Slashdot Mirror
Infamous Emails Don't Always Kill Careers
Carl Bialik from the WSJ writes "Those oft-forwarded email gaffes don't always lead to career meltdowns for the ashamed senders, Jared Sandberg writes in the Wall Street Journal. In some corners of the business world, preserving a reputation can be less important than acquiring one in the first place. For instance, the 2003 legal summer associate who accidentally emailed 40 colleagues to announce he was 'busy doing jack' ended up getting a job at the firm. More recently, the young woman who told off a lawyer offering her a job -- and saw her email forwarded worldwide -- is quite confident that the notoriety can't hurt, and might even help, her career."
there's no such thing as bad publicity.
(1st?)
fak3r.com
You can't extrapolate from one intern who was hired despite having sent out a stupid email. TFA implies he spent the rest of the summer kissing ass and working his butt off.
As for Abadala, she's a trust-fund baby. I suspect she'll learn the hard way that professional networking is extremely important in a services career.
Many people have been passed over for hire for something stupid they posted to Usenet or an Internet forum. Googling a person before hire to learn as much about them as possible is standard practice these days.
"I'd rather be a lightning rod than a seismometer." -Ken Kesey
Maybe this is because in the legal profession you need to be forceful and unyielding in order to help you argue your cases. Who has ever heard of a famous lawyer who felt others pain, considered their positions and was meak and soft-spoken in court?
As a geek, though, I have found that many human resources types leave you alone when you come off strong and watch your language. Projecting dominance works well with them. If you do it right, you leave them no grounds to say "he was intimidating me" because the authority looks at your conduct and says, "uh, right. Next case."
It's about a simple rule. The average person doesn't really respect those they think are weak and/or vulnerable. This applies to both genders. Women don't like men who just give them what they want, and men don't respect women who just blindly take whatever a man does. People who are unwilling to just sit there and take it get much more respect in almost any organization. Usually the types that complain shut up in the face of a counter-challenge.
From the article:
As for Ms. Abdala, she says a mea culpa "will never happen." She's living on funds provided by her father and has rented office space for her own practice. "I've never been the type to work under someone," she says.
She sounds like one of those people who nobody picks to work with, so she ends up doing all of her work alone and has convinced herself that she enjoys it. I hope the marketplace (ie, her prospective customers) make her suffer (or she'll surely make them suffer, not having learned how to behave in a civil society).
What is the issue?
That someone put snotty comments in an email?
Or that some other person choose to use them as means other than intended by forewarding them on to a bunch of other people?
It looks like the article (yes, I RTFA) is bashing the wench for being snotty, not the recipient for using the email to further their own ends.
Ms. Abdala sounds like a spoiled nutjob who thinks that her thoughtless gall in her personal life should automatically transfer to her professional career. The fact that cattiness is framed positively and rewarded in today's business world is disheartening. There is a difference between being bold and confident and being petty. Moreover, just because you have gall does not mean you are always correct. As a man whose initials are JK once said in a widely watched debate, "You can be confident and you can be wrong." The type of gall that Ms. Abdala displays here may be good in the court-room but it can also be dangerous when administrating a business. A lack of concern for other people's feelings or thoughts is just as bad - probably more - than an over-concern for them. A good worker has the confidence to stand up for their own opinions bravely when they know they are right, and to take genuine opportunities. She also knows when to shut up and cooperate, for crissake. I really hope that Ms. Abdala's outrageous bluntness is not rewarded with a fast-track career.
... she said this: I'm more worried about whether I've left my hair iron on than this little email exchange
Translation: I can't get a job now.
In tabulario donationem feci.
I watched Jerry McGuire.
Reminds me of this old joke:
A shadkhen (matchmaker) goes to see a poor man and says, "I want to arrange a marriage for your son."
The poor man replies, "I never interfere in my son's life."
The shadkhen responds, "But the girl is Lord Rothschild's daughter."
"Well, in that case..."
Next, the shadkhen approaches Lord Rothschild. "I have a husband for your daughter."
"But my daughter is too young to marry."
"But this young man is already a vice president of the World Bank."
"Ah, in that case..."
Finally, the shadkhen goes to see the president of the World Bank.
"I have a young man to recommend to you as a vice president."
"But I already have more vice presidents than I need."
"But this young man is Lord Rothschild's son-in-law."
"Ah, in that case...."
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.
From TFA:
As for Ms. Abdala, she says a mea culpa "will never happen." She's living on funds provided by her father and has rented office space for her own practice. "I've never been the type to work under someone," she says.
I won't work under someone, earning my own way, but I'll shamelessly nurse from the teat. That doesn't work for people whose parents don't have the funds to be venture capitalists for their children.
Web 2.0 == Giant Blogspam Circle Jerk
As a person who worked at a bank for 5 years, from teller, to head teller, to personal banker, to investment specialist I can tell you that - potentially an investment specialist would need to hit certain sites to find out things like stock prices. Other then that, it is not necessary for the company. The bank can easily restrict access to specific users (i.e. Only allow people who have the investment specialist job description). Instead of putting it in front of everyones faces. People can also utilize the internet and be fairly respectful "yes i will only go to check my email, or weather report, etc." If you don't want your employees doing something, then do not temp them with it.
I mod down so you can mod up. Your welcome.
And, in this case, the ??? step would be "sue for unauthorized distribution). Quote the business plan; quite job, send snippy email, then sue if the boss passes it on.
This post is for the sole use of the intended /. recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure, distribution, or reply/rebuttal is prohibited.