At some point of my life I came to realize that both me and my husband are trying to do an experiment I advise my clients NOT to do.

I left my full-time job and was doing ad-hoc freelance projects, trying to build less than more stable private practice. My husband wanted to change the profession – having 20 years of industry experience (which is all things construction). And we were doing it at the same time – using our savings and living with no regular income.

Sometimes you have to test things yourself and fail – in order to secure others from repeating your mistakes. We have figured it out finally – I found a role that allows me to do plenty of coaching and career consulting, and he found a remote opportunity in his industry, which none of us could have thought of.

When I tell my clients not to do 180-degree pivots I mean exactly that. Do not abandon your previous experience just because it currently (and temporarily) hurts. Do not cross out the entire industry or profession based on your limited experience gained within a handful of contexts. Try to leverage it instead.

How? Usually, by finding another entrance into the same – or adjacent – field. Choose another door, and the window scenery will change. A healthier organizational culture makes a difference. A good manager does, too. A different client as well. Switching the sides of the table. Going from agency to in-house and vice versa. Moving within the logic of horizontal or vertical integration. Joining the client. And so on.

By doing so you will expand your experience, knowledge, and value. A bonus side-effect – by expanding this way, you will start seeing more of these doors (or door-openers).

Do not pivot by 180 degrees, - pivot safely. Find one door, and then another one, and another one.

There are just as many of them as you are able to recognize.

Early on in my career, when I was looking for a job as a graduate with Master degree from a Swedish business school and no one wanted to interview me, I had a thought: “Do I really want to build my career being guided by what a random recruiter thinks?”

I had an interview later that day with a small executive search agency, and was turned down. Or I rejected. Years passed, and I don’t even remember who said no first, me or them.

Later, working as a recruiter and then as a career consultant, I realized that versions of this question paralyze many of us.

“How would that look on my CV?” “How should I justify the gaps on the CV?” “Am I changing the jobs too often, and they won’t take me seriously?” “Am I sitting for too long with my current company and no one will invest into me if I leave?”

Well. As a career consultant, I can help you with storytelling around these. But the truth is – if those were your choices, you don’t need to claim for any excuses. At that point in life other things could have mattered. At that point in life you only knew this and that. At that point in life you might have needed… a regular salary, job security, or a slower pace. Or you just wanted to give it a try. It’s not always about the rational choice or the company culture or the space for advancement. As long as you are able to frame it convincingly, you’re fine. That’s one.

Two. It is exactly the part of the story that a recruiter will never know. And there’s always a chance that he/she will co-create your story, interpreting it in own way. Unconsciously, as we are all humans. There are two possible solutions to this: adjust the CV to each role, and write the cover letter. Communicate it in a way that no questions pop up, - or at least, no questions that might confuse you.

Behind the CV façade (part 2)

For me, everything that happens behind the CV façade, is exactly the reason why I have chosen to be and stay in this profession, - helping others in their professional fulfilment and integrating work into lives at large.

The difference between the recruiter and the career coach, is that to a career coach, the candidate will tell the truth. Recruiter will only hear truth that’s polished, or deal with an unprepared candidate 😊 Career coach (and headhunter sometimes) will hear what’s on the agenda.

The unvoiced decisions, the pros and cons of staying vs. leaving, the turbulent times behind the stable title, the offers never signed, the returning alumni and expectations both ways, the shifts between NGOs and commercials, all of that. Decisions and motivations behind the choices. The known and the unknown. Questions around “what’s next”.

We’ll never get to that by just screening the CVs or scrolling LinkedIn profiles. Even more – often clients themselves will not know it until they start talking to someone in confidence. To some extent, people pay career coaches for the questions that coaches ask (i.e. for the competence of knowing what to ask and when), just like they pay trainers in a gym for being there and guarding them.

Some would seek handholding, others – a challenge, and the majority – the space to be listened to and a chance to be heard, - in the world that never stops talking.

Borrowed dreams.

We’ve overcome scarcity, and now we are learning how to deal with abundance. Abundance of choices first of all – what to do in life, whom to be with, whom to work with, whom to follow or avoid. Our choices lead us elsewhere – but are they always ours? Yes and no. No, because way too often they follow the steps of someone else (a role model, whether accepted as such or not), and yes, because they are unique to us, in this very moment of life.

Majority of career paths are pre-established, and many of us are adult kids seeking for acceptance and some sort of balance in life. Not everyone has a career, but everyone has a path. And on this path, some dream pursuit is often present. The question is, whose dream is that?

In the first part of these series I asked (also myself) a question – “do I (you) want to build a career being guided by what recruiters think?” If your answer is no, replace recruiters with society, parents, teachers, mentors, grandma, grandpa, and so on. If the answer is still no, I admire your courage and sense your loneliness.

Borrowing from, and rephrasing Milorad Pavich, “even for the God this world is the first try”, and guess what, it’s not perfect. Often, it’s helpful to release self-expectations of flawlessness and experience learning by making “mistakes”.

The CV is the summary of choices, and choosing keeps you accountable. That’s why it’s easier to rely on pre-defined career paths. With one caveat: such paths could be derivatives of someone else’s dreams.

“…luck plays a large role in every story of success”.

“We are prone to overestimate how much we understand about the world and to underestimate the role of chance in events”.

I borrowed these two beautiful quotes from the famous Daniel Kahneman’s book (“Thinking fast and slow”), took them out of context, and would like to examine under a career angle.

Depending on what type of a careerist reads these lines, takeaways could be pretty varied – from “it’s not worth to plan anything” to “how do I increase the percentage of chances for myself”.

For high achievers and those who love things in order and under control – consider the “acts of God” scenario. You might have predicted everything right, you might have delivered 150% a number of times – and still there’s always a chance that your plan will walk its own way. As nearly perfect as you are, you are still part of a bigger system – where anything could fail. As highly responsible as you are, it might not be solely on you.

For those who go with the flow and have no plan – luck alone is not a promise of success. It is a potential for success, where at some point you will have to be present and earn credit. If discipline and diligence are not your strengths, think of your efforts as a generator of future occasions for luck.

For all those in between – congratulations for striking the balance.

My appeal today is the following. Compare yourself with your past self on a journey to your future self. This is the only story you know, as all other stories do not belong to us, - and we never know the luck-effort ratio. Nor shall we attempt to judge. Whoever (including ourselves).

