Imposter syndrome - prevalence in your industry? and the Degradation of learning institutions.

Well, whistle blowers should get more respect, unfortunately they are a liability to most corporate interests. Also, HR people get the word around, the blacklist is for real and whistle blowers are at the top of that list.

If you, as an employee, have good ideas and shares them with your supervisor or manager, it becomes their idea, or someone above them takes the credit. You are employed by them and like it or not you are a part of their corporate community, they basically own you and your ideas.

On the other hand if you ask intelligent questions and are interested in the entire process, you will get ahead regardless of your qualifications. Admitting mistakes and learning from them is a really good thing too. You remember not to make stupid mistakes and management usually appreciates your honesty, they might even give you a pass on some mistakes because you reported it right away.

With the right attitude, you could even get a job that someone else who had more qualifications didn't get. What you want, a paycheck and a livelihood, and what they want, an honest, hardworking and punctual employee, are two different things. Are you there simply to get paid, or are you there to be a benefit to the business that hired you by doing the best job possible? Is your self worth based on income level or doing a good job, no matter what it is? Some might say, "What good is it to be the best toilet cleaner in the world if you get crap pay doing it?" I'd reply with, "What good does it do to clean a toilet but leave it full of turds?"

There are many different flavors of impostors in our society, myself included.

What do you think fashion is for?

Who do you think is driving this?
If you look within an industry or institution: you will see that is is driven by their own policies.
It's everywhere now.

Crikey: look at our various world politicians, leaders, and captains of industry!
That's our best people.
That's the best we can do!

Back in the 70s, they called this the "Peter Principle":

www.forbes.com...

Basically, it says that competent people have a tendency to rise within a company all the way up to the point they become lousy at their jobs. You start with a good salesman. So good that you make him a sales manager. Well, maybe he's not all that good at management, but he sure can sell good. So he busts his butt in his new job, works 14 hour days, and maybe because he's a hard-working guy and has some brains, he's actually pretty good at it. Then you give him a "promotion" to District Manager. Suddenly maybe he's not so good at tracking the salespeople in his territory, assigning goals, working with the National Sales Manager to come up with new advertising and marketing and hiring and new training techniques, etc.

So now you have somebody who used to be a good salesman who is now a mediocre if not lousy manager. He rose to the level of his own incompetence. It's not hard to see where that salesman might think he's just faking being a manager.

originally posted by: Blue Shift
Back in the 70s, they called this the "Peter Principle":

www.forbes.com...

Basically, it says that competent people have a tendency to rise within a company all the way up to the point they become lousy at their jobs. You start with a good salesman. So good that you make him a sales manager. Well, maybe he's not all that good at management, but he sure can sell good. So he busts his butt in his new job, works 14 hour days, and maybe because he's a hard-working guy and has some brains, he's actually pretty good at it. Then you give him a "promotion" to District Manager. Suddenly maybe he's not so good at tracking the salespeople in his territory, assigning goals, working with the National Sales Manager to come up with new advertising and marketing and hiring and new training techniques, etc.

So now you have somebody who used to be a good salesman who is now a mediocre if not lousy manager. He rose to the level of his own incompetence. It's not hard to see where that salesman might think he's just faking being a manager.

I guess it might be the effect of the peter principle, I hadn't really thought about the association. I've known the term but I think it is caused by something different - but they may be indistinguishable in the work place. But they do operate on the same function - that the person in their position can't do their job and that's all that really matters. If we could figure out a good way to deal with this, imagine what could be accomplished!

originally posted by: Nothin
There are many different flavors of impostors in our society, myself included.

What do you think fashion is for?

Who do you think is driving this?
If you look within an industry or institution: you will see that is is driven by their own policies.
It's everywhere now.

Crikey: look at our various world politicians, leaders, and captains of industry!
That's our best people.
That's the best we can do!

Very good points. I thought of this before but not while I was writing, I was kind of zoned into the fields in which I have experience.

As far as the politicians, I agree that this seems laughable that these are the best we have to offer - anywhere in the world. IT seems like the good people are actively suppressed or are just so uninterested in politics that they don't bother trying. If they are going to put forth effort, they might as well do it somewhere they are out of the spotlight and don't have to deal with the fools in DC. IDK how this can be changed.. Suggestions?

originally posted by: DigginFoTroof
If we could figure out a good way to deal with this, imagine what could be accomplished!

We could all just let people do what they're best at and let them contribute to society that way, just like...

COMMUNISTS!

originally posted by: DigginFoTroof
a reply to: rickymouse

I agree with the experience 100%. This is one of the "outside research/studies" that I mentioned. Unfortunately a lot of times not even internships give very good experience as often the responsibilities & duties performed are very minimal in many fields. I think some businesses get either tax breaks, grants or some other funding to pay for interns and they basically end up using them as slave labor (basically free sometimes) and it can even end up hurting the interns b/c a lot of their energy is diverted from what actual productive duties and doing menial, repetitive, low skill jobs which they will most likely not need to do in their profession.

