OK, so say (hypothetically of course) that you had a job you'd been doing for, oh, 3 years. Your job was great in some ways-high profile, great for the career, you got several awards, and you made a name for yourself after falling from a great height.
Then say you got burnt out.
Too many long hours.
The stress and pressure were endless.
Your bosses, too much to deal with.
Your enthusiasm....gone.
So, say you got a job offer.
Then-surprisingly-another one.
Then-believe it or not-a third.
Promotion within the same company-(a nice big promotion).
High profile.
Very high stress.
Long hours.
New team to work with (most of whom you like a lot).
New bosses to work for (most of whom you like, some of whom you really don't).
A product you're in charge of that you know somewhat.
A lot of politics.
Unclear boundaries.
Lots of management interference.
Much greater responsibility for no pay raise (the company has a freeze on pay raises just now).
Line management responsibility.
Some travel, mostly to Paris.
Good career move.
More weekly travel into London-an impact on not being able to work from home as much, should I manage to ever get knocked up and not lose it this time.
Running a project exactly like the project today, only far less rodent-y.
Working with a team you mostly know already (although they are not the team you lead today).
Working for a new boss, but bosses' boss is still the same (unfortunately).
Running a product you don't know at all.
No pay raise, but at the same time, no interviewing process-the job is yours if you want it, the manager is keen to have you.
Little to no stress.
No politics.
Clear boundaries.
I get to run the project on my own.
A lateral move, in the "career move" scheme of things.
The same amount of travel into London you have today and high flexibility of working from home should I manage to ever get knocked up and not lose it this time.
Some travel involved-mostly Europe, a few America/Japan trips in scope.
Moving to a whole new company, to take on the work they have that you already know very well. Exciting company, mostly stable, but with some history of letting people go.
So it's Option A and Option B. I want to reject A simply because taking on that responsibility and not getting compensation for it is crazy-I'm already underpaid. This will make it much worse, the gap is not something that can be closed for many years. Option A is exciting, it's sexy, it's a great career move, but the stress is quite high. Option B is ok, it's a lateral career move, but the stress is much lower although I run the risk of never "succeeding" quite like the project I'm on now managed to do. That in itself is maybe not such a bad thing-I learnt that work isn't everything when I lost my job three years ago, that all the hard work you do is not always repaid in protection.
Maybe this is what happens-you get a choice between career and sanity. I've spent my life being this bizarre driven-chick, wanting to bust through glass ceilings and take on the world but now? Not so important anymore. At the same time, I'm still young enough to do something with the CV, if I want, and while I've never wanted to be a CEO, Option A may me work on something I do care about-products oriented to the female market.
-H.
1
If it were me, and future maternity were as important to me as it seems to be to you, Option B would be the clear winner. A lateral move, yes; on the other hand, would Option A risk making you over-qualified if you were to look for a job outside this company?
That may sound like a silly question, but I ask because there are some positions like that; my mother had a very hard time transitioning out of public accounting partner into a lower-stress job because the assumption was that someone who'd made partner at her previous firm would want the moon, the stars, the whole galaxy, and so even companies that would have been thrilled to have someone so experienced were too afraid to hire her, thinking she'd grow bored and discontent and not stay. (What they didn't understand were the vast depths of her burn-out and how relieved she'd have been to take a "lesser" position elsewhere, anywhere.)
I have no way to know if Option A is a comparable sort of position for you, but if it is, I'd lean towards Option B all the harder.
Posted by: ilyka at September 20, 2006 06:48 AM (mQ53p)
2
B cos it's less stress for the money. If you have to travel into London more for A then it's a non starter. It's no loss of face to step off the hamster wheel for a while, especially if you have other priorities outside work (commonly called "a Life", not all employers get the idea)
Posted by: Caroline M at September 20, 2006 07:39 AM (x3QDi)
3
Little to no stress. [\quote]
In my mind it's B all the way, if what you really want is a baby, reducing stress benefits both conception and pregnancy...
Posted by: deeleea at September 20, 2006 08:24 AM (/SmFP)
4
Less stress!! Especially if there is no chance of getting the monetary compensation that goes with increased responsibility.
