Not sure I'm a good fit for new job
July 27, 2013 2:21 AM   Subscribe

I'm not sure I'm a good fit in my new job. MeFites, what do you think and if so, is it redeemable or not?

I've been told to tone down my behaviour, in terms of:

- Not being so loud in volume, which I definitely have worked on and trust me, there's a noticeable differenceThen,
- Not writing so big (the spaces we're given to write is tiny, very objectively, for anyone, though it doesn't help my writing is rather large). Again, I've tried and been somewhat successful, but I don't agree with making it so small that it's hard to read (which it is, it requires squinting) Then
- Not questioning anything unless it is literally about to kill a patient (I work as a hospital pharmacist). My rule to myself in general, is to never talk about the places I've previously worked at, because then of course it opens you up to "well if you liked it so much, why didn't you stay there?" plus I don't like to brag. This is what I did, and especially had in mind coming here. However, everyone seems to think that just because I asked "oh so what do we do here?" or "oh how does this work?" purely in an information-gathering sense because I don't know the answer, they seem to think that it's me judging them which how can I if I don't know what the thing is to pass judgement on. So, I'm effectively being banned from asking questions unless it's outright dangerous and the problem is--IT'S MY JOB TO ASK QUESTIONS. Literally. My position is to make medicines use safer in the hospital. So yeah I'm being paid to ask the questions to find out the lay of the land, and then analyse it to bits, and then improve it. For the record, there are some pretty shit systems here but I never verbalise it because who wants to hear a newbie of 6 weeks criticise something you've done for years because why would it have stuck around for years if it wasn't good, right?!

So I wonder if I'm being attacked simply for being the outsider. Am I too different? Oh, which leads me to the second part. If it really isn't a good fit (and also not getting any real direction from boss as promised, you can see my previous posts), the situation is this:

- I'm 6 weeks in of a 3 month probation
- I was hired at this point in time to get us to pass accreditation. Accreditation is end of Nov, so would be 5 month anniversary of me starting. If it's not a good fit, should I:
a) Quit now (well not right now till I line up a job, but you know what I mean--start looking and quit by the 3 months)
b) Stick it out till accreditation then decide whether to quit --> this I think is most professional and also more thinking time, but then if I do decide to quit, would it be better to ask to extend the probation to 6 months? (so it doesn't look bad on my resume). This is of course assuming it's even possible, which it may not be because it's in the public sector.

Thanks.
posted by glache to Work & Money (13 answers total) 2 users marked this as a favorite
 
Either way I would start looking for a new job now. That's all BS. Hell, it'd be BS if you didn't have people's lives depending on you... when you add that factor, it's about a million times worse.

I, personally, would not wait until accreditation to take any new job that came up, because from the sound of it, they need a LOT more work and that work is more than you yourself can do, especially with these restrictions. If asked, I would just say that it was a bad fit. Probation isn't just for them to evaluate you, and all that.
posted by gloraelin at 2:47 AM on July 27, 2013


What are you asking questions *about*? I mean, sure, you need to ask about things like what other drugs a patient is taking; but are you questioning procedures unconnected to your duties, or how other people do *their* duties?

Look, one of the things you're questioning is the amount of entry space on forms: since I'd say it's a fair assumption that these forms weren't just developed --- everyone else has apparently been successfully using them for a while --- that's not your business, and it just makes you sound like a complainer or troublemaker. If you're being "attacked for being an outsider", maybe it's because you've positioned yourself that way, and aren't making any effort to become an insider.

And the talking too loud thing..... yeah, that's objectionable. It's annoying to everyone around you who is trying to work quietly or hold a conversation or listen on the phone; as a pharmacist, you might even be broadcasting patients' personal info to everyone in the area.
posted by easily confused at 3:08 AM on July 27, 2013


There's three dynamics here that I see:

1) Tasks – you don't mention that your work is under scrutiny, which is a very positive sign. That would be a dealbreaker on either side. There seems to be more of a focus on the execution of your tasks (volume, writing, questions), than on the work itself. As those all seem to be soft-factors, it seems as if the bigger issue here is fit.

2) Fit – either you fit the team, or you do not fit the team. If you do not fit the team, then either you will change to fit the team, or you will not change to fit the team.

