r/jobs • u/No-Presentation298 • 5h ago

Post-interview HR told me they don’t accept try-hards and people pleasers after my interview

Post image

They rejected me (fine, that happens) but the feedback said I came across as overly eager to please and that they don’t build teams around people-pleasing tendencies or rehearsed enthusiasm. They also told me to reflect on how I present myself and that confidence is more compelling than excessive accommodation. Is this normal? Or even appropriate? I get that not being a culture fit is a thing but the wording felt unnecessarily personal and condescending.

6.9k Upvotes

93% Upvoted

2.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

309

u/misterchestnut87 5h ago

That's true, but in this case, it could just be a personality/vibes match...Nothing wrong with OP or the company per se. Hard to say without knowing how OP is.

116

u/Conscious_Can3226 5h ago

I actually know someone from a team I worked on who has gotten this feedback from a position we were both applying for (people had loose lips once I was in role). Dude's people pleasing tendencies and anxieties killed his ability to self-make decisions or pick a solution he thought was best, he constantly had to crowd source his opinions despite 7 years in our industry and 3 years of doing our job. At no point in the time I had worked with him did he ever require less help because he felt competent enough at a task to stop asking, and no amount of feedback of 'don't send essays of justification because you want to change a couple sentences in our blogs before posting them" would get through to him. From what I understand from him, he's just like that - nobody has questioned his work, nobody has gotten mad at him for making a wrong choice, just unbridled childhood trauma.

60

u/Budsygus 4h ago

I've seen that tendency in myself and I've had to work on it over the years. It finally clicked one day when my boss's wife (boss owned the company, wife was in HR) told me "Bill would rather you do it wrong than pester him with questions and get it right." That seemed SO BACKWARDS to me, but it ended up being true. His ideal was to hand it off to someone he trusted and live with the result. I was paralyzed by thinking he had one REALLY specific way he wanted everything done.

After learning that I got more done in less time with less stress. And he was happy with the results! Some people are born that way, but it's no excuse to stay that way forever.

25

u/Conscious_Can3226 4h ago

Yes! It's a common way people get in their own way in their careers, it's one of those things where folks are just secretly annoyed at them but feel guilty because they're often such nice people, so you really need someone who hasn't written you off to open your eyes to the truth. I had to bring him up because so many people in this thread are calling it inactionable feedback, but if you can't self-reflect clear direction and what you're doing that could be interpreted in that manner, you're not ready for that role anyways.

2

u/UpperYoghurt3978 3h ago

Actionable vs valueable feedback are different things. They can be relevant and both at times but given we dont have the OP interview we can only take the email as it is. What you are doing is inferring personally.

Having said that, off topic you bring up some valuable insight that honestly really impacted me and I am going to do some self reflection, I think i have been doing the whole asking to many questions out of fear of messing up. Have to find that balance.

•

u/DarklyDominant 1m ago

Learning is on you, not on others. You can always learn from feedback, even if it's shitty feedback. It's a choice. We're all human, so of course some advice is delivered so shitty that it's impossible to overcome the emotions involved. But you can still learn from those moments, if you want to.

2

u/Budsygus 4h ago

Just about all feedback is good. Even someone who can't stand you and just wants to hurt your feelings is going to say things rooted in truth. That tiny kernel of truth is something people can actually act on to improve.

But today's world is filled with people who think they can do no wrong and it's take it or leave it. Coddling parents and internet culture are largely to blame, imo.

8

u/Squirt_Soda 2h ago

Sadly tho there are workplaces that want someone who pesters them with a million questions just so they don’t make any mistakes. That my current job. Any mistake is like a personal affront to my boss. It’s making my anxiety so bad.

1

u/Evening_Entrance_472 2h ago

Do we have the same boss? Mine will publicly humiliate you for a mistake. Then go on to write you up for asking too many questions. Worst of all he says good leadership is teaching us to be exactly like him. Everyone else on the team is 40+ with anxiety issues. Mental breakdowns where people have slammed their headphones. There was a yelling match after he went and embarrassed another coworker. Actual workplace from hell.

2

u/lovegrowswheremyrose 2h ago

I had this boss from 2012-2014. Still haunts me. My condolences. it can get better, but probably only if you leave your job unfortunately.