Posted by: KG at September 20, 2006 09:32 AM (rw/2F)
Posted by: Mia at September 20, 2006 10:32 AM (Sr4ps)
Posted by: Gill at September 20, 2006 11:15 AM (TsRom)
7
No question, I'd choose B. Work does not equal life and you have a life waiting for you. Enjoy it! One thing I've noticed in my own life is that while work will still be there when you're done with 'life' things, life tends to not hang around waiting...
Posted by: Wicked at September 20, 2006 11:27 AM (WOOQd)
8
well A brings you to Paris for lovely dinners and me maybe showing you where to get teh best cookies in town. But otherwise it sounds like shit (unless once the freeze is off you will get the $$ and the freeze isnt expected to last 5 years...)
option B sounds better...
but I live in hell because of a similar but topically different decision, that went so many kinds of wrong I dont know of words to express that. so what do I know?
Bises!
Posted by: stinkerbell at September 20, 2006 11:49 AM (ZznPv)
9
B. Less stress is good, even if some of the glory goes with it. But I think you are going to discover things in the future that are much more glorious.
Posted by: Teresa at September 20, 2006 12:19 PM (PZNTf)
10
I'd go with B. Especially if you will not be appropriately compenated for additional stress, such as would be the cause with A. And I think you have been learning (with the help of couch man) that you are not defined any longer by your job, etc. I think it would be better for you health-wise.
Posted by: Teri at September 20, 2006 12:28 PM (K7jOL)
11
I'm a longtime lurker, but, have been reading you for quite a bit now.
I'd choose B.
Good luck with whatever option you choose!
Posted by: Katy at September 20, 2006 12:39 PM (n4Z5z)
12
A little over a year ago I chose an option B, and it has been the best thing for me in the long run. On top of that, when the wage freeze was over, I got a promotion and TWO raises out of it....
Posted by: jennifer at September 20, 2006 01:02 PM (F8TUc)
13
I also would choose B. The constant stress of Option A just doesn't seem worth it. You aren't going to be compensated for it. And perhaps now is the time to take more time for yourself, rather than subjecting yourself to more attacks and criticism and stress.
Best of luck in choosing. And congratulations on being so sought after, you hot mama!
Posted by: donna at September 20, 2006 01:03 PM (wGEbS)
14
Me? I'd choose B, unless A was something I REALLY believed in and was passionate about. I figure I have enough stress at home that I don't need more at work, and underpaid + overworked = a not happy me.
For you though, obviously it may be different
Posted by: geeky at September 20, 2006 01:11 PM (ziVl9)
15
B ... for all the reasons everyone else has handed out. Let us know!
Posted by: sue at September 20, 2006 01:39 PM (WbfZD)
16
If I were you and going through the extreme stress of IVF, I would most definitely choose option B. If I were single or even married with no kids in the future, I'd go for A. I think you've dealt with enough stress this year already to take an even more stressful position with no pay raise, but hey, that's just my opinion and we all know what they say about opinions, right?
Posted by: girl at September 20, 2006 02:26 PM (ZIi+3)
17
Dude, you forgot options D: Work at Wienerschnitzel. You can get all the salty dogs you want for free!
I think option B sounds good. Life is too short to be super stressed all the time.
Posted by: Sir Henry at September 20, 2006 02:29 PM (6TpYK)
18
B. For sure, B. As sexy and career-tastic as A may be, the stress and non-compensation would freaking kill me. Gorby wants you home as much as possible.
Posted by: lynD at September 20, 2006 02:40 PM (EUyu0)
Posted by: Lisa at September 20, 2006 03:01 PM (92RzM)
20
B. Remember the physical effects your current job produced? You have a home & lifestyle you love, and want to do IVF. If you want a life, you need to reduce your stress. Choose life over career intensity.
Posted by: loribo at September 20, 2006 03:09 PM (RYVp+)
21
It seems the general consensus from everyone that has commented is "B" and that is what I would urge you to elect as well. Sometimes Less is more.
Posted by: kimmykins13 at September 20, 2006 03:16 PM (QW8XY)
22
B = balance. Very important no matter what the journey reveals.
Posted by: Steff at September 20, 2006 03:33 PM (fIFtd)
23
B - work is not your life only a part of it etc etc and B sounds like the safer 'still have a life' option
abs x
Posted by: abs at September 20, 2006 04:11 PM (pejJ8)
24
Option B all the way baby
Posted by: cheryl at September 20, 2006 04:26 PM (WWLXT)
25
Keep your soul, go with B. Life is too short.