Don’t put all eggs in one basket, - you’ve probably heard and said it many times in your life.

But what if I say – “do something else in your life apart from work”? Much more imperative? Insulting? Who am I to?

If you pause for a moment, it is, in essence, the same message. Do not pack all of your aspirations, efforts, and identities, in work-related activity only.

Why is it happening?

Part of the answer is that our demands towards a workplace have elevated during the past century or so. We want it to be a respectful and respected place with a beautiful mission statement, regular reward and bonus part, a manager who cares about me as a professional and a person, opportunities to develop (my favourite! none is trickier than that), a pipeline of interesting assignments, nice and smart people around, good exit options, medical and life insurance, increased number of vacation days, vegan milk and a dog-friendly office.

Yeah. Wow.

Now, if these promises are kept, there’s a price for it, - and it’s your time and effort. That’s the second part of the answer.

If you’re in love with your work and want to succeed, it is very likely you will commit, - fair enough. If you are an achiever who thrives on intensity, chances are, you will overcommit. And when you push yourself (out of the comfort zone, where else?) for too long, you will inevitably burn out. It is the function of time (and health).

At that point we come to realize that we’ve been overdoing something at the cost of underdoing something else. We’ve invested too much in that one asset, our work. We overlook that the beautifully served table has only one standing leg.

If you recognize yourself and it feels disturbing, I am glad that the signal went through. Fortunately, the career heath is reversible, and you know where to start.

- I’ve received feedback from my manager that I should speak up more often as I have powerful insights.

- Great! And?

- The thing is, I believe my insights are powerful because I only speak up when I have something to say!

What would you say when the client comes with a challenge like that? Encourage them to speak up more just like the manager did? Tell them to trust oneself and leave everything as is? Brainstorm together to find out a way in between?

Whatever you want – as long as what you figure out serves the client, not what you believe is a right thing to do.

This is just one example, and it’s not the point.

The point is – very few of us are comfortable with silence. Instead, we are fighting for the air time as if not saying equals losing. Often it does. Elevator pitch is a pitch for a reason. But what about negotiations, establishing relationships, job interviews? Is talking more a better strategy?

I think that by talking more the majority of us are listening less. And I think that listening is more difficult to master – because majority of us believes we are good listeners already. And I don’t think it’s true.

During the interview, as a candidate, you can give an expected answer, or a less expected answer, - only if you listen to the question carefully. As an interviewer, you can receive a standard answer (that you were expecting to get) or a less expected answer. And when getting the latter you have two choices. First – judge the candidate “it’s not what I am asking”. Second – reflect: “that is how (s)he heard the question I asked”.

What is said, what is not said, and what is heard, are three different things; it is up to us how to approach them. One way is to choose not saying – when it’s not worth saying.

Feedback culture starts from asking for feedback, not giving it.

Feedback and coaching are often intertwined and similar, e.g. in the ecology of interaction. You can’t coach someone without someone’s will. At least, you can’t expect the same results. With no buy-in, there is no win.

For feedback, it’s valid, too. If change is your aspiration, “just saying” is not enough. You’ll have to market and “sell” feedback, showing purpose, expectations, and The Why. And even so, there’s no guarantee the behavior change will happen. Let alone, happen in a way you expected.

That’s why so many organizations work with feedback culture forever. As long as people are involved, it will continue to be an organism, not mechanism.

What needs to change, is the recipient role, - from being the “recipient” to an equally active part, and, at best, the initiator. It should start with them, not weigh them down. Like in coaching, here as well, it’s more about asking than telling.

Knowing what and how to do and doing are two different things.

Perhaps it explains part of the disappointment that participants have after some learning programs that focus on so-called soft skills.

“Nothing new”, “nothing eye-opening”, “I knew it already”.

When I sense this skepticism, I get skeptical myself: well, and who is supposed to open-your-eyes?

Expectations are there even when we think we have none. I’ll join this training and maybe I’ll learn something new. When there’s nothing that’s new to me, I’d realize newness was my expectation.

But then, what is this new something that I am looking for and fail to find?

Right, the magic pill.

There is no magic pill to treat anything that was developing for years. You can’t build muscle overnight, and you can’t learn driving in one day. Habits need to change (or to establish). So if you don’t have a habit of asking for feedback, giving feedback, appreciating yourself and others, listen actively, delegating, - the list goes on… then the best thing to do is to start doing it.

Intuitively, we know what’s right. It’s not the next webinar or digital course that you need. It’s the first step, that you have to take.

Dream jobs aren’t to be found, They are to be created.

Endless search for a dream job isn’t a good strategy, because the search is endless, and the job is a dream, not reality :P It’s like looking for an ideal partner in life. Based on what will you recognize – “finally, it’s him/her”?

But dreams can become true if you take charge. Job description is an idea, a recipe, a proposal, but ultimately you will create the end product when you accept the offer. It is a snapshot at the moment you apply, and based on the candidate who’s chosen, it will evolve. Or not.

More often than not, things will get out of your control. Sometimes it might feel like you are doing things over and over again. Sometimes you care too much and push too hard. That’s life.

And almost always, there’s a space for choice: to complain or to come up with a solution, to stay or to leave, to tell or to ask, to ask or to stay silent, to say yes or no to a project, to take rest before you’re tired or when it’s too late. And so on. All of those are decisions and steps in creating the “dream job”. Creating, not consuming.

If it resonates, click “follow” to get more of this. Watch the Groundhog day. Again 😊

“Rewrite with AI” – a hint I get each time when I am ready with the LinkedIn or another social media post. This is the last thing I want to do. The fact that I am conservative, and Futuristic is at the bottom of my talents, is one thing. Another thing is that from my initial observations, artificial texts sound artificial. Hmm, what else would I expect them to be?

Now, I know absolutely nothing about AI, but I know something about career transitions, and I hear the discourse about another powerful technology replacing human labour. And I see no point in being afraid of it – too powerful wave where we can influence very little. And what has not changed, - we can work on our own mastery. When we think that AI or downsizing will replace us, what we should ask ourselves, is – whom will they be looking for to do my job?

The more we can outsource to machines, the higher the standard will be, - and professionals will have space to add more value. The value that will become more valuable :P because professionals can go beyond being just transactional.

We will get used to it with time, and once again, it will be professionals who count, not professions.

It takes courage. Courage of dealing with feedback when you don’t ask for it. Courage to face critique or being laughed at. Courage to face the risk of being fired for not following the rules.

