Wednesday, August 30, 2017
3 Times It’s Worth Burning A Bridge In Your Career
www.fastcompany.com: There is certain career advice that just about everyone seems to take as gospel. Always pay your dues, don’t be too picky about your first job, and keep your options open when you start out. The merits of these types of advice have been questioned, debated, and in some cases–even debunked. But there’s one piece of advice that seems to stick: “Whatever you do, avoid burning bridges!”
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I completely agree with this article but I think the title "3 Times It’s Worth Burning A Bridge In Your Career" is a misnomer. The article brings up valid points that someone should leave a job if they are being harassed, in a failing company or in a field with no upward growth for the employees. There can be bridges burned when leaving these jobs but not necessarily. I think when the author writes "burn bridges" it is more of a shocking statement to drag the reader in than what should be done. There are less drastic ways to leave a job that is going under or has no upward growth. I think there is a major exaggeration when the author uses the word "burn bridges.
This was a very interesting article to read, as I've heard many times the warnings against "burning bridges" in the workplace and have been told to never fully cut ties in the future when going through my first experiences with jobs. This article is reminiscent of a previous one I read on this blog about how it's not only okay but necessary to change your career path multiple times-- both seem to have a strong voice of urging their readers to pursue their own interests rather than attempt to cater to jobs that will grant them status and possibly success but ultimately dissatisfaction with their current path. I also liked that the author listed the possible scenarios in which "burning bridges" would be considered okay, and when it becomes imperative to do so.
I think I may have a different definition of “burning bridges” than this article. It sounds to me like the writer feels any short notice departure is somehow burning a bridge. And that, at least in my experience, is a pretty ridiculous measurement. “Burning a bridge” means you have *destroyed* a relationship, either with a person or a company. And I mean, totally wrecked not just miffed or inconvenienced. If you can repair the relationship, it probably isn’t a burned bridge.
I think you’re far more likely to burn bridges if you leave badly (disappearing, not transitioning well, having poor behavior, bad reason) than simply leaving. In which case, leaving because of harassment, health, to save your financial future, or get a much better job really shouldn’t burn a bridge. Maybe I’ve been incredibly lucky, but in most cases, people, at least in our industry, understand those things if you handle the situation with grace and honesty. Most cases of burned bridges I’ve seen have revolved around betrayal, dishonesty, backing out on a project last second without a replacement, ethical violations, and people being terrible to work with or doing terrible work.
I think it goes without saying that *genuinely* burned bridges can be even more of a black spot in theatre and entertainment because the world is so small, so they really should be avoided.
I really appreciate the tone in which this article has been approached with. Often when I think of burning bridges the connotations are often negative. I think that this author is trying to propose that burning bridges may not mean what we have all thought it I really appreciate the tone in which this article has been approached with. Often when I think of burning bridges the connotations are often negative. I think that this author is trying to propose that burning bridges may not mean what we have all thought it to mean. Sometimes we do have to make decisions that may disappoint others but are for our own good. It’s ok to walk away sometimes and that can be done gracefully and kindly in such a manner that as she puts at the end those bridges can be reconnected if need be. I personally don’t think that should be classified as burning a bridge, in this analogy it could perhaps be viewed as shutting the gate to the bridge. That way the door can be re-opened one day if need be, but closed for daily traffic in the purpose of self preservation or advancement. If you as a person are honest and genuine then you’ll never have to really burn a bridge while still moving forward in the ways that you decide are appropriate.
Post a Comment