Posted by: Kat at September 20, 2006 05:43 PM (4g1jr)
26
Hi baby.
I am late to the comment party but I think you know what I did and what I would do.
I opted to not have a career. I have had a series of jobs. I could have turned them into a career but I found myself getting more and more into trouble because at one time I was a single mom and I was the only person who was called for the skinned knees and temperatures in class. And you know what? I stressed and stressed because of all of the trouble I was in.
And now I realize that I never wanted a career. I wanted to be a Mommy. Because of my decision, I am currently in the position of having to have two part-time jobs -- one "brick and mortar" Monday through Friday and the other an independent contractor positon -- much like I had before. So in my decision to not have a career, I have hamstrung myself in the making money department.
Money's a means to an end for me. I work to live, not live to work. Then again, I haven't had the incredible highs you have had -- the sense of accomplishment. It's a damned trade-off and I have struggled with it my whole life. But my kids are more important to me. Always.
I know that doesn't help you at all. . .it's just a bunch of rationalization for where I'm at in my life.
Heh.
Love you long time. . .
Posted by: Margi at September 20, 2006 06:23 PM (KN1Ch)
27
I vote for B. You said it yourself, hon. Sanity. Isn't that what you're fighting for?
The thing is, if you choose A and hate it, there's nowhere else to go but out. If you choose B, you still have the opportunity to choose something like A later, since B is a lateral move. You can always move up if the opportunity comes again.
I chose option B myself last year, and I've never regretted it!
Posted by: caltechgirl at September 20, 2006 06:36 PM (/vgMZ)
28
Whenever I have had to make a career desicion, my wife will say, I will stand beside you, whatever your decision. Luckily, they have not turned out too bad. Good luck in your choice. Remember that stress is not good for getting preganent!
Posted by: David T. at September 20, 2006 06:59 PM (hkvGr)
29
Have you talked with your therapist about this? Based on your earlier posts, you're a perfectionist who will step in and do someone else's work if it's necessary to finish the project. For your employers, this is a huge advantage. For you and your stress levels, it could be a bad thing and it will follow you from job to job, regardless of whether it's a move up or across.
I'd say B, it's your best chance to chill - if you let yourself. Will it flesh out any part of your resume so the lateral move could be good from an experience viewpoint? Good luck with whatever you choose, and congratulations on all the offers!
Posted by: Oda Mae at September 20, 2006 07:58 PM (6c2sn)
30
High stress with no pay raise? Heck NO! Take the one you know you can handle, which will allow you to work at something you like, but not cause undue stress. Life is too short to spend all your time at work or stressing about it.
Posted by: kenju at September 20, 2006 08:10 PM (2+7OT)
31
I had this dilemma myself 1.5 years ago. Ultimately I chose the 'B' option, and have never regretted it for one moment. Once I was out of the stewing high pressure/fast track pot that I had been in, I realized that I was happier. Not only was I happier, but my family and friends were happier. I had a chance to get back the personal contacts that had shriveled when I was so immersed in the corporate race.
I can only imaging that if I had chosen the 'A' option back then that I would now still be waking up in the middle of the night thinking about what I had to do at work the next day. Trying to squeeze in a happy relationship with my spouse and contemplating kids would have made me freak the f out.
just my 2 cents, best of luck in whatever choice you make.
Posted by: Jen-Again at September 20, 2006 08:26 PM (FARam)
32
I read carefully your choices, and then I read all the responses from everybody. Like most everyone else that commented, I have a choice of my own that I would recommend.
But I'm not going to tell you what it is.
Why? Because after reading your post it's obvious to me that you've already made your choice. So my answer is this - reread what you posted and choose the option that you already decided on.
And don't look back.
Posted by: diamond dave at September 20, 2006 08:50 PM (CTBtx)
33
Option B. Enjoy your life, sounds like you've already got everything out of your career that you want.
Posted by: Hannah at September 20, 2006 09:24 PM (ImQx2)
34
I seem to be in the massive minority as I say go for "C", I would approach them with the package you need; read money, work style and benefits. To me doing a new/bigger job with no pay raise is just plain silly.
Either way good luck!