But it is also courage to accept the glory and reward. Somehow we are skewed to think “it won’t work out”. And what if it does? How many of us are ready to handle success?

Standing for something enables you to stand out. To “keep calm and…” choose how you want to frame the sentence. It makes you more resilient, and your choices clearer. It has its price. But the opposite scenario comes with a price, too.

One of the reasons why coaching “works”? Because we intuitively know what to do.

At the end of the process the client would either say “yeh, I was right, this is what I suspected”, or “I would still do it MY way”. Both of these are “your” ways.

Often times, career decisions are far from being rational. That’s part of the answer why some of the pros-and-cons tools don’t work. Simply because pros and cons are incomparable, they are not apples to apples.

We choose because of “chemistry”, excitement, interest, or “intuition” (whatever it means for each of us). Arguments could be found later on – to support our gut feeling. Let’s call them rationally biased decisions – the ones that were emotional, but we create the logical story around it.

What I would be careful with, is judging – either self or others.

Judging self when looking back: you were who you were, and with that amount of information, pressure, and health you made the best possible decision. Period. What could have been – could have been.

Judging others: assuming is the worst thing you can do – it is the same storytelling to support your line of thinking. And if assumptions are inevitable? Try to treat them as hypotheses, not answers.

According to Brene Brown, belonging is the opposite of fitting in.

While companies are struggling to boost engagement in panic after annual surveys, perhaps they should look into the core of the issue.

Do our staff belong here or are they just trying to fit in? What do our systems encourage? What are our people role modelling? Who is leading by example?

There is never enough time to address these questions because they are uncomfortable for many.

The consequence is simple: as long as there is a gap in belonging, your top performers will leave. They are able to fit into rules, but the company may not be able to fit into their expectations.

Then talk to him. Speak with the impostor, or self-critic, or saboteur, however you call it. When you start the conversation with them, usually they run out of arguments pretty quickly.


-What if say this, and haters (or: my ex-colleagues, former managers, clients) will smash me?
-And what if you keep quiet? Who and what will you deprive of?

-What if I fail?
-And what if you fly? How well-prepared are you for the opposite scenario? And when you fail (because you will, the only way not to is not to do anything), what will you learn about your expectations?

-What would others say?
-What would your closest people say – instead? What would those who care about you say? When is the point in time where it will cease to matter?

-What would it cost me to take this risk?
-And what does it cost you to keep things as is? What makes you believe that what you are currently doing is risk-free?


I can keep going, but I invite you to have fun with your own dialogues and voices in the head. Use the impostor’s methods against them. Often times their bravery expires as you keep reframing.

For quite some time, Achiever used to be a nr.1 theme in terms of frequency out of all 34 Clifton Strengths talents. Maybe it still is.

What makes it so widespread, beyond dopamine boost that comes with accomplishment?

To me it is more of a nature-vs-nurture question. Is it so because we observe achievers and learn to operate this way, or is it a born-this-way manifestation of self-made success? In other words, my achievements make me an achiever?

For sure Western culture produces and supports action-biased environments, where being /acting as an achiever feels just right. Doing and getting X done gets more credit than thinking, or feeling, or listening.

Maybe it’s one of the reasons so many of us end up with overload and too much work to do. Because it’s rewarded and because we like it. And because we rarely see an alternative.

And maybe there’s a slight chance to make things lighter by listening a bit better. To each other and ourselves.

Listening, thinking and asking more, - while doing, producing, consuming, and saving the world – less. Less is more, with a twist.

What is it that makes you spend years doing, solving, or improving what you do?

Life is short, and one can spend years understanding a phenomena, saving others’ health, changing the political regime, or mastering the dance.

And life if long enough to leave the legacy in painting or music, to advance science or to establish a business that will long live after you.

Creating prosperity. Giving people a choice. Enabling us to live longer. To live healthier. Establishing connections between people. Making payments safe. Teaching the younger crowd. Helping others decide. Building what’s not yet built.

Or?

Becoming the best in class in what I do. Developing my business. Safeguarding my family.

Or?

It may well be that no one asked you about it yet. And that’s ok. It gives you a chance to be the pioneer and your own strongest ally.

In a society, when something is rare or new, it is often surrounded by biases. An idea that a career is not necessarily something linear or vertical, by now is more or less generally accepted. Career path has replaced career ladder. Being an expert profile with increasing knowledge (vs. growing number of direct reports) is by and large recognized. But what if one changes fields and industries, moves among big organizations, start-ups and NGOs or does freelancing for a couple of years? Would a career like this even be called a career? Would it be acknowledged, looked up to or desired? My guess is that transitory careers are still surrounded by biases, and multipotentials have tough time… fitting in.

Higher education offers general disciplines first, and then comes a choice of a major. Consultants in top firms usually start with a variety of projects, and then specialize. When we accept this approach, but frame upon transitory careers or side steps, why do we?

For those of you who are still searching: what is your search really about? What is the question you are looking an answer for?

Quick wins, low-hanging fruits and things off the shelf. Sometimes (more often then not) they are helpful and can save a seemingly emergency case.

But the short term is usually short, and that’s the thing. If temporary is a solution for permanent, we substitute the problem with a solution that’s available. A solution to a different, less complex problem.

“I’m going to stay with this company for my internship and maybe, if everything goes well, for a year or so. It’s a good start for my CV”. And then months turn into years, the comfort zone shrinks, exit costs elevate, and vision becomes myopic.

“Let’s promote them now as otherwise they’ll leave”. And then the bargaining power gets penalty points.

“We need to lower the price not to let competitors win this deal”. And then you’re understaffed.

“I must overachieve to prove my credibility”. And since then overachievement will be the permanent expectation.

“I can only afford top performers here, it is a very important project”. In fact, you can’t afford them: when you have them once, you won’t have them further on all the time.

When we solve for here and now, we think that we solve for the long term.

There are two caveats. One – you might not always know what the long-term is, and the best you can do is to “manage” the current.

Two – the response you go ahead with is a response to a different question. A solution for a simpler, urgent problem. You might not even notice that the original problem is, in fact, complex.

Follow the instructions, keep the standard at bar, be compliant, treat the code of ethics as sacred. Embrace the same mindset, ask the same questions, follow the session structure, and… arrive at the same insights.