I would like you to entertain a counter viewpoint. If I were to ask your manager or coworkers about you, would they say you are disruptive (loud), not adopting required practices (writing size), and ask too many questions?

If that is what they would say, it may help to consider what it would be like to work with someone who was disruptive, did not follow required practices, and asked too many questions? What would you think of that person? Would you like to work with them? Would they be good for the team dynamic and results?

Fit is a funny thing, for one has to choose a priority. Either one will fit with the dominant culture in place, or one will find a place where they agree with the dominant culture. If you generally like the job and want to stay on, you will conform (to some degree) to that which the team requires. If you must express who you are, and don't want to change your behaviour, it's probably best to find somewhere else to work.

My own view on this has changed massively in the last five years, moving from an employee to an entrepreneur. Many people have the skills required for jobs, but fit is much more difficult. Because fit of each individual team member either has a positive or negative effect on the rest of the team. If you are seen to be standing out, and require special attention, that may well affect the motivation and results of the people around you. Thus, the issue of fit seems to be less about you specifically, and more about the functioning of your team as a whole.

There was one thing that you said that raised a yellow/redish light for me: there are some pretty shit systems here but I never verbalise it because who wants to hear a newbie of 6 weeks criticise something you've done for years because why would it have stuck around for years if it wasn't good, right?!

The biggest issue I have with your entire post is that you have a bit of an ego here. You have decided the systems are shit, and are not interested in working with them, rather you are keeping your real feelings hidden. This is a subtle but distinctive point, because I don't hear that you think the systems are poor and you are keen to understand why they are in place. That would be the first point in contributing a new solution. Before you can change something, you must first know the lay of the land.

That is not what I am hearing. What I am hearing overall is that 1) you don't want to change your personality to fit in, 2) you've already made sweeping decisions about how to approach your workplace after three weeks.

My greatest concern for you would be not in the result of this job, but in your attitude toward work in general. Given your field, there's a high likelihood pretty much any role is going to require some level of conformity and adherence to processes. Rather than seeing these as part of a job role, you seem to see them as attacks on your personality. Which is not helpful, because they are in fact part of the job role. And they're going to be part of any job role.

Some jobs are very personality-driven and it really matters who people are. I want my musicians to be expressive. I do not want my accountants or doctors to be expressive. I would like them to follow codified principles and do their jobs well. I would probably not want a doctor who questioned the basis of modern medicine or the validity of established techniques. Especially not someone who had been a doctor for three weeks.


3) Timing – The timing is really up to you. You don't have a responsibility to get the hospital past accreditation. Your responsibility is to perform in the role which you were hired into to the best of your ability. The larger concerns are the concerns of the people running the show. If you have no intention of making this situation work, you should probably go sooner. If you think that this is something you want to do, and can change your attitude and behaviour and see how it goes, then you should probably stay.

Overall, I don't see that this has very much to do with the role or anything else. It seems to be whether or not you are in the right career for yourself. Either you can settle down, pay your dues, and find comfort in progressing in a career role. Or you can bail out and get on the road. But after reading this a few times, I really think this is all in your hands... and also that you don't really see it that way in the moment. The fact you are thinking about how an exit will look on your CV indicates that you are looking at the wrong thing. Who cares how it looks on your CV. Much more important will be your references – which will be how you act on a daily basis.

Good luck.
posted by nickrussell at 3:16 AM on July 27, 2013 [6 favorites]


I'm being paid to ask the questions to find out the lay of the land, and then analyse it to bits, and then improve it.

Is that actually in your job description for the position for which you were hired, or do you assume that this is what all hospital pharmacists are supposed to do and are taking it upon yourself to do so? Because it sounds like you are an entry level staff pharmacist, not someone brought in from the outside to evaluate and re-engineer processes, which would be the job of a more senior level person.

If you feel as though you're not a good fit, and there isn't good chemistry with you and the rest of the workplace compared to other places you've worked, then feel free to look for another job as soon as you can. But be aware of the "no matter where you go, there you are" problem-- if you have problems getting along with coworkers in the workplace in general and being able to "read" the culture of a workplace, that will be something that follows you no matter where you go.
posted by deanc at 5:20 AM on July 27, 2013 [1 favorite]


If you are unhappy, get a new job. If you can get a better job, leave.

