Extra: Building Your Career is Not Your Career
John Sills
Managing Partner at The Foundation. Author of The Human Experience. Trustee of Young Enterprise. Part-time Writer, Professional Commuter.
This is the third in a new ‘Extra’ series of CX Story posts, with broader thoughts on business, leadership, and personal development.?
When I worked at HSBC, I was one of those people who jumped between roles every 18 months or so. A bit of time running branches, a bit of time in Head Office, a bit of time working globally. I was lucky enough to be involved in some really interesting projects, albeit I couldn’t help feeling that what I did or didn’t do only ever amounted to a rounding error, as the company always seemed to make about £15Bn in profit regardless.
At the time, I thought this quick movement through roles was a great thing, letting me try lots of different jobs before settling on what I really wanted to do. But now I work across lots of different companies, and with people at a senior level, I can see that, for all the positives, it can have a dangerous impact both on people’s careers and on innovation in organisations as a whole.
Driven through the education system, it seems like corporate careers have this ‘video game’ feel about them now: the ambition isn’t necessarily to do great things; the ambition is to get to the next level as quickly as possible.
The same pattern repeats in organisations everywhere. A role has around a two-year shelf-life. You spend the first six months settling in, spend a year trying to do something that will get you noticed, spend the final six months positioning yourself for promotion. Then you move on.
This means that people end up getting promoted to a senior level quickly - but perhaps too quickly to consider whether it’s something they really want to do long-term. They end up getting trapped, earning a good salary that makes it hard to switch to something different. So, they spend their career earning well and moving between senior roles, but lacking that true fulfilment they might have had elsewhere, a sense of building frustration of what could have been.
The point of the career becomes to build the career, and then,?just like a video game, it stops and leaves a sense of emptiness.
There’s a second problem with this ‘video game career completion’ approach, that it creates short-term thinking in organisations, leading to a lack of innovation.
To move their careers forward, people need results now, so the big, long-term, systemic changes that are needed get put to one side for the next person to do. This drives lots of well-meaning but piecemeal activity, whilst the overall organisation – perhaps industry, perhaps economy – stagnates to a point where it’s so far behind it’s impossible to catch up.
I was talking to a friend of The Foundation’s about this recently, a senior leader in one of the UKs largest organisations, who agreed. He said he often now saw
‘a desire from leaders to try and find a single silver bullet and a quick solution to a problem so that they can move on’.?
He also said he’d started to see the same traits in the most successful climbers:
领英推荐
1. Manage upwards and focus on building strong senior relationships
2. Back safe, low-risk and ‘quick win’ initiatives
3. Don’t make mistakes – and if anything does happen, ensure any bad news is pinned on someone else
As a result, he rarely sees them doing anything big, bold, innovative or interesting
This ties in with one of the best books on human behaviour I’ve read, ‘Risk Savvy’ by German psychologist Gerd Gigerenzer. He warns of ‘defensive decision making’, an affliction affecting important decisions made in large companies. In extensive research, he saw that given a choice being a riskier, more innovative bet, and a safer but less innovative one, most managers want to go with the former, because they worry that if something goes wrong, they would be held solely responsible. But for the company to grow, it needs some leaders who’ll go for the riskier, more innovative option.
So it seems to me that, ironically, the thing that stops people from building a fulfilling career is focusing too much on building a successful career.
People hit the mid-life, mid-career point and feel unfulfilled, feel the need to do something, to achieve something, to leave a mark on the world in some way, to?create?something. And I think this comes from the dawning realisation that whilst they’ve built a ‘successful’ career, they don’t have anything to show for it – at least, in terms of the impact they’ve had on others.
It may be that seeing your career as a series of projects to make something happen may be more interesting than simply being a ladder you need to keep climbing.
Because, it turns out,?it’s the journey that’s the fun bit, far more than the destination. And that ladder, well, it never really ends.
Thank you for reading! If you enjoyed it, please do share. And if you need any help with improving your organisation’s customer experience, come and find me and the team at?The Foundation.
Director, Sustainability / ESG Change & Comms | Tech | Financial Services | Manufacturing | Real Estate & Construction | Strategy Development | Innovation | Program & Project Delivery | Impact Metrics & Reporting | D&I
1 年Love this post, John Sills. I can relate! It does make me wonder which is chicken and which is egg. Is the ambitious career-climbing driving commercial short-termism, or is the impatient organisation driving the shortened shelf life? In a recent podcast I was astonished to hear that the average tenure of a CEO is now <3 years. It got me thinking about what constitutes corporate patience. Is a company that tolerates a 2+ year journey with the same leadership effectively ‘a patient company’? Who are the patient organisations of today? The ones that deliver meaningful change. Few would describe SpaceX, Tesla, Facebook as patient, yet they achieve enormous, tangible change (we can argue if meaningful and positive later). Does the short shelf life exist in these companies? I would assume so. Which businesses are prepared to create and doggedly protect the conditions that ensure those tasked with bringing about tangible, sustained change actually want to run and stay in the systemic-change marathon, rather than sprint to the next rung of the ladder, all for the reward you describe, a sense of fulfilment and the ability to point to something bigger than ourselves and say ‘I helped achieve that’?
Director, Sustainability / ESG Change & Comms | Tech | Financial Services | Manufacturing | Real Estate & Construction | Strategy Development | Innovation | Program & Project Delivery | Impact Metrics & Reporting | D&I
1 年It got me thinking about China’s 50-years-long Belt and Road which delivers enormous systemic change, both positive and negative. No 2-year shelf life there, although the people behind it may still change regularly. The UK’s 4-year electoral cycle / the effectiveness of government to deliver much-needed change seems to break down when in power for longer than about 8-10 years. Should we be thinking more about a corporate patience quota geared towards a 10+ year shelf life for its leaders? Or even something closer to 50 (heaven help our retirement plans!)? In our high-volatility, ever-increasing race to be first to market, first to respond, first to serve, first to seal the deal, who can afford to be patient? Thank you for making me think!
Mildly Unmanageable. Occasionally Useful. Strategically Provocative.
1 年Heard this in relation to the current generation of consulting partners coming through, and the senior managers battling it out for promotion. Clients see them always selling, always making it about them, when the retiring old guards superpower was an ability to listen first, sell later. I wonder how much of it is to do with jobs that ask for a lot of experience and a generation of people trying to fight those barriers.
Partner in building customer-strong businesses.
1 年I agree with the point but not the video game analogy. In my world, gaming is the opposite experience of what you describe.
Head of Content at Sidekick Business Development
1 年Spot on