When it’s a product, factory rules are essential. There’s no room for interpretation, and it’s not what the client pays for. He pays for the guarantee that your Big Mac is the same elsewhere. When it’s a service, things get interesting. Flight is a service, yoga class is a service, a haircut is a service, and a coaching session is a service. To what extent is it possible to commoditize them? And how to define extra that is willing to be paid, and therefore, can be charged? That’s when an artistic component comes into play.

Not all coaches (therapists, consultants, chefs, dancers) are artists. Some will just follow the rules. You’ll get the Big Mac but you won’t be able to order all those different little things that are country-specific. Others will respect the rules AND add some flavour, perhaps serving you a refresher. And some (a few) will follow the tailor-made road and serve you what serves you best.

The difference between groups 1 and 3 is that group 3 treats the rules as the start of the journey, not the confirmation of expertness. Rules are the technique of the dance, but not the entire dance.

Fortunately or not, like with the hairdresser, you won’t figure it out until you try.

The certificate is only an indication that the Big Mac is still on offer.

In a conversation, we can usually tell if we are being listened to. Most of us can recall those catch-ups or alumni meetings (or specific people), when we are asked how we’re doing just to open the talk for the other side and let them tell us how [awesome] they are. While we didn’t ask.

There’s little difference when you ask a client how things are going. Are you truly listening? For emotions behind their words, for their doubts and worries? Or the absence of all these?

Are you truly listening so that they are feeling they are being listened to? Or are you screening for a problem, waiting for a good moment to interrupt and offer your help? Your solution looking for a problem to solve.

In many decisions, arguments count, but the emotions count even more.

Listening is a skill, so it can be trained. As humans we are equipped with a sophisticated indication console, backed up by thousands of years of evolution. Intelligence is there, it just needs to be given attention. Like a muscle.

Start by observing, it’s the easiest first step. We all know how it feels to be the other side of the “hi how am I” conversation, and most likely, you don’t want your clients to feel that way.

I know networking is over-marketed. And I know that despite that, it is not leveraged enough. Promoting more apparently doesn’t add any practicality, - as the problem can’t be solved on the same level of complexity that created it. We’ve all heard this.

What could help then? Maybe explaining what networking is and saying openly that it goes far beyond awkwardness at a cocktail party? Maybe helping understand own value, in order to articulate it better and be more confident?

Maybe.

But what if I tell you one thing that might help you change the optics. When someone approaches you with a contact, proposal or a request for proposal, how do you feel? Normal. Happy. Content. Excited. Sometimes (really sometimes) disappointed.

So look, - there are many people waiting to be approached. If they are not interested, they’ll say so.

But what if they are?

“And someone else’s, too”.

I borrowed this quote from my absolutely favourite author and creator Seth Godin, to explore it through slightly different lenses.

It starts and ends with the coffee mugs. Replace coffee mugs with slides, tickets, tasks, and you’ll get an answer to why many of the deadlines are missed, the end result is lower than expected, why you need quality control, and why employees think the pay is unfair.

One dirty coffee mug put in an unassigned place in a shared kitchen automatically attracts the rest of the mugs, and by the end of the day you run out of clean ones, and the entire place is a total mess.

Many of us spent at least some time at student dorms, and we all know there are ways to deal with such problems.

But where did all those people go to when they entered the corporate world? Right. Washing coffee mugs is someone else’s job. And it is someone else’s job to close that ticket, to make client happy, and to arrive on time. A blame game has no point, and it’s not my point either to show you that one dirty mug lowers the standard for the whole product and your brand. My point is to claim that the opposite is good.

Because it produces a surplus.

The truth is, there’s no right or left. If you turn 180 degrees, your left becomes your right. But how often are we tempted to make that right decision?

The. Right. Decision.

The first trap is an assumption that the right decision is singular, the one and only, and the rest are “wrong”. While in reality it may be a seeming contradiction, and more than one road leads you to the same outcome. It’s a route, not the goal, that we are choosing.

The second trap is the expectation to figure out the decision is right at the time of making it. For many choices, that’s impossible.

The interview process is fairly short for you to comprehend what the company culture really is (if it exists, at all). Your hiring manager can be a master of first impression, or simply a charismatic person, or, on the contrary, s/he could join the interview right after the tough meeting or it’s just a bad day. That’s life.

Finally, you never have a full picture at the time of seeing the offer, because… your satisfaction, engagement, loyalty, fun, stress, sleepless nights and the very best days, - all of that will depend on, and result from, a sum of factors unknown to you at the moment of making a decision whether to accept, reject, or negotiate the offer.

Those are factors of context that are only partially in your control. Industry dynamics, your core and extra assignments, people in the team, key decision-makers, your manager, the manager of your manager, workload, the intertest in what you do, how your day is scheduled, and so on. You cannot foresee and diversify them beforehand – this is a market risk component that may or may not occur, and can’t be hedged. But you can manage them once they start to appear, and you can expand your control zone and comfort zone, and craft your job to some extent.

So relax and liberate this responsibility burden when you push yourself for the right decision. You can’t make a mistake as essentially there are no mistakes.

“The cloud clears when you enter it” (Beryl Markham).

Many bakeries here open at 7 am and offer fresh bread, croissants and cinnamon rolls. For me to buy one early in the morning, someone had to work at night.

When meeting is scheduled on Monday morning, it’s likely that someone is formatting and binding the slides over the weekend. Helpdesks work around the clock, and so do train and taxi drivers, pilots, surgeons and emergency crews.

What we consume as a service means a different work-life balance for someone else. Do we appreciate or take it for granted?

And when we deliver service, do we expect our client to appreciate it? That we took an effort to travel after hours (or before) for meeting or conference, that we had to organize child or pet care and that our sleep schedule is disrupted?

Some efforts are invisible to the other party, - and so are our expectations. That’s why it’s useful to start with the question “what’s in it for them”, and then to check-in with yourself on what’s in it for you.

Maps will be in demand because so many people want them. But do they need them?

How to become successful, how to cope with (!) the impostor syndrome, a key to spectacular career, 5 ways to be a greater leader, - you got it.

Ideally, the map should be made by someone who’s “been there, done that”. It makes it credible. And yet… while the satellite view may still be accurate, the street view will not.

Which means that someone else’s map might not work for you.