You work for YOU, and no one else.
posted by Ruthless Bunny at 5:42 AM on July 27, 2013 [2 favorites]


You say you're banned from asking questions. So there's two possibilities: your work environment is pretty damn toxic OR you're coming across as judging (even if you don't think you are). I have had new employees ask me how we do things in a certain tone. As in, they're not explicitly saying "I have a better way" but I can hear it in their voice and see it in their face. Then another new person will ask the same question, but their tone is one of someone who is eager and curious. The latter person tends to take that information and apply it properly. They also tend to be the people whose opinions are valued as they become more senior employees.

Just something to think about.
posted by futureisunwritten at 6:49 AM on July 27, 2013


I'm not sure I'm a good fit in my new job. MeFites, what do you think and if so, is it redeemable or not

There are pieces of information missing in your question (your description of your perceived job role does not sound consistent with what you describe doing on a day-to-day basis, especially the way people are responding). I'll leave that aside and still give this a stab.

Think about some of the things that they are asking you to do and why. Would writing smaller really be a sacrifice on your part?

This in particular: Not being so loud in volume If I understand your job description correctly, and you are a hospital pharmacist in a place that patients can hear you, the concern would be everything from patient privacy to if you do not like a procedure and question in a place that other people can hear it. Back up and ask yourself why they are doing this because if you leave this work environment, it can be a problem in other work places.

Not questioning anything unless it is literally about to kill a patient

How are you asking these questions? So if you are a new pharmacist in a new hospital, even if you worked at one before,it would be logical that you would not know a procedure. Asking how to enter a certain medication into the computer system, which you did not do at your previous (pharmacy,hospital) would be a logical question.

The way that you write this question and describe what you are thinking makes me wonder if people feel attacked or that you are not asking it for a real reason. So I would really evaluate what information do you need and how you ask the question. This is a critical skill for any job that you have.

My greater concern is what you state you think the outcome should be (in your 3 weeks there,you can see the changes that should be made). Let's just say that you have. How do you think these changes would be made at a hospital? On the floor when pharmacist A sees something and makes an observation and then a sweeping change is made across the hospital?

OR in a meeting with pharmacists, doctors, nurses, staff, discussing things that are done and making policy changes? This is how changes happen in hospitals in the states(committees meet for various topics in a hospital setting either every week,month, etc.). If someone wants to select a certain medication, they look at the literature and a representative from each team discusses why to decide to go with decision A or B. So if you truly see problems, then I would ask to participate in committees that pertain to your interests or concerns. I would first observe what they discuss and how changes are made.

But from reading your entire question, ask yourself if the changes are difficult and why not do some of them (writing size, speech volume) and why there may be a problem with your questions and how to go about and make changes if you truly feel committed to them.But I suspect that this may potentially be a problem in your next job- so consider learning how to work at your current work place to deal with these challenges. I did peek at your former questions (i.e. trying to get your manager to respond)- backup and look at your colleagues. Are there colleagues that you really respect and get along with? Consider observing how they behave and if you feel comfortable, ask them how to deal with some of these things. Soft skills can be learned from those around you.
posted by Wolfster at 6:51 AM on July 27, 2013


From this and your previous question, it does sound like you are coming across as very critical and not happy with the co-workers/way things are done. If indeed you were hired specifically to be in a monitoring position, then you need to talk with someone about the proper form your questions and criticism need to take. It sounds like there is some sort of perception gap here, either you not understanding your job role or them being unclear about what you are supposed to be doing.

You what, though. We just had someone leave my workplace. She quit; she was not fired; but I am sure she thinks she was pushed out and specifically not encouraged to ask questions. The thing is, she asked with a certain tone and a certain look on her face. When I was assigned to work with her, I always felt she was giving me needless and, frankly, inappropriate pushback. I was glad to see the back of her because in my view she clogged up the work process. We're not dispensing potentially lethal drugs though, so accuracy is less of a priority.
posted by BibiRose at 7:33 AM on July 27, 2013 [1 favorite]


I think all of the above commenters have done a great job giving context to your fit for the job, but nobody has addressed the part where you struggle to write legibly in small spaces. Have you thought about bringing your own pen to work for this task? I have an uneasy feeling that you've been using a standard ballpoint for this, and that just won't do. Think about using a fountain pen with an extra fine nib, or maybe a decent felt tipped pen. Make sure to use the proper color ink.
posted by oceanjesse at 8:58 AM on July 27, 2013 [2 favorites]


If I'm reading your question right, you're in a change management role in a hospital pharmacy - maybe some kind of medication safety officer or quality improvement specialist. This is a role that requires relationship-building skills and a strong understanding of how to get people to accept change.

