it does, my implementation of their feedback won’t make that much difference (I’ve tried that track twice already) because I will have to compete for it anyway, and twice already those efforts seem to have no influence on their decision.
Companies complain about talent leaving, but then restrict all growth to singular paths gated by competition with one’s coworkers instead of a person’s own drive and abilities, even if it was that person’s efforts that showed the need for the position.
As I said, I am grief-staging right now. Bitterness is one, right?