Because the context has changed, and because the context is capable of changing. Pandemic and chat gpt are two recent macro examples. Micro examples start with people. Talk to five marketers about what they love about marketing, and what do they do on a daily basis, - and you’ll get five different stories, where the profession is just one of the factors. Talk to two analysts from the same company serving different clients, - and you’ll hear two versions of what the company culture and their role is about. Same grade, same employer, same competency expectations. And two maps. Talk to them after they have served three more clients each, - and their maps will be pending updates.

The truth is, the only person who can make a map for you is yourself, - and you’ll have to explore. Good mentors and broad network do help, but the street view is only available during a walk, and only for a while. Tomorrow the barber shop on a corner will close, but the pharmacy has been there for ages, and will probably keep its place. But it’s not certain 😊

And yes, maps will be selling as long as we want to pay for them.

Please find the odd word among these three, - and now we’re talking.

To an extent, a skill is a choice to leverage talent.

To an extent, talent guides a choice.

To an extent, a skill can replace talent and no one will notice.

And how often in fact it is a choice, not talent, that is both a problem and a solution?

Language fluency results from a choice to attend classes and speaking clubs, reading newspapers or books, translating the songs you like and rejecting offers that don’t allow you to work in that language.

Musicality in dancing comes from working with both music and your dance.

Wellbeing comes from a choice to do certain things and refuse to do other things, scrolling relevant feeds and ignoring all others, knowing own attitudes and interpretations of events.

And when we say “I have no choice”, we are desperate, and to some extent choose to view the situation as a dead end. In work contexts though, there will be subsequent choices and crossroads beyond that dead end, it is just that sometimes we are dealing with the choices we don’t like.

Your next project. Your yoga class. Your time with kids. Choose genuinely. Choose responsibly.

Many of us who are aware of the recommendation to compare apples to apples and not apples to oranges, still compare their next employer with the previous one(s). I am no exception, although I try to catch myself each time I do so, - but it’s only possible when it’s conscious. When it’s not, you don’t care about apples. Emotions take over.

But is it helpful? Or is it ethical? Or maybe you’ve noticed that things you used to blame while being part of the system, out of a sudden become a benchmark and the right thing to do when you join a different system?

Perhaps some practices get adopted just like some accurate words are accepted in several languages. Many solutions become standard. Some organizations start looking like almost identical apples.

Almost. Unless you work for Universum or a similar company whose job is to issue best employers’ ratings, comparing does not probably add much value to decisions here and now. But it teaches us to appreciate what was good – and to keep an eye on what is good today.

In fact, one of the keys, but it backs up a brand and acts as a guarantee to promise.

There’s a reason why you choose to return to that particular restaurant, theatre, hairdresser, dentist, or consultant. More often than not, it is the consistent quality of the service (or product) being an expectation, and it is what fuels the decision to switch to competitors when it’s absent.

That’s why I think authenticity is overrated. Or underdefined.

Most likely, you want your lawyer to be professional, not authentic. And your manicure master, too.

And now let’s switch the perspective and imagine what teams may demand from leaders. Is it authenticity or maybe consistency and fairness? A promise that systems they build are resilient?

If you are not getting benefits for being consistent in your work, maybe you are consistent in a direction that no longer serves you, or you haven’t appreciated it well enough to negotiate. Or you need to add up a bit of adaptability.

While authenticity is a place to hide.

Is in the eye of the observer.

Less is more is about more, not less, - but through less. Different people want different things, and yet we all crave the same.

Empathy does not need to convert into sympathy, and responsibility is the ability to respond, where “no” is also a response. Self-assurance does not have to come with arrogance. Introspection is not always introversion. Past may well inform the future, and it may not.

Priorities may foster decisions, and relationships may hinder decisions for the sake of relationships.

You see where it’s going. It is the focus, the angle, the perspective that we choose to accept that informs and interprets what’s happening. It is the camera that is filming some episodes and stops filming episodes we’ll never see.

A seeming contradiction may not be the contradiction, if you add alternative frame of reference, and therefore:

Career plateau is the foundation for something else.

Admitting that you don’t know everything gives you more credibility than “know-it-all”.

When stress is high and we think we need more rigor, what we usually need is to release tension.

Often counterintuitive, these tweaks can help disarm destructive assumptions. Not this, not that, but both.

Once upon a time there was a thought. Maybe yours, maybe someone else’s that became yours. Maybe borrowed from a film, a book, or a success-case compendium.

“When I find my true calling, I will finally be happy and everything will get clear”.

“Look at uncle X – he loves what he does AND THEREFORE he is happy”.

With time, a thought has become an assumption, - something you believe is true.

“If it’s a doubt, it’s no doubt”.

“If it’s not exciting and effortless, that’s not for me. It should come easy, otherwise its not my true calling, my devotion, my thing”.

Well, expectations like these are unrealistically high, or just unrealistic. And let’s face it, they are far from being modest. “Sky is the limit”. Perhaps, at some times, but not all of the time, not most of the time – because the sky doesn’t care (just like the rest of the world).

Real-life careers aren’t scripted this way. In fact, they aren’t scripted anyhow, as you are the author in charge of the script. To some extent.

And doubt is a part of the journey, because as a professional, the more you know, the more you doubt. No-doubt cases are for amateurs, who assume being the experts.

The coach doesn’t really know (and doesn’t have to). The coach would approach this with counter-questions that enable you to answer this yourself, e.g.:

-What’s important for you to know?
-What will change once you know?
-What should the answer sound or look like?
-Who else might know?
-When do you know that you know?

And so on. The consultant may not know either, but usually has some ideas how to approach solving your problem:

-Ok, tell me what you did so far.
-What is that you don’t want to do?
-What is it you will regret not even trying?
-What is the real problem / issue you’re trying to solve?

What’s common in both methods?

>> Open questions do their job. It’s a skill and an art to know what to ask for.
>> All takeaways are hypotheses, not facts.
>> Decisions and actions are on you (that is, the client).

What’s the difference? The recommendations part. You need expertise-based intuition to provide this.

Can they be launched? Oh, absolutely! (Provided expertise is there). Keeping them separate is like eating clean… until Christmas comes :P

Mistakes and failures are also part of the journey, and if we don’t have them, we are most likely not traveling anywhere.

Mistakes and failures are a way to label our choices that haven’t turned into optimistic outcomes—and they are called so after the choice is made. At the point of making a choice or decision, we might not see any alternative, and there’s nothing, and no one, to blame. It can be out of our sight.