You should come into the role with a plan for gathering information (both about the processes and the culture), selecting changes based on urgency and feasibility, building support for those changes and managing implementation. You have to come into these roles with a demeanor that indicates you know your stuff but are not there CHANGE EVERYTHING for no reason. A mix of competence and openness.

This requires a high level of organizational and interpersonal savvy. Based on this and some of your previous questions, I think you're just out of your depth here. It seems like you're still figuring out how to operate effectively in a workplace and what is and isn't normal and appropriate. Leading change requires a much higher level of interpersonal skill. You can get there, but this position sounds like a mismatch for you at this point in your career. These deficiencies are probably apparent to the people you are working with, which may explain the reactions you're getting.

I think your situation is compounded by the fact that you are young, female and Asian. Behavior that would seem "normal" for an older white man may be characterized as "pushy," "intrusive," "bitchy" or whatever because of a cultural expectation for women (especially young women and Asian women) to be subservient. People also just assume that younger people don't know as much and are generally less qualified. It sucks, but without that cultural baggage people might give you a little more wiggle room to find your feet in this job before shutting you down.

If I were you, I'd look for another job. I would not plan to stay through accreditation.
posted by jeoc at 9:43 AM on July 27, 2013 [2 favorites]


Not questioning anything unless it is literally about to kill a patient

Who delivered this directive to you? If it was anyone other than your boss or his superior, you need to have a sit-down pronto with your boss and let him know what's going on. It smells to me like maybe your co-workers are in head-in-the-sand/cover-their-ass mode, and are blocking you from doing your job -- which, as I understand it, is to ask the tough questions.

Your manager needs to empower (ugh, I hate that word, but you know what I mean) you to get the information you need to do your analyses. Part of that might mean him having conversations with your co-workers to make sure they are on-board with the program; part of it might be him working with you to refine your people skills, if those are somehow getting in the way.

Definitely have a talk with him right away to address this situation. Broach it in a calm, problem-solving way.

If, though, he was the one telling you not to ask questions, then I think you are in a sick-system situation -- he's part of the problem, and you won't be able to improve upon it. If that's the case, I'd still be inclined to stick around through accreditation (assuming you think they will pass the evals), so you can add that as a tangible accomplishment on your resume. Then, I'd get the hell out of there as soon as I could find a new, better job.
posted by nacho fries at 10:55 AM on July 27, 2013


I would never tolerate being in a job where I'm told not to ask questions. How can you learn to work effectively and efficiently if you can't ask questions? And how can an organization improve if nobody can ask questions? This workplace smacks of being dysfunctional.
posted by Dansaman at 11:28 AM on July 27, 2013


Response by poster: Thanks for the answers. All very helpful, so much so I'm going to respond to each of you individually.

gloraelin. That's a good point. It never hurts to browse.

easily confused (which covers any questions about what I'm actually meant to do). My title (though I hate titles because I think it's being pompous) is "medication safety pharmacist". In other words, I'm not supposed to be dispensing or checking charts (though I have due to staffing shortages, and I actually really enjoy it so I don't mind at all!), but making the prescribing, administration and dispensing of medications in the hospital safer. So yes, I am supposed to be questioning procedures on how *everyone* does their duties.