I think apprenticeships might be a better alternatives to many studies that are currently offered. People need to have some skin in the game when it comes to education and they need a fire lit under their butts to ensure they do what needs to be done - they don't need pandering/mommying from some educational system that changes the goal posts to fit where the student ends up.

You got that right about internships. Before they used to have a reduced wage for about ninety days, a probationary period where you got paid about a buck an hour while training in for the job. If you did all right, they kept you and gave you a raise. Now they have created internships with very low wages and they just train you to do demeaner work that needs to be done. Hardly any of the internships turn into jobs at that place either. The internship is a way of the employer making money and looking good at the same time.

I believe that when you start a job you should have a wage that takes into consideration your need for training, if you are already experienced, then a better wage could be started but not full pay, because someone could be lying on their resume and actually disrupt the work crew. I have seen that myself half a dozen times over the years in my business and being a foreman for another place, I had to let some people go because they messed up the crews production.

The longer you are at the job and being productive should alter the wage, how the worker gets along with others is important too, often a good worker has an attitude which conflicts with everyone else on the job, the one person has to go.

originally posted by: DigginFoTroof

originally posted by: Nothin
There are many different flavors of impostors in our society, myself included.

What do you think fashion is for?

Who do you think is driving this?
If you look within an industry or institution: you will see that is is driven by their own policies.
It's everywhere now.

Crikey: look at our various world politicians, leaders, and captains of industry!
That's our best people.
That's the best we can do!

Very good points. I thought of this before but not while I was writing, I was kind of zoned into the fields in which I have experience.

As far as the politicians, I agree that this seems laughable that these are the best we have to offer - anywhere in the world. IT seems like the good people are actively suppressed or are just so uninterested in politics that they don't bother trying. If they are going to put forth effort, they might as well do it somewhere they are out of the spotlight and don't have to deal with the fools in DC. IDK how this can be changed.. Suggestions?

Can't see this changing soon.
As observers have noted in this thread: it just seems to be getting worse, and in many different ways.

On a parallel: perhaps you, (because you are a prolific thread creator), should perhaps consider making a thread about 'leadership', and the various types of folks that are drawn to power, in many different spheres of our societies.

The way HR deals with this is that they accept applicants resumes, and even transcripts.

But they do their own in-house skills testing, and only go by the results they get.

So they disregard your credit-hours in math, and instead ask you to use a fourier transform to talk about the the different frequency-components of a complex wave.

I work in the tech industry; I'm an EE and specialize in Test Systems. I came up in the industry completely in the computer age and I would have to say it has had a lasting effect on the industry and young engineers. The computer age has allowed us to be more productive, to perform more complex tasks with less effort than has ever been possible. But it has also further pushed us into specializations. No one person knows how to do all aspects of a given vocation any more; but the aspects of a vocation they can preform they do preform better than those who came before them.

For example as I said I am an EE; but what exactly does that mean? There are things I was exposed to in college that was apparently important for an EE to know as it was part of the curriculum ... but just like crap you learn in high school but never use, I have all but forgotten some of this important EE knowledge. Does that make me a bad EE? Or is it true that I have specialized in certain aspects of EE at the expense of others?

I went to a job interview a few years ago and totally bombed at it when I was interviewed by their Director of Engineering; this was after I spent the morning dazzling their business management. The job was to come on under the Director of Engineering for a few years and be groomed to replace him as he was looking to retire. The reason I even went on the interview was because I was head hunted by their business management after they saw my resume on linkedin. I possed skills they wanted to bring into their corporation because they currently lacked them. Things like knowledge of automation, programming and statistical analysis. Unfortunately the Director of Engineering hit me with questions about EE that I no longer know like the back of my hand because they aren't things I do on a regular bases. He walked away thinking I was an idiot; and unfortunately the company missed out on me posibly bringing in knowledge that they current lacked. Was/am I an imposter or did that company have a miscomunication between them selves in what they wanted in a new employee? I truly don't know; some times when I think back on that interview I do feel like an imposter.


-----------

Another aspect of this issue I don't believe I read in this thread yet is the responsibility a corporation has on training their young engineers. A few posts stated that getting a diploma in a given field does not make one an expert in that field. I completely agree; but does that not mean that their hiring company has some responsibility in training that individual? Unfortunately the last decades of great recession and sequestration has created a situation where companies no longer allow for on the job training. Schedules and budgets no longer afford having young employees working next to older more experienced employees. Why budget two employees on a task when you can get away with only one? In this type of situation I'd say both the young and experienced employee losses out; the young employee losses the chances to learn what he needs to know to be good at his job and the older employee losses out on the diversity in knowledge that the young employee might bring in with him.

