EDIT: Thanks for all the great responses. Helped me get out of my head and see how things appear, and not how I think they are. Really sorry for the length of this post. You guys are awesome! 😄
SHORT-POST: About 6 mos before being laid off by an ex-employer in the past, one of the Supervisors (Sup B) told me that I exaggerated the work timelines, so I got less work; appeared slower. He said I could get things done fast and when I said that work given was going to take a while, he felt that was unreasonably long.
CONTEXT: Up to 8 mos before this meeting, I had tried to improve things, QAed my own work so I could have QAing skills, and delivered promising results, but I was passed over twice promotions (Senior Data Enterer that QAs work) before this meeting, in favor of people who started after me, and did not know this job or had the skills for the QA the data-entry one above it, in my estimation. Of course, I was probably wrong.
So, message to me: Management wanted me at my current role. I simply stopped going beyond the scope of my role, and continued delivering steady and good performance. My own Supervisor (Sup A) evidenced that. When asked for time estimates about my tasks by this other Supervisor (Sup B) I gave a number I thought I needed or simply deferred to his number. I wanted to be happy in my role, and not stressed out about going beyond it. That stress got me nowhere.
A couple of times, knowing that I could QA this Supervisor (Sup B) got me to work the Senior Data Enterers jobs. He liked pressing me for when I could get things done, in the hopes I would give a shorter duration than the standard. He came across as a bit of a slave-driver to me. I wanted to be happy in my job, so I gave him estimates of what I thought worked; or, tried to deliver things on his timelines, and when something failed, told him why it failed. He thought I wasn’t delivering.
QUESTION: Given the context above, am I right to blame myself and say that I had a cannot-do attitude? Should I have taken on more, in the hopes that I would’ve been a Senior Data Enterer some day, when I had been passed over twice? Or, were they just milking me for their own bonuses?
‐——–×——–
LONG OLD POST (same content as above): I apologize in-advance. This is long for context. But, I’m here for serious advice and to learn.
I’m unemployed at the moment and looking for work. But, I’ve been reaching out to previous employers, and simply requesting one-liners on what they could have seen me improve, when I worked for them. One of them reached out with some honesty. I wanted to ask here about what I can learn from this, and how I can get better.
I worked for this company for 2.5 years. Hard. Put up with whimsical leadership that did not have a clue how to guide me, produced paperwork they wanted on time, got things done. (Entered data.) Met their deadlines. Said Hellos and Good Byes. Was social and nice. Participated in events.
I could sense that there was a general feeling of unhappiness there, since no one had a raise, and pretty much a lot of people felt that the management had its head up its ass. Whatever. I got passed over for 2 promotions during this time by other folks, one of whom didn’t have my typing speed, the other of whom was a computer programmer. Whatever.
After about 1.8 years, they tried to invent a problem with me about me getting too settled in a role that I had gotten good at, and had not been an eager beaver anymore, asking for extra work or innovate. How can one innovate data entry? I figured, if they want to give me work, they’ll do that; I’ve been hired for role A, and I deliver value in that, not come up with role A+B for myself. Otherwise, I’m here to do good at what I’ve been given, little or more. My one main Supervisor at the time, since I had 2, pulled me out from one side of the office, put me on the other, and the complaints disappeared. I was still doing the same job.
Before they downsized (when half the company went, about 6 months later), one of the other guys, who was the 3rd Supervisor, but of a team within the same area as this new side of the office, sat me in a meeting, and told me that when I take on data entry assignments, I give him the worst estimate possible of how long the work will take to get done, which comes across as I don’t want to work.
I told him that instead of, then, having me tell them how long it’ll take me, why don’t they just simply tell me how long it should get done in; then, if it isn’t done because something went wrong, like my keyboard broke or whatever, I’ll simply go tell him that, as things comes up.
I gave him an example of the one time I told him something new that I hadn’t done before would take me an hour to get gone, he told me that it shouldn’t be more than 45 minutes, and the Shift key stopped working, and I had to get the hardware guy’s help to get the thing done in 45 minutes. If it were just me, it would not have been done in an hour, let alone 45 minutes, since I didn’t have the keys to the locker that had the spare keyboards.
My message through this example was that if they leave me without support, and I give them a time estimate based on that, I’m going to give them the worst time estimate because that’s the only variable I control. If they are tight on time, they should streamline their processes more, than having me invent their processes for them. I’m not paid to do that; I’m paid to enter data.
I’m not confident enough, nor am I a project manager making complex charts, to give them accurate time estimates. They should have their own ideas, and when keyboards break and there is no one with keys to the locker with the spares, blame their own judgements.
He went on a rant about how I should be more confident. How I should be better at communication. My main supervisor (guy who moved me) came into the room then, listened, heard me tell the other guy that I get my work done and not pass it on to others, and if I’m not confident, I’ll commumicate that realistically. If that sounds like 5he worst case scenario every time, maybe they should tell me what, how and when they need somethind and I’ll get it done their way. I walked out with my main Supervisor at the end and he told me later that there was nothing wrong with my performance; I should go home and enjoy my evening.
I reflect on that now. I may have “checked out” and left it up to the Management to figure out the tasking better; given unimpressive answers about how quickly things can get done, since (1) when I was an eager beaver, they didn’t promote me or value me, and (2) if I’m used to not being supported and doing things myself, I’ll just assume that will remain unchanged.
They wanted to hear that I can get things done quick, and I used to say that I’ve made it the most efficient I can. Afterall, now they had the computer scientist they promoted to maybe automate parts to make the data entry faster.
Management universally wants to hear that things are better, even though underneath it is just more stress and burnout. I refused to take that on, and maybe wasn’t careful enough in striking the right balance between eager beaver and I-do-not-care-here-for-the-pay.
The feedback I got from a group of Managers there recently was that it felt like I exaggerated the work timelines, so I work less. Subconsciously, I was passed over twice for more pay, and I wasn’t going to innovate their data entry processes for them; I did what I was paid for well. But, that subconscious feeling maybe seeped through.
Given the context above, am I right to blame myself and say that I had a cannot-do attitude, and should have been more innovative? Should I have taken more on, taken more ownership, when all the evidence from lack of advancement, but indication from main Supervisor of good performance, was that they didn’t want me to progress with them anyways? Just milk me more, while feeding me the same amount of grass?
I wish to be objective about this. I appreciate any feedback. And, honesty. Thank you for your time.