Good point about the rest. Though I've never had feedback like that before and I've worked at five hospitals, all of which have the same paperwork. With privacy, a) there is no privacy when you talk to patients anyway, they are all shared rooms, (not saying that's good though!), and b) if you wanted to harp on the privacy point, they're not the queens of it either--here all the drugs are sent up in clear bags with names on them for everyone to see (which is one of the things I think is shit and this is the first hospital that does it--everything else is in opaque bags).

nickrussell--yes. The feedback is from my deputy manager. I WANT to like my job. I've moved 900km for this, and I am excited about what I could potentially do here. However, I'm not being given much direction--my actual no.1 manager rambles a lot and then when he does say something useful, half the time it never gets followed through (I'm not getting a lot more from no. 2 either except in this area). For example, we're meant to be putting out a pharmacy newsletter to satisfy accreditation. Another pharmacist has been made editor because it was started before I came here (which I'm totally fine with because it's good for both of us). He tells me he wants A,B,C for the upcoming issue, and tells the other pharmacist X,Y,Z, and she can't confirm with him what he actually wants because it's always so hard to actually sit him down. Anyway, so I'm not getting much clear direction, which makes it harder to be excited about my job and to conform.

SOME of them are just shit period. For example, multiple patients per basket. That is not considered good practice by the professional board, because of the risk of putting the wrong med in the wrong bag. Also that clear plastic bag thingy mentioned earlier. Others, I still don't agree with but I do try to understand them because I think there's a history there. For example, we photocopy ALL the paperwork from their admission, and attach it to their discharge script (no other place does it, it's simply your annotations on the discharge script are taken as is). That happened because up until about 12 months ago there weren't any pharmacists on the ward, so it fell to the dispensing pharmacist to really scrutinise for discrpeancies which only having all the paperwork would do.

I think it's an unnecessary pain now that we do, it's the ward pharmacist's job to check it's therapeutically correct and us as dispensary pharmacists should simply be checking the label to the script (and it's what we do in practice too, if we see the ward pharmacist's signature on it we don't even bother looking at anything else, this is what the deputy manager who's giving me the feedback says he does himself as a pharmacist and what I did do as a pharmacist at every other place before this anyway so it's not a deficiency in my practice) but I can see that it made sense previously. So I am trying to see the rationale behind everything, it's just that in some cases, it is really just shit.

Timing--true. I don't have a responsibility to get the hospital past accreditation--technically. But they heavily emphasised during the interview that that's why they needed me, and needed me now (I had to quit my previous contract 3 weeks early). So leaving now would actually be just not a very nice thing to do, I'd feel guilty for doing so. Again, I WANT to make the situation work, but I'm not sure if the situation is just so untenable I should persist or leave, which is what I'm asking you guys about.

Good point about the CV. It was more from a theoretical perspective that, does quitting during probation (if that's what it ends up to be) make it look not as bad as just quitting, period. Of course I understand about the references.

deanc--it's in my job description, hopefully the above answers that. No I haven't had any problems with the other hospitals, so that's why I'm sussing if it's a chemistry thing particular to this workplace.

Ruthless Bunny--thanks.

futureisunwritten--I never thought of it like that. So, how can I come across as less judging? I actually am interested to know the answer, it's not a pushback.

Wolfster--see above re:volume. Writing smaller would not be a sacrifice on my part, except that doesn't make sense to me, just in a purely sensical sense, period. We have to write everything about how to administer a medication in a 3cmx1cm box. If any of you are on bisphosphonates (bone strengthening tablets generally taken once a week), or have ever been on doxycycline (generally used for acne or chest infections, or even malaria in some cases) you can imagine the pain of writing "Take 30 mins before food. Do not lie down for 30 mins after taking. Do not take milk, calcium, iron or magnesium supplements within 2hrs of taking" in that space. Even if I adjusted the times of any calcium, iron or magnesium supplements that may be charted so that it voids the last sentence (which I ALWAYS do), writing the first two is a squeeze and I'm not sure how it improves the nurses' efficiency (which is really what it is) to squint at those directions.

That is exactly what I am supposed to be doing. I am already in these committees as it's part of the job. I always like consulting with colleagues, it's good to get opinions. However, the colleagues I would feel most comfortable asking, most of them have not worked at other places so they don't have the outside perspective that I have. The ones that have (two of them)--is that same deputy manager and his wife (who works part-time as a usual ward pharmacist). I asked them how long it took for them to adjust (they worked at one of the leading hospitals in Australia, so much so that their staffing ratios actually set the national standard) and how long it took for the place to adjust to them, and they said several months. For that reason, I'm also not keen to quit, because there's potentially a light at the end of the tunnel. Whether it potentially is, FOR ME, is what I'm asking.