Successes are cases when positive scenario worked out. But how much of it is luck, and for how much is the quality of our decision accountable? When we succeed, we think it’s because of our “right” decisions, and when we don’t – then what? Shall we believe that the entire journey was a mistake just because the destination doesn’t look like we’ve envisioned? I don’t think so.

When we twist our thinking about failures as just outcomes, maybe we’ll be one step further to increasing our chances for “good luck”.

Define the problem. When you know it, you are halfway to success.

What makes you think about it? What is the story you are telling yourself?

In essence, no matter what you do, you’ll have to make choices, execute decisions, fail and learn and move on. Make sure you have some fun along the way and stay healthy. That’s it.

Easier said than done.

Freedom to choose and decide can be paralyzing. That’s why many of us stay in larger organizations – you have controllable freedom within the target that is set for you. Sometimes you are the one who sets the target. And yet, you are almost never alone.

Being free and independent looks lucrative, but it also might feel extremely lonely. Hugely responsible. Daunting.

That’s why the question “what shall I do next” is daunting, too. Because it’s solely on us. With all the inputs we collect, the choice is on us.

Make it work for you.

Christmas and the New year are symbolic milestones to sum up the year and celebrate achievements. I am almost done with my year-end summary, and there’s one dimension that I started to track 2-3 years ago that I want to share.

It is the question “Whom did I help”, where I literally make a list of my clients, friends and friends of friends whom I was able to support somehow. For helping professions it’s a moment of truth 😊 and self-awareness.

The flip side of it is acknowledging who’ve helped me. What I observe is that we tend to attribute too much of our success to ourselves, while in fact… part of it is our network, referrals, and who knows whom. Part of it is our talent and skill. And part of it is luck of being in the right place at the right time.

Extending the famous Tolstoy’s notion about happy and unhappy families, success is the result of multiple actions and circumstances, while we are merely one contributor among many.

Teachers, mentors, clients, bosses of all kinds, our kids and families, our peers – they all teach us something and we are led to where we are. Perhaps it is this time of the year when it’s most appropriate to send some gratitude back to the Universe.

What is it that the leader has, or represents, that inspires followers to follow? Gallup studied leadership through this perspective, too, and came up with the framework of the four needs of followers. You can learn more here.

That’s an interesting angle that may help to answer the question “where do I start”. For the followers to follow, what should the leader have, radiate and inspire? How should it feel for the follower to embrace the lead? And how can the follower propose something to the leader or share feedback?

This is borrowed from tango, of course. An active follower is a creative one, who does not take over the lead, but has a voice and uses an opportunity to propose their own interpretation of the dance, - while following the lead. And the leader, in a way, is also following, - the follower. It’s the dialogue with a constant focus on the other role.

How does this inform business environments?

Followers may refuse to dance (i.e. buy the product, continue the employment or extend their subscription) if the lead isn’t right for them (see Gallup’s four needs, again).

Leaders should be informed about what’s going on, all the time (the power of feedback).

Both parties need each other, and it’s dynamic (your target audience stays with you for some reason, and so does your competitors' audience).

[Photo credit goes to Monika Ufnal - picture borrowed from Mediterranean Summer Tango festival, https://www.summertango.com]

“There are no opportunities for development here”. How about people who built successful careers in the environment where you are now, aren’t they worth exploring?

“I expect clear guidelines from my manager”. Of course you do. And what does your manager expect from you, maybe some insight into those guidelines?

“That’s just not for me”. What led you here? With this in mind, how can you figure out what is right “for you”?

“My manager won’t let me”. Can I absolutely know it’s true?

What I am trying to say is that in these assumptions you are not part of the system. You are the system, and have willingly accepted to be so. You have already signed up for this journey – maybe because it was an opportunity window some time ago?

Proactivity starts from realizing this pattern and influencing what you can influence.

I recently came across the idea of CV of failures. It’s a list of projects, employers, opportunities, roles, scholarships, and so on, where you got rejected. And on the other side of the scale is your regular CV – a portfolio of successes, achievements, awards, titles or events you were part of. Despite the “failures”, thanks to them, or in parallel to them.

Both CVs are yours, both of them describe your path, and both of them are part of the journey; and most likely you’ve grown along the way through all the experiences you’ve had. The thing is, in each rejection there’s only some part that’s related to you (your experiences, competencies, and how well you prepared the application or performed at the interview). The other part is on a decision maker and all other factors you aren’t aware of.

And in each win, there’s only a part earned by you, maybe the major part, and a number of factors beyond your influence, including luck and the names of those turned down this time. When we stop taking ourselves too seriously, things come easier. Stop thinking that we are fully in charge of everything we touch.

Hard skills aren’t more important than soft skills, and soft skills aren’t really soft. They are interpersonal, and therefore absolutely critical because each of us works with someone else, or a group of people.

It’s just that hard skills are easier to measure – to score, to set the bar, and the margin around the bar which is still a “pass”. That’s their only advantage, - illusion of objectivity.

Time to master? Soft skills have it, too.

Proof for future success? We don’t really know.

What we know is that it’s easier to argue that higher score is better than a lower score, thus the candidate with the higher score should be passed to the next round within the funnel.

And it’s far more difficult to argue on “charisma”, “presence”, “self-confidence”, “empathy”, “stress-resistance”, “adaptability”, let alone resilience and decision-making ability. These are hard to agree on, and harder to set the bar for, and more complex to articulate if you need to turn down based on that.

So we go ahead with what we consider reliable proxies, while they only measure what can be measured, not necessarily what needs to be, or what’s more important.

picture: The Disintegration of the Persistence of Memory, 1954 by Salvador Dali, found at: https://www.dalipaintings.com

[Manager] I won’t let you sign up for that project because I don’t want to lose you.

[Top-performing employee] You can’t really lose me as you don’t own me.

That’s it. Our best performers always have options, - and they are with us temporarily and because they’ve chosen to. And because they are the best performers, they want to work with the best, be mentored by the best, and be exposed to the best among all available. I think it’s the point that many of those who craft high-po programs miss. They miss the motivation of these profiles and that they always have options, and that the opportunity cost of their time is high. Higher. The trap? Their “best” is not what you think it is, it’s a bar on a different scale, that often.. we don’t have on offer.

And yet, these are people we want to have on our teams, despite the fact that they are extremely hard to be led. Let alone “be managed”.

“What’s in it for them” that they decide to stay with us? How will it change tomorrow? When we know the answer, the fear of “losing” will vanish.

