this post was submitted on 27 Aug 2024
26 points (100.0% liked)

ADHD memes

8202 readers
794 users here now

ADHD Memes

The lighter side of ADHD


Rules

  1. No Party Pooping

Other ND communities

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Maybe an alternate perspective, but I do a lot of interviews for technical roles like developers, product owners, architects, etc.

There’s often a perception that the role can be done isolated at a desk grinding on tasks, but that is often not the case. It’s easy to find people who will do task work, but really hard to find people who are capable communicators and empathizers with the people they will be working with. At the end of the day, we’re trying to fill the roles with someone who we can trust alone in a room with a customer, and not someone who will be alone in a room doing tasks.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

I hear you and essentially don't disagree. But I feel like this might lean a tad toward gaslighting.

  • Plenty of people are fine communicators when it comes to genuine collaborative work but still find the "game" of job applications very difficult or impossible.
  • Being left alone with a customer is not a thing at all for many roles.
  • Embracing diversity in abilities and doing so transparently is a thing that can be valuable for both companies and humanity. Presuming everyone can do all the things is, IMO/IME, damaging. It leads to cutting out people who have something valuable to offer. But also leads to not recognising when people are properly bad at something despite the fact that they really shouldn't be given their seniority and role.

In the end, a job application/interview is not like the job at all (whether necessarily or not). That there are people in the world who would be disproportionately good at the job but bad the application seems to me an empirical fact given the diversity of humanity. And recognising this seems important and valuable in general but especially for those trying to understand their relationship to the system.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

True. What the image should say is Capitalism is hell for autistic people. And non-autistic people. And all other people. Capitalism is really only not hell for those born wealthy.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Yea, because non-free-markets don't require people to get along?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

No, but the difference is you don't have the threat of starvation and homelessness if you can't do it.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Absolutely. Capitalism categorizes all people as 'useful' and 'useless', the former really being 'exploitably productive'.

Lots of folks with tons to offer the world are shunted off to the side because what they can offer isn't valued by capital. Either that, or their challenges are perceived as too substantial for the accumulationists to bother to see what accommodations could be made.

But why bother when humans-go-in-money-comes-out is the depth of all thinking and concern? It's not the company's job to care that people are starving three houses over! Why don't they just get a job—

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 month ago

because what they can offer isn't valued by capital

People categorize people as 'useful' and 'useless'. Hell, get down to Biology 101 and mate selection, animals select useful against useless. What do you have to offer?

"I'm having a heart attack! Help!"

"I'm a really nice guy that does wonderful paintings of the local pelicans!"

"Fuck off, I need a skilled physician and I'll pay anything right now!"

Yes, people get paid more or less dependent upon their use to society. Why would society support you if you have little, or nothing, to contribute? For those of us in first world countries, we're populous enough and technologically advanced enough to support a wide range of talents. Of course there are plenty of counter examples, but that's mainly how it goes in any given economic or governmental framework.

tl;dr: We're social animals with needs. Fulfill needs or GTFO. You don't have to like it, but you better understand it.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago (1 children)

But how do I show I am that guy day-to-day but not when it's a high pressure situation I've been playing my head over and over for days?

I've found ways around it but never know when you could need this kind of advice.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

The interviewer(s) has no power over your life, not presenting your case to a judge here. You didn't have the job when you woke up this morning, you may or may not have it when you go to bed. You can't lose anything, only gain.

Some advice that has stuck with me came from Andrew Carnegie's How to Win Friends and Influence People. Yeah, modern sensibilities take that old-school title all wrong. It's a book about the author's quest to better understand social interactions and document his findings for future people feeling as lost as he did, thereby making himself a better person. It's the only book I'd recommend to anyone. Give it a spin.

When faced with potentially world shattering change, and an interview is not that, I force myself to take a breath and ask, "What happens if the very worst consequence I can imagine comes true?" Go nuts here, get dark, what's the worst you can imagine?

The answer is invariably, "I'll soldier on, somehow survive." Not like I'm going to blow my brains out, whatever happens. And you won't either.

"Will I get this job?" is nothing compared to the many difficulties life throws up. I'm on the hunt now, after leaving an employer that treats their employees like gold. In fact, I'm on severance pay ATM, but running out fast. What if I have to go back to an office everyday? What if I only end up getting paid half what I was making? Fuck, what if I end up selling boiled peanuts on a corner downtown to make our mortgage? Well, I won't die, that's for sure.

The second thing I'd say, talk to the interviewer just as you would a friend of a friend, an acquaintance that maybe has an opportunity for you. They're not kings, and you're not their subject. Approaching them as an equal makes one hell of a difference, exudes sincerity, and that lets them see you as your really are. And isn't that what you both want?