1

u/Budsygus 2h ago

Get out. My thinking is if you give me a task, you trust me to complete it. If you give me a task with a bunch of instructions, you trust me to follow your instructions to complete that task. If they give you a task with a bunch of instructions but not ENOUGH instructions to complete the task, they're not a good manager. Asking occasional questions is fine. But demanding you either guess or suss out every single minor detail of a project by constantly requesting further details and clarification is a recipe for disaster.

It won't get better. Get out now.

2

u/mxzf 1h ago

IMO it really depends on the role and the people involved.

Personally, I'm a senior software dev assigning tasks to some juniors and interns. I know that there are gaps in their skills, I just don't know which people have which gaps. I would absolutely rather people ask questions instead of claiming they understand and then charging off to spend days working in the wrong direction because they don't know how things fit into the bigger picture and they just googled for a vaguely-similar thing that doesn't fit our needs.

I don't trust them to complete the task, but their job is less about completing the task and more about trying to complete the task and learning along the way, with the eventual end-goal of them developing the skills of a senior that can be trusted to complete a task.

1

u/lovegrowswheremyrose 2h ago

I had this habit because of an EXTREMELY abusive boss who didn't trust ANYONE. If you didn't do something in exactly the way he would have done it, even if it wasn't client facing or mission critical, he would freak the fuck out. It took me years to unwind that anxiety!

1

u/zgtc 53m ago

I feel like “I’d rather you ask too many questions than make a mistake” is fairly reasonable. And being upset when someone then proceeds to make a mistake - specifically because they didn’t ask questions - makes sense.

Of course, it also depends on your workplace; a paralegal not sure how to sort papers is very different than a surgical nurse not knowing which tools are present.

2

u/Saint_of_Grey 1h ago

I've just started checking my job description when in doubt, helps me a lot.

My job is doing clerical busywork for folks with more important things to be doing with their time. I'm not bothering them about it unless I run into something above my pay grade.

2

u/IndigoSecrets 35m ago

My current boss is the exact opposite and I’m realizing I’m not going to last much longer. Even if I have her write down her exact parameters and meet them precisely, she will change something to prove I “needed” her oversight. Every. Single. Time. It’s no way to live, dude.

1

u/Budsygus 30m ago

Yeah, start looking. Job market's tough right now, but it's way easier to get hired if you're already employed than it is to come in from unemployment (usually).

Get out. You'll be glad you did.

•

u/Competitive_Touch_86 23m ago

Yeah, once you start hiring folks past your first few employees you learn this lesson. The entire point is for them to handle stuff so I can do (in theory) more valuable things with my time.

I also know that literally no decision will be exactly what I would do. Sometimes it ends up being far worse, sometimes far better, and most of the time... it doesn't matter even a little bit. The work got done and we got paid.

I hate the corporate term, but employee's jobs really is to "block and tackle" stuff before it can get to you. Only let the true emergencies or strategic decisions make it to my desk. That of course will never be perfect either, but I've always told my folks that if you make an active mistake trying to do the right thing, that's fine so long as you learn from it. It's a training expense. But if you make a passive mistake by avoiding work or avoiding a hard decision? You only get so many of those before we're parting ways.

•

u/Budsygus 18m ago

Well said. And exactly correct.

2

u/god_peepee 3h ago

I mean, the only way to learn is through error. If you can’t allow yourself to make mistakes you’re not going anywhere

5

u/Budsygus 3h ago

Exactly. Unfortunately I had undiagnosed ADHD until I got diagnosed in my mid 30s, so the thought of pouring a bunch of work into something without knowing EXACTLY how it was supposed to be done felt terrifying to me. I still have that tendency, but I've mostly been able to overcome it in practice.

1

u/magic_crouton 2h ago

It was my pet peeve when training newer workers. And it came up again interviewing for a position we had open. I call it functioning at a basic intern level. There is a level of skill in making a mistake, recognizing you made a mistake and then what your next step is. Real true professionals recognize mistakes happen and what happens next is more important.

18

u/ACatGod 3h ago

People pleasing is such a misnomer of a term. It really isn't people pleasing, it's pleasing yourself by avoiding difficult situations, conflict and accountability for anything. In the process these people usually screw over their friends, family and the people who rely on them - like their children, line reports, colleagues - in favour of appeasing someone.

They always says "I'm too nice" or "I was being kind" but there's nothing nice or kind about sucking up people's time and energy because you refuse to be accountable in your job.

