
How I got fired from my job, and what I learned - vincentbarr
http://www.andrewlynch.net/2016/03/29/how-i-got-fired-from-my-dream-job-and-what-i-learned/
======
ChrisDutrow
He was set up to fail in this scenario. Lack of oversight and prompt feedback
when he started slipping caused this situation to snowball.

Some personality types can handle this amount of autonomy, but most people
cannot. Most people need more structure than what existed here. I also think
highly creative people are even more likely to slip.

This is a reason why startups are so hard, it's really hard to put together an
organization where people can be productive together.

I have three remote workers and I check in daily. When someone inevitably
starts slipping, I try to let them know immediately. Otherwise it's my fault
when I have to fire them and destroy value that I worked to create. It's
throwing money down down the drain in the form of training, familiarity with
the organization and acquired skills.

~~~
ArkyBeagle
IMO, you have to be a bit... "spiky" ( as Eddie Izzard might say ) to work
independently. It's worth being a bit paranoid about expectations. This means
you have to manage expectations, design deliverables very carefully and
perpetually review them.

And if you don't hand in progress reports, do them anyway and keep them for
audit - you'll need them eventually whether there's any conflict or not.

It's nearly impossible to describe just how ambiguously most people
communicate. I've been places where I was in-house and it got to the point
where I simply made it a point to be as irritating and lawyerly as possible,
not long before I left. It at least communicates "I'm not the one giving up
here..."

~~~
ChrisDutrow
This is a really good point. When I think of the people who I've worked with
who are successful without structure are usually a little bit
paranoid/neurotic. Even if no one has checked on them for months, in the back
of their head, they are still concerned about the repercussions of slacking
off.

I should note that people without this personality trait can be successful
too. But in their case, the repercussions for slacking off must be real and
immediate (usually just being verbally called out). As a business you must
have systems in place to know when this is happening.

There is another type of person who cannot be successful at all in this
scenario. They will do everything in their power and intellect to get away
with slacking off. ...Oftentimes because they cannot stop themselves from
slacking off so their options are either: quit, get fired, or try to get away
with it. Most people don't quit.

~~~
thelynchmob1
You're totally right. You pretty much nailed it. I'm not one of those
paranoid/neurotic people at all.

Funnily enough, this is why I've been a lot better at freelancing: I get
instant feedback from the client if they're not happy, and I get instant
rewards (payment) when I finish a job to a good standard.

~~~
ArkyBeagle
I think it can be developed as habits. Really, it comes down to just another
checklist, but it may be a checklist you have to sort of muse about now and
again - "is that _really_ done?"

------
Cartwright2
It's a crazy world we live in where someone would post such a candid article
about their own under-performance. This article is embarrassing to the
individual, and more importantly, to the company that fired him. I think
people need to think more carefully about what they post online especially
when using real names. This is permanent now. Any potential employer who
searches this man on the internet will see this and I don't think that's a
good thing. While some might not be turned off by this person's honesty, I
certainly would not hire him having read this article. If anything it shows a
lack of a diplomatic filter, not only a lack of discipline.

~~~
mobiuscog
A lack of honesty and too many 'diplomatic filters' is why most businesses are
messed up.

The world is diving into yet another period of political correctness because
people don't like the truth or differing opinions.

It's refreshing to see someone describe what happened and why without a glossy
layer of 'Everything is awesome' over the top.

~~~
thelynchmob1
I wrote this article - thanks, your comment means a lot to me. I thought
exactly the same. Everyone who writes online is portraying only the best
parts, the highlights, without admitting that sometimes, things suck. It's
about time we were honest about things.

------
invaliddata
We all have shortcomings. It is hard to work with people who refuse to
acknowledge their shortcomings and then try to remediate or at least work
around them. Even worse are those who seek to blame others for their
circumstances or and arr not willing to admit anything personally embarassing.

I applaud the author and although I'm not in a position to hire anyone, I'd be
more likely to hire him (ceteres paribus) because he's put this out there.

~~~
thelynchmob1
Author of this article here: thanks, that means a lot to me. I completely
agree with you -- I'd much rather work with someone who acknowledges and
admits their issues, so we can find a way to work around them, or make them
non-issues. That's much easier than working with people who ignore problems,
or try to patch over them, or try to mitigate all of their weaknesses without
ever focusing on maximising their strengths.

------
itsmemattchung
I really enjoyed the article, thanks for sharing it. As a remote worker, many
of the points you mentioned resonate with me.

~~~
thelynchmob1
Hey, I wrote this article. Thanks - really glad you liked it. Remote jobs are
fantastic for a lot of people, but they're not the be all and end all.
Sometimes, they REALLY suck. Especially if you're not an introvert, and need
other people around to recharge.

~~~
shambulatron1
Signed up specifically to reply to this comment, and to add my thanks for your
blog post :)

I'm going through a lot of exactly the same thing at the moment, though sans
startup environment. I'm intrigued to read that you consider the root cause to
be extroversion. I wouldn't call myself an extrovert at all, and would ascribe
most of what you write about to anxiety (for which I've recently started
seeing a CBT counsellor).

Do you think that having your coworkers available in-person would have changed
things because 1) having them around would have "recharged your batteries",
i.e. the extrovert theory, or 2) having them around would have added the
pressure to counterbalance the procrastination (my situation a lot of the
time), or 3) something else?

~~~
thelynchmob1
I don't consider the root cause to be extroversion at all. That's one
particular reason why I don't like working at home, but I could (and did) just
rent office space to deal with that. The problem is that I'm afraid of
succeeding -- so, for example, when I rented office space, I didn't go all the
time. Or when my company offered to move me from the UK to Austin to be around
them all the time, I said no.

2) is correct. I would have felt like I needed to do everything to the best
standard because the people I was working for were around around me. I'd feel
a much more personal connection with them, and I wouldn't want to let them
down, so I'd get my work done, and do it well. And I'd be less afraid about
speaking up, or mentioning problems, in person. It's also a lot easier to
demarcate between work and not-work time when you're working at an office.