My current employer is facing this problem right now as the baby boomers are starting to retire in greater numbers. We have been working so "lean" the last 15 years that the young generation of engineers can't possibly replace what we are losing simply because we did not invest in them.

And what is worse is that this wasn't an unforeseen issue; I have been complaining about it to my upper management for years and while they had aknowlaged the problem they have done nothing to mitigate it. Now in my department alone I have 5 or 6 people reaching retirement and I only have 2 or 3 guys to replace them with. Even if these replacements are the smartest in the world they can't possible replace double their numbers. And we want to blame this younger generation for not being good enough? I think not; it's the older generation that failed them... and if we're talking about things as important as nukular power, than they may have failed us all.

a reply to: Graysen

Truthfully I try not to use skills testing when conducting interviews; life is not a test and how a person arrives at a final product is less important than if they have the means to find or develop the product. Depending on a few different factors I might higher a person who effectively demonstrates they are resourceful enough to find the solution to a question over someone who just knows the answers to my questions. We do hard things; we aren't always going to know the answer before we start.

a reply to: DanDanDat

I'm with you on that. Honestly the skills testing I see is to check whether the applicant has familiarity with the topic at hand--not that they remember obscure formulas, but whether they know what a given formula is for, or how to find the formula. Most of jobs require specialized skills that must be added after a hiring, but can be built if the applicant has a foundation of some kind.

To go with my Fourier transform example, you could ask the applicant how you'd use an app that performs the function, or maybe how they'd go about wiring up a board with a chip that does the transform periodically from live input. Tell them that they'll be processing a lot of analog data into digital, and we want to dissect the wave for components in an undesirable bandwidth.

You can expect a few moments of the mental gears grinding. But at some point, a qualified applicant will say something like, "you know, there's an app we could put in the software that would run the transform when it receives a given input request from the client.." that sort of thing

originally posted by: Graysen
a reply to: DanDanDat

I'm with you on that. Honestly the skills testing I see is to check whether the applicant has familiarity with the topic at hand--not that they remember obscure formulas, but whether they know what a given formula is for, or how to find the formula. Most of jobs require specialized skills that must be added after a hiring, but can be built if the applicant has a foundation of some kind.

To go with my Fourier transform example, you could ask the applicant how you'd use an app that performs the function, or maybe how they'd go about wiring up a board with a chip that does the transform periodically from live input. Tell them that they'll be processing a lot of analog data into digital, and we want to dissect the wave for components in an undesirable bandwidth.

You can expect a few moments of the mental gears grinding. But at some point, a qualified applicant will say something like, "you know, there's an app we could put in the software that would run the transform when it receives a given input request from the client.." that sort of thing

I agree too. I would rarely ask for specific "formulas" or procedures unless they are elementary and building blocks for the rest of the profession. For more advanced topics, I think they should at least be aware of a certain process/formula - basically know it exists - and then be able to find it and work it out. They don't necessarily need to know the exact details of the top of their heads (in many cases) but they must at least understand what it is, when it is used and why.

It'd be like asking someone the volume of a sphere. One person has no idea but knows there's a formula that they can find - and do. Then there's the person who doesn't know and doesn't even know there's a formula or process to figure it out. Those are two totally different levels of employees or students IMO.

When I got hired as a project mgr in oil & gas, I knew I shouldn't have taken the job! I had no previous experience in oil and gas and within 30 days of hire ai was senior company representative at very large mtg with household name companies.

I knew nothing of the equipment, companies (including the one I worked for) industry or project I was tasked with. It executed 3 months after ai got there and man it was a mess! Then 3/4 of the way through it I got pulled from it and turned it over to my coordinator.

Funny, I didn't get pulled from it because I sucked, they were actually pleased that ai held up under so much pressure. They pulled me to put me on another project that was horribly off track in Scotland. People were walking away from it, no one wanted to touch it, client was threatening lawsuit. Omg, it was a nightmare for 12-14 hrs a day for 4 months.

Pulled it off and forever sealed my fate as the guy to send horribly ill-conceived projects to.

Exec's and mgrs at companies are family to someone mostly. They use everyone with any brains, grit and never promote them because they need those people there because they can't do it.

I quit, took my money and started my own company doing my own thing.

Lesson: learn how to do something on someone else's dime, get paid for it. When you learned what you need, go do something on your own.

a reply to: DanDanDat

I completely agree. And, while my agreement may seem at odds with my earlier post(s) on this subject, it really isn't. It isn't because your assessment is looking at the same problem from a different angle. You are 100% correct that the younger generations of professionals have been failed. However, this is as much the fault of corporate greed as it is the fault of older generations. I often say (and have even posted as much previously)..."We've been asked to do so much, with so little, in such a short time, that now we are expected to do absolutely everything, with nothing at all, in no time flat!".