Mostly because you can’t play by the book. In forming your path, more and more you have to play than to have a plan. Sometimes I’m not even sure that a career strategy would work. Perhaps a portfolio of strategies, but the playing element will increase, together with the desire to control your professional destiny and maintain sort of a “logic” throughout the career.

It doesn’t mean that you shouldn’t deliberate, think steps ahead or be proactive. You should. It only means that even given all the best efforts made and risks evaluated, things may still develop differently.

Differently from what you’ve expected.

That’s why dream jobs, dream companies and dream careers are illusions as long as you are trying to find them and grab them. That’s why the ideal day exercise isn’t helpful.

What you can do instead is to work with own expectations, make choices, and do things that matter to you, regularly.

If making career decisions was easy, the population of career advisors wouldn’t exist. If it was easy for career advisors, maps would be anywhere, for free. For a city you want to explore there is a map, and usually someone friendly at the tourist info point, who will give you directions. And after hours there are brochures with recommendations anyway. Soon it will be AI.

And yet.

And yet people want to pay for algorithms and a sequence of steps. And yet, there are those ready to match demand with supply. And yet, life is a game or a dance, - and no dance can be mastered by a sequence of steps, and any game can’t be played as planned.

So much responsibility, and so little guidance. You can’t find a path unless you try. Unless you give a chance to a basic step of any dance. Even if it is a side step.

“There are no development opportunities here”. That’s one of my favorite client statements opening the conversations, because it’s framed so broadly that I can only guess what it actually means.

So I ask, how do you understand “development” and “opportunity”, or – what is a “development opportunity” for you. More often than not, it all boils down to advancement and money.

But even if you have developed-it-all, and opportunity is there, there’s no promise or guarantee of advancement. Advancement is a result of actions that were proactive at the time taken, that preceded it. And hard work is the portion of it. Smart work is a more important portion, and self-marketing is the third.

But when it comes to development… you choose. Make an effort, get to know new people, reach out to leaders who drive important stuff, sign up for a project, go for a conference, go for a workshop, sign up as a mentor, find yourself a mentor, support women, help juniors, speak on campus, teach on campus, code your knowledge and share with your team or adjacent teams… Endless things!

And you know… development is everywhere, but it’s us who turn it into an opportunity. Opportunities aren’t ready made and served, they are assembled by those who see and who want to be seen. This is how you take charge of your career. Otherwise things will keep “happening” to you, until some time, when you swipe left for too long, and they cease to appear.

Sometimes, when you think you need a plan, perhaps what you need is less plan.

Because what you really need is the feeling of being in charge and the idea of control over the situation.

If I have a plan, I am better prepared for the future.

And this is an assumption, because future doesn’t care about us.

If our plans used to work in the past, we learn that this is an adequate strategy, and continue with more plans: plan A, plan B, and so on.

So that we are better equipped for tomorrow.

But the critical question here is, - better, compared to what? Or to whom?

Sometimes it’s counterintuitive, that it is the plan that keeps us blind and following, when maybe it’s the time to change the route.

When you ask an ambitious, diligent, well-educated employee working for a well-known company with a strong brand, “what are you paid for?”, you might be surprised that it is surprising. Usually there is a moment of silence which is ok, - we don’t ask ourselves this question every day (imagine attrition rates if we would). What comes next is a well-polished interview-inspired answer, something like “for advising my clients”, “for solving the problems of my clients”, “for my expertise”, “for getting things done”, “for developing business”, and so on. You’ll never hear “for being on emails” or “spending all my day on meetings”.

And then the second question arrives – “what are you spending most of your time on?”. Meetings and emails, of course. And by being present there, I am absent somewhere else. For example, where decisions need to be made.

You can clearly see where I am heading. Show me your calendar and I will tell what you value. By doing, not declaring.

To make it more dramatic, all of us have only 24 hours each day. Extremely equal, extremely fair.

Based on what do you decide which commitments you say “yes” to?

Is actually the most fair part of not going into any overpromise. When you are capable of handling more, delivering, and keeping the promise, your reputation is built on the trust and credibility that you’ve earned. And to maintain and strengthen that credibility, at some point you’ll have to start saying “no” to certain projects. Exactly because your “yes” carries more weight and is reliable. And because long-term game is more sustainable.

But that’s only one side of transaction.

What if the person on the other side (client, counterpart, manager) has the expectation and the standard of “yes” being “yes” and not “yes maybe”? Your choice becomes even more considerate then, because saying yes and not delivering will disrupt their trust.

And if you are the one who hears “no” as a response? Maybe you are dealing with someone more mature and responsible who actually estimates their and your time well.

There are no all-double-bass orchestras, and no all-goal-keeper football teams, because different roles and voices are needed. There’s no harmony with just one voice speaking up.

But in business, how tempting it is to hire people just like us, - hardworking, diligent, responsible, analytical, AND creative, empathetic, collaborative, you name it. Well. Each recruiter knows that an ideal candidate doesn’t exist, and each candidate, after several interviews, is starting to guess that there’s no ideal role out there. Something is missing or something is extra.

But ideal is not the goal (or it is the goal we’ll never reach). If a strong team is the goal, you need different people on it. If a strong player is a goal, look out for (and be ready for) spikes.

Differences create two potentials: potential for conflict or for synergy. Individuals are sharp, but teams can be well-rounded. And of course there is no promise that such a team is an easy one to lead.

Part of the answer to why miscommunication is so common, maybe lies in the way of how we listen.

Are we listening to understand or listening for arguments to react and counter-arguments to make?

When you split a workshop group in two and ask one half to listen for X, and the other half to focus on Y in a given demo recording, expect to get at least two different perspectives during the debrief.

When you go for a movie with someone and discuss it afterwards, sometimes it feels like you’ve been to two different movies. Choose well who you invite for a movie next time 😉

When you end up arguing with a family member, what is it that you’ve heard? What is it that you wanted to say but feel like you weren’t truly listened to?

When you are having a conversation with a client, what is it that you are listening to?

There’s nothing bad in selling more, but listening for understanding makes your menu more tailored, and that makes you a restaurant of choice. Not necessarily hunger.

Most drivers believe they are awesome drivers, and when you are a passenger and look around, chances are high you disagree.

My empathy is more empathetic than yours. My systemic approach is more systemic than yours. My problem-solvers solve more problems, faster and better than yours. And so on.