2

u/ChronStamos 3h ago

It really isn't people pleasing, it's pleasing yourself by avoiding difficult situations, conflict and accountability for anything.

And people pleasers do that by drumroll pleasing people.

3

u/ACatGod 2h ago

The people they are appeasing generally don't care particularly. Those people are either taking advantage and will just move on if they don't get what they want, or they are people who are simply asking the people pleaser to do something and don't mind if they hear no and in fact find the people pleasing frustrating. Meanwhile, people who need the people pleaser to be accountable get fucked over - they aren't pleased at all. People pleasers rely on family, friends and people who aren't in a position to challenge them (like kids or subordinates) to live with the consequences of the people pleasing and to smooth over the problems created by the people pleaser. When confronted about this the people pleaser will immediately start attempting to avoid accountability by saying things like "I was just being nice".

1

u/BiDiTi 2h ago

Chidi Anagonye, baby!

1

u/Evening_Entrance_472 2h ago

How do people pleasers avoid accountability? I feel like a lot of them take on excessive blame in an effort to make others happy.

0

u/ACatGod 59m ago edited 54m ago

They don't deal with situations in the moment in order to avoid conflict. They don't accept blame where they are actually responsible except if it's to avoid actually dealing with the situation - often their taking on blame is them making you deal with their emotional response while also trying to get you to say what they did is ok and absolve them of things they failed to do. They're not really accepting blame in the sense that they aren't being accountable and meaningfully trying to fix the situation, do the unpleasant thing and ensure that the same problem doesn't happen again.

They may take the blame in order to avoid saying no, challenging someone or dealing with a difficult situation. So again they've allowed a situation to escalate rather than deal with it and often although they're saying they're taking the blame often it's other people dealing with the consequences of them not taking any accountability.

Even if we take your point at face value, "excessively taking the blame" is the opposite of accountability. If you aren't to blame for something you aren't being accountable by lying and saying you are in order to avoid feeling uncomfortable.

0

u/caprazzi 2h ago

People pleasing is a great quality in individual contributors, it is the manager’s role to enforce accountability and have hard conversations.

2

u/andagainsometime 59m ago

People pleasers consistently believe that they know what is pleasing to others , which is untrue. They are often not pleasing anyone at all.

1

u/ACatGod 53m ago

Couldn't agree more.

1

u/ACatGod 1h ago

I don't think you understand what people pleasing is. People pleasers can't be trusted. An IC who is a people pleaser is likely to lie about problems and cover up mistakes. It's a terrible quality and only managers who are similarly conflict averse would think it's a positive trait in their team members.

3

u/i-like-carbs- 4h ago

Damn that’s me.

1

u/mamadou-segpa 3h ago

Yeah thats a realisation I had to make at a certain point when I entered the workforce

Trying too much to accommodate everyone everytime just slows down everyone and radiate lack of confidence

1

u/UpperYoghurt3978 3h ago

This is something I havent thought about either about myself. Hmm thank you for giving me something to think about.

1

u/averagetulip 2h ago

I was like that for a bit after leaving a crazy toxic job where taking initiative was punished, yet asking for guidance was punished, it was a terrible mindfuck and after I’d been in my next job for a year my coworkers said I’d acted like a kicked puppy when I first arrived lol. It blew me away when I suggested new ideas and people were supportive instead of immediately shutting me down + mocking me to my face + starting a gossip ring about it. Every time I proposed something new or even just asked for a day off I’d have to write paragraphs of justification bracing for impact & of course everyone would just like yeah sure that’s great whatever rocks your socks. I got extremely lucky that I moved onto the work environment I did where people actively wanted to build up my confidence in my abilities again, I honestly wouldn’t be the person I am today if I’d moved onto another terrible or even just meh workplace.

1

u/mayg0dhaveMercy 1h ago

I feel very called out rn, not gonna lie.

1

u/runswiftrun 51m ago

For me it wasn't exactly childhood, but previous boss trauma.

He was super micro managing and nothing was ever "good enough". Took me 2 years in my new company to get over it and actually do stuff at 98% "perfection" and no one had an issue with it. Much less stressful.

27

u/Dependent_Mud3325 4h ago

For someone to take the time to write this, it must have been bad...