Corporations are not willing to spend the time (i.e. $$$$) to invest in true apprenticeship and having junior professionals shadow more experienced professionals for the time it takes to truly learn skills. They just throw them out there and hope the "trail by fire" approach works.

However, regarding skills requirements and education, I would hope we can both agree that a EE better damn well know something like Ohm's Law! (which was the issue in the one interview I referred to). I agree that interviews should not be a "test". In my example, I wasn't actually 'testing' the individual as much as asking them to explain to me how they might go about solving a fairly simple problem. He was the one who actually volunteered his lack of knowledge (by trying to impress me with his superior intellect at the expense of making some very foolish and fundamental mistakes). Could he have just been nervous? Absolutely, most are in aviation, but they don't slap the paper down on the table with a "NAILED IT!!" attitude and then give you a smug look like..."How ya' like me NOW??" ...sort of thing. He could have much more easily just offered a general approach and identified the steps he would use to solve the problem (which was what I asked him to do).

When we couple these two themes together we get a really toxic result for the industry as a whole. The education system has lowered the bar, and the corporate environment has raised the bar (through greed) for entry level people. This pushes the onus even further back onto the education system. And fundamentally, the failure here is not so much the 'engineering' element of the education system (it is, but there's more) as much as a failing for schools to prepare students for the world they will walk into when they're done.

One could argue the schools are failing to teach economics, more so than engineering. This isn't the students fault. Suddenly they walk into a world where profits are the first, last and ONLY consideration. This is something they've never been exposed to at all, no one ever told them this. They never told them to expect they will be thrown into a trial by fire environment on day one. And this is a fundamental disconnect between the education system and the corporate world. They (the education system) have 'assumed' there's this world out there where everyone can have all the time and resources they need to do their job, and unlimited time to do it, and no matter what everyone gets a trophy at the end of the day. That assumption was wrong. And the students walk out into that world and get blindsided with this reality.

I could go on all day with different subjects along this line. Things like "teaching for the test" (once again, another thing about economics) where pass/fail statistics for school funding are all that matter. And the list goes on.

In the end though, what I see on the horizon isn't pretty. Something has got to break, no, something WILL break sooner or later. I don't know what that 'thing' is, but it's going to be big. It has to be because whatever that thing is will have to reset the clock on society as a whole.

a reply to: Strate8

Lesson: learn how to do something on someone else's dime, get paid for it. When you learned what you need, go do something on your own.

Even though i put the quote in red, that right there is pure gold. And i wish folks understood this.

a reply to: Graysen

"if you are even barely competent, you will eventually end up running the world." I love that quote, it has so much truth. Competent people recognize their own limitations.

Reminds me of Gurdjieff's saying something like "If you can make a simple cup of tea right, you can do anything."

The closely related Dunning-Kruger effect highlights why incompetents over estimate their abilities and highly cometent people underestimate the incompetence of others and thenselves.

... As described by social psychologists David Dunning and Justin Kruger, the cognitive bias of illusory superiority results from an internal illusion in people of low ability and from an external misperception in people of high ability; that is, "the miscalibration of the incompetent stems from an error about the self, whereas the miscalibration of the highly competent stems from an error about others."

originally posted by: cenpuppie
a reply to: Strate8

Lesson: learn how to do something on someone else's dime, get paid for it. When you learned what you need, go do something on your own.

Even though i put the quote in red, that right there is pure gold. And i wish folks understood this.

Yes sir. It's the second time I've done it in my working career. 1st time I was a field technician and went independent after 6 years - taking 80% of the local customer base with me.

This time I was Proj mgt and spent 5 years around some of the best designers, engineers, SME's, manufacturing specialists, managers, sales reps in the country. Everything I needed to know to bring a product to market....

What I learned was far beyond what someone going to the best university could ever have learned and I was getting paid well to learn AND apply it real world real time, real consequences, gains and losses.

originally posted by: DigginFoTroof

People just lie at work too much or don't know what to do.

Can't say i have lots of work experience but in the past 6 months i've been working part time on IT as i finish my last year at college and one of the first things i learned is this exact thing LMAO

It happened like this, i'm helping a small team with a small project, i was supposed to write some code to help connect to a remote web service, i kept getting emails about things not working and getting tickets open for bugs i was almost sure i did not had

At some point i got so fed up, i checked in very badly broken logic and waited to see who would complain. Then no one said anything about the bad logic that was *imposible* to use, somehow things still worked LOL. Turns out the moron doing the deployment wasn't using latest, he was manually building instead of using an automated script, and he did not updated his code for days and days and would keep testing the same old code over and over adding tickets for things that had been fixed already like 2 weeks ago..

When i asked if he had the latest he said 'Yes' and that's how i called him up on his BS because the latest would not even build, i broke it on purpose