Canaan thought that he mainly operated the official WeChat account, wrote tweets, planned activities and so on, but these only occupied his little energy. His immediate leader often asks him to record videos at exhibitions. When the company held various offline activities, the leader asked Canaan to take a camera to the scene, be a camera guest and let him finish the post-editing.
Canaan is very wronged. "Video, I don't understand. I won't do video editing in the future. "
The leader walked past without saying a word. "I don't understand, can't you learn? Who was born knowing 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 giving him a hard time. Should he leave his job immediately?
The experience of Canaan is more common in the workplace. Many people think that joining a new company means a successful job-hopping. Actually, not necessarily. After entering a new company, you are likely to face new problems. For example, in Canaan, I found that the new company did not meet my expectations.
There are two possible situations. First, it may be inconsistent with what the company promised 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", has pointed out in detail three situations that do not meet expectations:
Including duties, ranks, grades, etc. That is to say, the position promised to you is different from the position you entered.
Canaan's experience is obviously inconsistent with his duties, and his post-employment duties are inconsistent with the job content communicated during the interview.
And level mismatch, hierarchy mismatch, etc. , mainly refers to the position and level promised after joining the job have not been put in place.
Including inconsistent reporting relationship, inconsistent team size and inconsistent harmony. The first two are different from the original promises to job seekers, and the last one is different from the personal expectations of job seekers.
Here are three examples to illustrate these three differences:
Inconsistent reporting relationship-for example, during the interview, you said that this position reported directly to the department manager, and after joining the company, you found that there was a senior business supervisor between you and the department manager.
The team size does not match-for example, when interviewing, 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 in the company, and it is difficult to win resources and expenses.
Harmony does not match-for example, you think that team members are easy to get along with, and the team is harmonious and easy to get along with, 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.
Including the development prospects of positions, departments and even enterprises, we will not give examples.
In fact, no matter what happens and 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 with hard work, the situation may change and the predicament may be reversed.
If this really happens, we must first face it positively, analyze and think, and solve it in reverse. Passive avoidance, once gone, should only be used as a last resort, which is the worst policy.
So, how should we think?
On the one hand, analyze the causes of inconsistency. Why doesn't it match? Is it inconsistent with the original promise? Or is it inconsistent 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 reasons for non-compliance. Analyze clearly what you can change after your own efforts and what you can't change after your own efforts. After you have completed all the parts that you can change, control and work hard, you can see whether this company is worth staying.
Generally speaking, a positive response may produce two results:
(1) Things are getting better, people are used to it, and the problem has been solved. Let's stay and continue working.
(2) When the situation gets worse and individuals can't adapt, job seekers should consider leaving this department.
If job seekers appreciate this company very much, and there are many opportunities for turnover within the company, they can consider changing jobs.
If the applicant is disappointed with this company, or thinks that there are no other suitable opportunities inside, he will turn to the 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 by themselves should be controlled at about 3 months, which is almost the probation period of new positions. Before the end of the probation period, job seekers can leave their jobs at any time, so that the losses to individuals and companies will be minimized.