When my colleagues handed over to me, I found that the company had many problems. Should I leave at once?

Netizen @ Canaan worked for one year and recently moved to a big company to do new media operations. After only working for a week, he became more and more unhappy. The new job is quite different from what he said in the interview and what he imagined. Canaan thought that he mainly operated the official WeChat account, wrote tweets and planned activities. But these only take up a little energy. The direct leader often asks him to go to the exhibition to record videos. When the company held various offline activities, the leader asked Canaan to carry the camera to the scene as a guest photographer and let him finish the post-editing. Canaan is very wronged. "I don't understand video. I won't edit the video again. " The leader came up with a sentence. "I don't understand, can't I learn?" A man born to know everything! Look at you complaining and tired. What's wrong with young people studying more! "Canaan is very upset. This job is very different from what he thought. He even thinks that the leader is deliberately making things difficult for him. Do you want to leave at once?

Canaan's experience is very common in the workplace. Many people think that joining a new company means job-hopping success. It may not be true. After entering the new company, they are likely to face new problems. For example, finding a new company like Canaan didn't meet your expectations.

This may lead to two situations:

First, it may be inconsistent with the company's commitment during the interview.

Second, it may be inconsistent with the job seeker's own estimate.

Sister Jenny, the author of "Job-hopping is blind date", pointed out in detail three situations of expectation mismatch:

First, the positions do not match. Including job, grade, grade, etc. In other words, the position promised to you is different from the position you entered. Canaan's experience is obviously inconsistent with his responsibilities, and his post-employment responsibilities are inconsistent with the job content communicated during the interview. The inconsistency between ranks and grades is mainly due to the fact that the positions and grades promised after joining the company have not been put in place.

Second, interpersonal relationships are inconsistent. Including inconsistent reporting relationship, inconsistent team size and inconsistent harmony. The first two are different from the original promise of the job seeker, and the last one is different from the personal expectation of the job seeker.

Here are three examples to illustrate these three differences:

Inconsistent relationship between the superior and the subordinate-for example, during the interview, you said that the position reported directly to the department manager, but after you joined the company, you found that there was a senior business supervisor between you and the department manager. The team size is inconsistent-for example, the interview said that this team is the core business department of the company. After joining the company, you find that the team is only a third-line department, and it is difficult to obtain resources and expenses. Harmony is inconsistent-for example, you think that team members are easy to get along with and the team is harmonious, but after joining the company, you find that this is not the case at all. Many colleagues don't like you as an airborne soldier at all.

Third, the development prospects are inconsistent. Including positions, departments and enterprise development prospects, we will not give examples. In fact, no matter what happens, no matter what kind of "discrepancy" you encounter, what you have to do is to observe before thinking, analyze before acting. Never make the decision to leave immediately, because through hard work, the situation may change and the predicament may be reversed. If you really encounter this situation, you must first face it positively, analyze and think, and solve it in reverse. Passive avoidance, when you walk away, should only be a last resort, which is the best policy.

So, what should we think?

On the one hand, analyze the reasons for the differences. Why don't they match? Is it inconsistent with the original promise? Still not in line with personal expectations? If it is caused by personal expectations, has the individual made an overly optimistic estimate? On the other hand, we should actively deal with the causes of unqualified. Analyze clearly what can be changed after your own efforts and what cannot be changed after your own efforts. When you have finished the changeable part, the controllable part and the hard part, let's see if this company is worth staying.

Generally speaking, active reaction may produce two results:

(1) The situation has improved, the individual has adapted, and the problem has been solved, so stay and continue to work.

(2) The situation is getting worse and worse, and individuals can't adapt. At this time, job seekers should consider leaving the team department.

If job seekers appreciate this company very much, and there are many opportunities for employees to leave, they can consider changing jobs. If the helper is disappointed with the company, or thinks that there are no other suitable opportunities in the company, he will go outside to look for opportunities and start a new round of job hopping. In most cases, the time for job seekers to think and act on their own should be controlled at about 3 months, which is almost the probation period for new positions. Before the end of the probation period, job seekers can leave their jobs at any time to minimize personal and company losses.