On the origin of careers (Hiring for potential, hiring for eco-balance)


Drawing a parallel comparison to Darwin’s Origin of Species, where nothing is stagnant, the same can be said about one’s career and its evolution.

The math tells us that successful evolution is an exception, while millions of species died in the process for a few to survive to modern time.

It is a romantic thought to have that with each new job we take on, we progress and evolve for the better. However, that may not be always the case.

As in Darwin’s observations in the Galápagos Islands, where after a visit of only four islands in five weeks, observed that the creatures differ from island to island, with their adaptations to the different harsh environment of the islands.

Thus coming to a conclusion that the species underwent a natural selection process, which resulted in a transmutation of species.

Looking back at ones career; a similar observation can be form where no two person can have the same career evolution.

There are numerous variants that may affect the course of one’s career evolution; from latent variance such as personality, interest, upbringing, education, cultural, religious and personal beliefs, to more obvious parameters such as the career progression and roles the person undertakes in the course of his/ her career.

Bringing some context to our argument today, how would we put a value to one’s talent at the point of hire? Given that in this move, the new hire would have to undergo certain level of transformation to adapt to the new enviornment.

Thus, shouldn’t we be looking out for evidence of successful adaptations and evolution in similar enviornment? Also, should we not place too much emphysis on one’s failure to adapt to enviornments that differ from the hiring organization’s?

As such, we can be sure that our new hire would be successful in fitting into the existing ecosystem.

Having said that, we also need to make sure that our new addition doesn’t cannabilize the rest of the species.

Ps. Special thanks to Maurice Ling (http://www.linkedin.com/in/mauriceling) for helping me with the Darwin’s analogy. I have to admit that I had a hard time with the 500+ pages of the original book!

Cheers

Eric Wong

Advertisements

Your career is your greatest asset and investment


This is probably one of the most important but yet underappreciated entries in your big portfolio of assets and investments. The fact that many of us don’t recognize “career” as part of that portfolio is worrying.

After all, your income and career stability are factors which banks use to evaluate your credit worthiness before they grant you that loan.

Putting it in investment terms, this is also one of the few investments with fixed repayment, which comes in form of paychecks. For the most people, this income is consistent and predictable.

Despite the value in which having a good career can bring to your overall asset portfolio, we haven’t been paying a lot of attention on how we manage, plan and invest in our career. Many of this is down to chance and fate.

Having being recruiting for so long, I come across candidates that would make the worst career choices for the most misguided reasons. The job change happens due to either a “push” or “pull” factor.

Either they are really fed up with where they are, or someone comes along with a bigger carrot.

I would admit that those are valid reasons to consider a job change, however shouldn’t there be a more structured and organized way to doing it?

We seldom hear of anyone that’s mapped out what they wanted to do in their careers in entirety. What it looks like now, what’s next and what ifs.

Granted that things may not be as utopic as what we wanted it to be, but as in any investments, we would had set up parameters in which we would cut our losses or cash in on the profits.

If that’s the case, why is it that many of us can’t say with certainty where we would like to go tomorrow? And for those who know where they would like to go, can you tell me how you would get there?