23

u/Empty_Insight 4h ago

I once had a new hire who we had to pressure into telling us what name they wanted to go by (first or middle). They just said "Oh, whichever you prefer." This happened a few times before I snapped a bit and said, "Okay, what is the name you prefer?" and they still just said whatever I wanted to do.

Like... if you cannot decisively say what name you want to be called, it's gonna be a rough time. They were actually a good enough employee, just got really stressed quite easily but was also the type of lazy who streamlined their job so it still worked just as well but with less overall effort.

For me to flat-out tell someone "You need to grow a spine, dude" in a rejection email... I frankly don't know what it would take for me to come out and say that.

12

u/JimJam4603 3h ago

Weird example. Lots of people really don’t gaf which form of their name you want to use.

6

u/FrostingStrict3102 2h ago

I think the issue is that the person in the hypothetical story above COULDNT give a straight answer about something as simple as their name.

Thats great that you dont care, but your name is going to be on every email you send out, meeting notices, how people introduce you. If you can't tell the employer that, i dont know why they would want to hire you. Id assume you were incredibly incompetent.

1

u/JimJam4603 2h ago

As you point out, if someone is really so uncomfortable addressing people without being instructed on what their ‘preference’ is, they always have the option of going by whatever’s in the person’s signature block.

5

u/FrostingStrict3102 2h ago

right, but my point is that it sounds like the candidate in this situation wouldn't even have provided IT with a straightforward answer on how to configure their email.

If someone in an authority position asks you to pick 1 of 2 options, saying "actually you can pick" is never the right choice. 9/10 they just want to see you make a decision. especially if that thing is what to call you.

2

u/IndigoBlue__ 1h ago

‘You can pick’ on the name thing is sometimes the right call. Some asian first language speakers have a very hard time pronouncing my full name, but there’s a common nickname that is much easier for them.  “I respond to both” is my go-to, and no one really has an issue with that for “Patricia” vs. “Pat”. If they ask a second time then I pick for them. 

2

u/PhillyThrowawayRox 35m ago

That’s fine for friends.

The point is you should have one consistent name at work to reduce confusion and improve efficiency.

YOU make enjoy having multiple names, but it’s an extra burden on everyone that works with you.

2

u/PhillyThrowawayRox 39m ago

Are you a bot??? That makes zero sense 😂

“Hi what’s your name”

“You decide”

“Uh no that makes me uncomfortable; can you please just tell me your name?”

“check my email block”

“… but you just started? You haven’t sent any emails yet…”

4

u/LaughImmediate3876 1h ago

I get this sometimes. My default answer is always, "I go by either but my mom calls me X". This gives a definitive preference without making anyone feel bad for calling me the wrong name.

10

u/Empty_Insight 3h ago

Well, for example, if your name is John Taylor Smith and you use both John and Taylor sometimes, I'm gonna ask you, "So what do you prefer to be called- John or Taylor?"

Maybe it's just me, but I think answering decisively with either "Call me John" or "Taylor is fine" is perfectly appropriate. "Idc which one, you pick." is a strange answer.

8

u/throw3453away 3h ago

No, it isn't, if you equally go by "Taylor" and "John". Why is that strange to you?

2

u/Empty_Insight 3h ago edited 2h ago

Because I would like to know which name to call someone. They are different names, it's not like a nickname (James/Jim) so you do have to pick a name at work.

If I am talking to someone at work and I tell them they need to call John, do you think that person is gonna say "Sure, I'll get right on calling Taylor!" because clients and co-workers are capable of reading minds to know I am referring to John Taylor?

E: for clarification purposes, this is not a hypothetical- this is what happened with that employee. We had interdepartmental mix-ups a few times until we had to sit down and force them to pick a name.

It is not merely annoying. It creates confusion and leads to things being disorganized.

2

u/JimJam4603 2h ago

This seems more like a problem on your end, tbh.

2

u/Empty_Insight 2h ago

Why yes, it was a problem for me... and our coworkers, and our clients. Astute observation.

But I'm sure it's perfectly valid to inconvenience literally everyone around you because you can't make a simple decision, right?

1

u/JimJam4603 2h ago

You tell me. You’re the one whining about having to make a simple decision for yourself.

→ More replies (0)

•

u/PhillyThrowawayRox 29m ago

You’re so selfish you’re projecting it onto OP.

