I was wondering if any of you felt the need to explain processes in certain situations. I do, and it typically gets a response from my NT coworkers or boyfriend that is light years away from my intention.
Here are two instances:
- I've tried explaining that I may have difficulties with certain tasks, or that I processed information differently and needed a few particular steps taken (such as being given ample time to write down instructions, or requesting to be exempt from acting as the note-taker in meetings because I can't handle several people talking at the same time, and my coworkers just loooooove to chat during meetings). I've also tried to explain meltdowns to my boyfriend when we moved in together after more than a decade of occasionally seeing each other, naively thinking that it could help avoid situations that cause the meltdowns in the first place.
In all of these cases, the response I got was that I "should not hide behind the condition and let it define me" -- except, while it does not define me, it is a very valid explanation for my difficulties and atypical reactions.
- Another instance is mostly from work. To put things in perspective, my contribution usually kicks in around the end of a project, so that means I have to fix anything that wasn't set up properly in the first place. I work in marketing, and have to work along the salespeople, who are pretty much running around like chickens with their heads cut off.
So, sometimes I'm asked why this or that got delayed or didn't work well. If it comes from me, I take full ownership, but usually it started much earlier in the chain. And I'll explain exactly that: what was not properly done, and what steps I took to fix it, how much more time it took compared to what was scheduled (you know, before somebody went and ruined things), etc. My rationale behind this is that we need to clearly identify each and every thing that can be improved upon, with the end goal of not seeing those mistakes again, and saving time, so more efficiency.
My managers view this as making excuses. But I'm not. I'll even stay overtime to fix things that other neglected to do/do decently, but I can't be expected to always make up for other people's shortcomings. Maybe they need more training, or for their morale to be boosted, I don't know, but if none of that is ever raised, it can be expected to be corrected.
Maybe management does not like to be told something can be done better? Especially if they were not the ones coming up with the idea? I'm very confused.
Have you noticed similar things happening to you at school, work or with your families?
Here are two instances:
- I've tried explaining that I may have difficulties with certain tasks, or that I processed information differently and needed a few particular steps taken (such as being given ample time to write down instructions, or requesting to be exempt from acting as the note-taker in meetings because I can't handle several people talking at the same time, and my coworkers just loooooove to chat during meetings). I've also tried to explain meltdowns to my boyfriend when we moved in together after more than a decade of occasionally seeing each other, naively thinking that it could help avoid situations that cause the meltdowns in the first place.
In all of these cases, the response I got was that I "should not hide behind the condition and let it define me" -- except, while it does not define me, it is a very valid explanation for my difficulties and atypical reactions.
- Another instance is mostly from work. To put things in perspective, my contribution usually kicks in around the end of a project, so that means I have to fix anything that wasn't set up properly in the first place. I work in marketing, and have to work along the salespeople, who are pretty much running around like chickens with their heads cut off.
So, sometimes I'm asked why this or that got delayed or didn't work well. If it comes from me, I take full ownership, but usually it started much earlier in the chain. And I'll explain exactly that: what was not properly done, and what steps I took to fix it, how much more time it took compared to what was scheduled (you know, before somebody went and ruined things), etc. My rationale behind this is that we need to clearly identify each and every thing that can be improved upon, with the end goal of not seeing those mistakes again, and saving time, so more efficiency.
My managers view this as making excuses. But I'm not. I'll even stay overtime to fix things that other neglected to do/do decently, but I can't be expected to always make up for other people's shortcomings. Maybe they need more training, or for their morale to be boosted, I don't know, but if none of that is ever raised, it can be expected to be corrected.
Maybe management does not like to be told something can be done better? Especially if they were not the ones coming up with the idea? I'm very confused.
Have you noticed similar things happening to you at school, work or with your families?