SCRIPT CHECK · 60 SECONDS
Five quick questions show how often it appears, how believable it feels, and what it makes you avoid. You’ll get one private next step.
This is not a diagnosis and there is no pass or fail. It measures the current frequency, credibility, and behavioral cost of “The severance offer is proof I was the problem”, including the private rule underneath it: The size of the payout must match the size of my hidden fault, so a generous number means they knew something damning about me and paid extra to keep it quiet.
QUIET
“The severance offer is proof I was the problem” appears, but it rarely gets the final say. Keep this line available for higher-pressure moments: “A severance number is priced by tenure and legal exposure, not by a verdict on my character.”
PRESENT
“The severance offer is proof I was the problem” wins some small decisions before you catch it. Your useful interruption is: “I can read a release clause without reading a confession into it.”
ACTIVE
“The severance offer is proof I was the problem” is shaping action often enough to deserve a deliberate counterexample. Start privately and concretely: Set the severance letter next to a plain list of what payout formulas price — tenure, budget, legal risk — and reread page two against that list instead of your fear.
DOMINANT
Right now, “The severance offer is proof I was the problem” is steering many of the moments you measured. That is a pattern reading, not a diagnosis or character verdict. Begin with one reversible receipt: Set the severance letter next to a plain list of what payout formulas price — tenure, budget, legal risk — and reread page two against that list instead of your fear.