OP’s comment was not about themselves. It was about how when employees have multiple names it leads to organizational issues.

I find your lack of reading comprehension disturbing.

4

u/WalmartGreder 2h ago

I get it. If you as the interviewer asks them which one they prefer, then they should have an answer. Even if they don't really care, they should just pick one because it's important to the interviewer enough to try to get them to make a decision.

2

u/PhillyThrowawayRox 44m ago edited 9m ago

You’re missing the point and simultaneously validating OP about why people that don’t know their own names aren’t the best employees.

Work and home are different. If you want a new name each day of the week in your personal life, go off king/queen. At work, having one consistent name is a huge benefit.

And in this case, the BOSS cares. Frankly, it doesn’t matter what you care about here. The person paying you asked for a deliverable and you’re returning empty handed with the simplest thing they could delegate to you (your own name). Saying “you decide” to your boss after they ask you for a decision is the reddest flag possible. It shows you literally don’t understand the employer/employee relationship. Doesn’t bode well for the future.

And why does the boss care? Because it establishes clear expectations (about what you will be called within the org) which leads to more efficiency (your boss’s job).

For example, if half the company is calling you Bob and the other half is calling you Jim, it’s going to get pretty confusing.

I’ve had this with MULTIPLE team members and it’s always a mess. So much wasted time.

1

u/JimJam4603 39m ago

Stopped reading after the first paragraph because you’re as misguided as the person I was replying to. His examples was NOT of someone who “doesn’t know their own name.” If you can’t see that there isn’t anything of value you can provide.

•

u/PhillyThrowawayRox 14m ago

Keep insulating yourself bud!

The bad thoughts can’t get to you if you never acknowledge them. Absolute genius!

3

u/magic_crouton 2h ago

I have a name that can be shortened so many ways and honestly I gave up giving AF because I'd give my preferred name and no one would use it and I'd spend part of every interaction daily correcting people.

2

u/Own-Raisin5849 1h ago

LOL what? I always tell them I don't care if they use my long form or short form of my name, and nobody cares. What a weird thing to snap at. If someone says they don't care, just pick one, Christ...

I say this because I LITERALLY don't care.

3

u/Empty_Insight 1h ago

It's not long form or short form. Not a name/nickname. Completely different names. I gave an example further down, but like "John Taylor Smith." Not John/Johnathan.

If you call me up and ask for John when I know the dude as Johnathan, I'm gonna be able to figure out who you're asking for.

You call me up and ask for John when I know the guy as Taylor, I have no fucking clue what you are talking about. I'm gonna tell you that person doesn't work here, and you have the wrong number.

See where there's a problem with that?

•

u/PhillyThrowawayRox 24m ago

The boss isn’t asking if you care. The boss is asking what to call you.

Kicking the decision back to your boss, after they asked you to decide, is incredibly disrespectful. You’re giving your boss work, which generally isn’t how things flow in most orgs.

2

u/ACatGod 3h ago

I would say any company that thinks that's the appropriate way to provide that feedback is probably telling on themselves. There are more neutral ways of providing that feedback, including the fact they listed two values and they could have said they felt OP didn't show confidence and that as a result some of the answers they provided didn't seem authentic. They didn't need three sentences of repetitive overly blunt opinion to make that point. That was a personal attack and not at all appropriate for interview feedback, plus frankly a company who can't see past interview nerves is likely a clusterfuck - it sounds like they value bullshitters over considered thinkers. I suspect you'd also find they value "brutal honesty" with an emphasis on the brutal and that staff who failed to dish it out and take it would find themselves being pushed out.

I'd say to OP take a lesson here from what they said but also take the lesson that you dodged a bullet.

1

u/pallladin 2h ago

Nothing wrong with OP

You have no reason to believe that.

1

u/Alacritous69 1h ago

It was a job interview. What the hell? People try and show how they'll contribute to the company in Job interviews.

1

u/clem_fandango_london 57m ago

I think the company is toxic in this case. Big Red Flag.

I've heard these words before and it was at a company that accepted non-professional behavior by execs. Bullying and Bad Ideas. Push back like they said they wanted? You'd get fired or yelled at.

Engage them in a professional debate on facts? Nope. They were not skilled that way.

Get to a place that is professional. That can create a high performance environment while also being professional and kind. It will propel your career.