Whether I loved the work?
Each of us should work - day after day, week after a week, month after month and year after year. Recently I reflected and whether I loved the work? Reflected after decided to leave from it.Solved
because was tired. Why was tired, seemingly unclear. Collective, in principle, quite good, chief too. Then why month of a month is saved fatigue and disgust?At first I worked with
, just being engaged in computers. Work was pleasant to me, I tested creative satisfaction from result, knew not bad “iron“ and software, i.e. understood the work. Then I began to be engaged in the website, and in principle it was quite interesting too - modern technologies, SEO, - generally, the advanced line.
Business went not bad, free time in which I liked to drink coffee began to appear, to talk to people, it is simple to chat, eventually.
Having noticed it, the management (or to it “helped to notice“) began to give me additional tasks - to go where - nibud, to help the management daughter “with a komputer“, to submit the announcement to the Rabota Dlya Vas newspaper. In general, in each of such actions at first sight there was nothing unusual and heavy. But through some time I understood that thus the person enters the hardly noticeable, but strongly influencing it vicious circle. Being engaged in a lot of the small and suddenly falling down remarks, you become the bipod not capable to create something valuable and interesting. Gradually interest in computers died away - it became just heavy to switch attention from a task to a task. To become in something the pro, it is necessary to cook in it constantly.to what I all this write
A. Yes just to that people, getting a job, were not bought on “an active dvizhukha“ around. Type, here all of us fuss, we work, everything is active. It is a pity for the lost years, and youth, probably, will are interesting which - what nuances.
Ask the potential employer a simple question: “You have duty regulations for me?“ Be not bought on vigorous answers: “Yes we will understand what you, it - god, the people“. Even the description in words of functions can not be a guarantee that you do not get to chaotic office. Only written on paper can be considered as what can be discussed and what is then your main argument in upholding of the rights. Actually, many chiefs know that it is easier to control the confused person: “How, you did not make it? You had to! It is known to all!“ But if you study the obligations for the written instruction, will know the purpose. In this case you will easier cope with work. Even with its large number. Moreover, you can have more free time. Also you know, there is nothing bad that someone does the whole hour nothing at work. It can say that it is he`s fine organized (and same it is always easy to check, misters chiefs!) . The army tradition to load that who caught sight without work - it is always a way to defeat both for the chief, and for the subordinate. It is much simpler to describe the scheme of the organization - to place on it people, to describe the scheme of subordination and coordination (one more frequent trap - three chiefs with the different points of view). And to trace then result at the exit, sometimes correcting, more simply. Obviously, big offices became big because could organize work of people irrespective of the identity of the administration. And in Russia still much depends on the identity of “chief“. The “chief“ inhaling life or giving a kick left there is no office also (or department, division etc.).
From love to hatred one step. And a name to it - duty regulations.