BibiRose--see above. I agree it doesn't help that, as per above, I'm not getting clear direction on what needs to be prioritised for accreditation. I know what improvements I want to make (subject to my managers agreeing of course), but getting an order of priority is where I'm failing. That's a good perspective, maybe I am coming across like that when I don't mean to be.

oceanjesse--I will Google fine tip purple pens.

jeoc--you hit the nail on the head with what I'm supposed to be doing--yes it's change management, good way to put it. I am open--well, I'd like to think I am. For example, one of the pharmacists here said she labels boxes on the front because what patient is gonna turn over to the back to look at instructions, which I'd never thought of before, so that's what I'm doing now.

And I don't reject everything just because it's different. Different doesn't necessarily mean bad. For example, we dispense drugs of addiction (morphine, etc) directly under the patient's name. No other hospital does it--it's generally the nurse in charge ordering those on the ward book. So for example, if surgical ward had patient A on morphine tablets (MS Contin) and B on oxycodone tablets (OxyContin), they would send those two charts down for us to dispense as usual (patient's name on it, etc). Other hospitals, it would be the nurse-in-charge sending down the surgical drugs of addiction ordering book with MS Contin and OxyContin written on it, just like that (they can put the patients' names if they want to, but it's not a requirement). So you actually send the required amount of unlabelled boxes of MS Contin and OxyContin addressed to the ward, up to the ward, for the nurse to put in the safe (as opposed to sending labelled boxes for the nurse to put in the safe anyway).

So it's different, but not necessarily better or worse. The reason being that the pros are: this system gives a more complete picture of what a patient may actually be on (especially important for relatively dangerous drugs like drugs of addiction), and saves the actual nurse looking after the patient from running around to find the nurse-in-charge to order. However, it creates far more workload for us downstairs. But because it's safer for the patients, and time is time (either it'd be the nursing time spent or ours), I agree with it. So that's why I said there are "some" bad things, not "all"--however, having said that, I can see more places for improvement than not.

It never occurred to me that it might be a mismatch for me at this point in my career. They knew I was 2 years registered when I applied for the job, so I thought as part of their job hiring process they would've taken that into consideration that I'm still fresh, and therefore should not have been an issue, if that makes sense.

nacho fries--no, it's my deputy boss, who is the one generally running things on the floor. The big boss does all the other behind the work stuff like finances, HR, etc so he wouldn't have a clue about what's going on on the floor. For example, when I mentioned to him about the multiple patients in baskets thing he was genuinely surprised, he assumed it was already happening. btw, I mentioned this in a meeting where the deputy manager was also present, so it wasn't like I was going behind his back, because if anything I need his support to effect any change like that on the floor. So yes it is the boss I would generally report to on a daily basis.

That deputy boss like I mentioned above though, he understands what it's like--it's a very slow, antiquated in some ways, place (he even said so himself, that it's very slow to get things done here). No-one's really worked elsewhere and when he told me what he's done (he offered, not I asked), I have a lot of respect for him. He's been here 3 years and it took 2 of those years to get pharmacists on the ward. Bearing in mind we work in a state very highly known for their ward pharmacist....standards I suppose? (this is one of the states with the highest hospital pharmacist:patient ratios, pioneered a lot of great things like restricting antibiotics so you're not using any old thing willy nilly, and so forth) so it was a shock to me that we've only had ward pharmacists for the last 2 years. To put it in context, 4 years ago when I was still a student, I did a placement at a town a third the size of this, which already had ward pharmacists, AND in a state which has probably one of the worser reputations in Australia for investing in its healthcare system.

So that's why I'm reluctant to leave, becuase I'm not sure if it's just impatience on my part, and I really am genuinely excited about what I could do here, but only if it is actually possible, for me. I'm not going to get anywhere if I'm not a good personality fit, so that's why I need to know now so that I can cut my losses if this is the case.

Dansaman--thanks.
posted by glache at 5:08 PM on July 27, 2013


« Older Which shelter dog: quiet four year old or eager...   |   Looking for very cool coffee place in specific... Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.