Posted by: Fred at September 21, 2006 12:40 AM (JXMxY)
35
Or option D. Remain where you are but put out feelers you are interested in opportunities and wait for something better to come along. No reason to grab the first set of offers that come across your desk.
Posted by: Michael at September 21, 2006 02:03 AM (C/HOM)
36
I have to say option D.
Become a professional writer, work at home, and eat chocolate while putting your genius on paper. Slowly become annonymously famous and independently wealthy.
Posted by: freakangel at September 21, 2006 03:26 AM (/qLV+)
37
If you really want the low(er) stress option then go for B. But do be aware that it is always difficult to judge a job before being in it. A friend who chose her option B had things change on her to become an option A in everyting except prestige (and money). On the other hand, the change did her some good as she was burnt out prior to the move.
If you would like A if there is more money then remember that the rules only apply if people in charge want them to (or more to the point, there is always a loophole if people are willing). I would tell the new (potential) boss flat out that you would be interested if they can meet your salary requirements and if not, "thank you for considering me."
I have to admit that I have always gone for A (and am about to do so again -and that is why my former boss is about to work for me -and no, that is not an evil laugh...).
Posted by: Nicole B. at September 21, 2006 03:38 AM (mWowe)
38
pretty much a no-brainer. B.
Posted by: Clancy at September 21, 2006 12:42 PM (JxYJc)
39
Option B. Life is too short.
Posted by: K David at September 21, 2006 01:23 PM (pW0NG)
40
At this point in my life? Option B. I've paid my dues and while I don't want to coast, I want stability and less stress.
Posted by: trouble at September 21, 2006 01:51 PM (j2vfb)
41
unless they guarantee you in writing that when the freeze lifts you get a raise RETROACTIVELY, i'd say forget A. but you need to go where you're most happy. so you choose. i don't think we're driven in the same ways, so it's hard for me to know what i'd do.
Posted by: becky at September 21, 2006 06:28 PM (9orlw)
42
Everyone is different. You have to do what is right for you, but at this stage in my life, I'd go with B. I need stability... no stress. I've done the corporate ladder, and did it very well thank you very much, but there is a quality of life issue. I want to enjoy my life... when I die, I want to look back and know I truly loved as much as I could have. The stress of a 'job' encroaches on that too much for me.
I look at my job now as a fair exchange. They pay me for my brain. I give them 150% when I'm there. It enables me to live my life the way I want to live it. That's it. I've prostituted my brain and I'm very comfortable with that. They get no extra time and I don't want to run the show. I just want a good life.
Posted by: Bou at September 21, 2006 08:23 PM (iHxT3)
43
You've already made your choice. So, I support you in that.
Helen, as long as you are happy, that is all that matters. Happy. Not stressed, not pushed to the max, not too thinly spread.
Your goal, at this point in your life, is whatever option fuels your soul and brings you balance.
Posted by: Dana at September 22, 2006 02:14 AM (Zp/ni)
44
Well it looks like Iam late to the party, as usual, so here goes. Seems to me like you are standing at the 'cross roads' one road leads toward ceo-ville the other...comfy-ville? whichever you choose.. do not sell your soul to the devil, like Robert Johnson did.
hope this helps.
Posted by: j.m at September 22, 2006 03:26 AM (k3v0Q)
45
If it were me, I'd choose Option B. I'd try as much as possible to avoid the stress, especially since it doesn't come with more money.
Posted by: amber at September 22, 2006 04:53 PM (5PLeA)
46
As everyone else has said already, you've made your decision.
And what it shows is that you always choose where your priorities are. The Helen of five years ago might have jumped at one option, but the Helen of now has different priorities. Personally, I think the current Helen's getting to a very good spot, and I think her decision will turn out to be the right one for her.
Posted by: B. Durbin at September 23, 2006 02:40 AM (tie24)
47
I'd say that so long as you are comfortable living on what you make now I'd DEFINATELY go with B..There is always the chance for a promotion without more stress.. and given how much stress has bothered you Id say avoiding it is a very wise move
Posted by: LarryConley at September 23, 2006 01:21 PM (kbWzj)
48
Currently I would have to take option B. I have been in the ranks of upper management, same company for almost 20 years, and took several steps down the totem pole to relieve stress and hours, and kind of like just doing my own thing.
Posted by: Richard at September 23, 2006 10:23 PM (gvl4P)
Hide Comments
| Add Comment