What sets you apart among 100 other people with the same title? In the same profession? In the same industry?

It’s the journey that does. Journeys make look similar, and to external world, they produce “profiles”, that are “fit” or unfit for certain jobs. Well that’s the simplification space, where (unfortunately) many average decisions are made. But it’s not what sets you apart.

What sets you apart, is the journey that you’ve been through. The one that happened inside you, not just to you.

I remember checking out at a hotel chain where reception desk was covered with a mat saying something like “100% satisfaction guaranteed”. I thought – yes, and you gave me a room close to a laundry that was on all night, although I asked for a quiet room, and I am part of your loyalty program.

I know we want to be bold in our brand promise, but how much in common with reality does it have? How ready are we to be in charge and deliver on it? What do we need the promise for? To attract as many as possible or to achieve loyalty and trust? If the former – the promise is single-use, and if the latter – well that involves time, consistency and saying no when knowing you can’t deliver.

That’s why I am not fully getting the my Dream ex-Employer headlines, and what these are trying to promise. And to whom.

Is the expectation that it’s doable. If you “just do it”, everything else is going to be all right.

So, how about your new year resolutions this time? Everything on track?

Setting ambitious goals and deadlines for yourself is good (perhaps), until you get some piece of feedback from life that:

-It’s time to get sick

-Someone’s plans have changed

-You booked a year for something that requires 3 or 5

-Force majeure happens

Setting goals supports progress when goals are smart – in the dictionary, not the framework meaning. And smart goals are somewhere in between those that are low-hanging fruits and those that you will never reach (such as perfection). But there is the way - of trial and error (mostly error), self-calibration, and celebrating milestones.

If you are a perfectionist, then never. A perfectionist will polish things over and over again, until what happens? Until it’s perfect? Hardly, because perfect is subjective and perfect is unattainable.

Most likely, - until the deadline informs it’s time to stop. Someone else down (or up?) this chain needs your work at this stage and that quality. Very often, it’s your boss, which also means their horizon is different. And what if there is no boss? Then it’s the client. Or the competitor.

Or maybe it’s an achiever on your team who knows exactly when to stop? When the goal is reached. For a perfectionist, it might be a good idea to challenge themselves with a question, - what is the end goal?

There is no answer like “perfection”, because that’s the place to hide.

Often times organizational friction happens when agents who are ready (and eager) to make decisions and take responsibility meet with those who are supposed to make decisions and take actions, but aren’t doing so.

By “meet” I mean report to, and depend on them, directly or otherwise.

It’s not about the formal roles, it’s about personalities that fill the roles.

And usually, you can’t figure it out during the interview or appraisal, - even if you score candidates on that particular dimension. Because scoring is done by humans, just like us. And humans can take self-confidence for arrogance, humbleness -for weakness, deliberation for slowness, and focus for narrowmindedness. And vice versa.

Things like: eating disorders, addictions, infertility, parenting, burnout, relationship building, self-confidence or lack of it – these are all complex things, and therefore there is no magic pill.

Things like: coaching (listening, following, and asking), learning a new language, building a network, reinventing your career in a new country, pulling organization through change, - are complex, too. It requires understanding, will, skill, and art, and there is no plug-and-play mechanism for that, yet.

At the same time, the market is full of ready-made solutions: 5 steps for so and so, an ultimate guide for so and so, do this one thing for a month, and you’ll forget about so and so forever.

You see. The next time you can’t find a simple solution for a complex problem, don’t be harsh on yourself, or get disappointed that you don’t see fast results.

If that solution was real, would the problem still exist?

Career consultants often hear: I’ve lost interest in doing this. There’s no point in doing that. There’s no meaning in what I do, not anymore.

I hear it often, too. Often I accept it, but sometimes I challenge it.

Asking, - and how about fun?

What, fun at work? We are experts busy with serious stuff.

Yes you are. And you are also human beings being here because of, and for, other human beings, and when you close this door, the first thing you will start missing, are the people.

So when it seems like it’s the meaning, maybe it’s something else, and it might be helpful asking yourself: has joy been recently elusive for me?

It’s when you tick the box.

And what is beyond that locus of control? Everything else, which is life.

Even when you have ticked all the boxes, it doesn’t guarantee that you will secure the result you wanted, forecasted or expected. You can have it all – top university, Dean scholarship, relevant experience, some exposure abroad, several languages, and hobbies beyond cooking and travelling. And still, your dream employer may say “no”. Despite the fact that all the boxes were there, ticked.

Because their decision is not under your control, regardless of how much you want it to be, or how much work you’ve invested that far. That is usually clear, albeit painful.

What is not clear, is the conclusion many of us make: “I am doing something wrong”. It seems logical, but it’s not. You might be doing everything right, and you are all-right. It’s just a different so-what. Even when you own 100% of effort, you never own 100% of the outcome. This is exactly where the locus border is.

A loud message sends a strong signal. “I can buy myself flooooweeeers”. I can afford this car, and that tailor-made suit, and that bag, and that pair of shoes. And brands will tell it and communicate what my preferences are.

But what is actually behind that message? Need for safety, status, and respect.

Propaganda is a loud message, too. The signal is so strong that you don’t want to read between the lines. Underneath the lines, to be more exact.

A “winning” CV is usually full of brands, too. It says where we traded our time for salary. But can you look underneath? A good headhunter can – they will read it for what exactly we were trading our time and what we have built.

Don’t get misled by big names. Look for messages that are hidden.

What are the indicators of a work well done?

It’s relevant, it’s complete (at least to a major extent), it (usually) brings some value (to whom, btw?), and often, it looks good.

Any other characteristics coming to mind? Maybe sleepless nights, amount of hours packed into it, tough calls, the size of a team, having superstars on a team, nineteen versions of (largely) the same document?

If not, - then why do we measure success by the hard work and fatigue? As if the value assigned to the result was the derivative of our sacrifice?

Does every training have to make you tired? Even more tired than you were at the time of entering the class?

If yes, just close your eyes in a tree posture next time. Improve the balance, not the lurch.

Promotions happen or not, deals get closed or not, offers get signed (or not), hypotheses are confirmed, or not.

One of the two (or more) scenarios gets real, but any outcome has its influence or a ripple effect.

If you were working hard for the past X months, and were not promoted – that’s the outcome. If you are – that’s the outcome, too. Both of them would influence career decisions going forward, including decisions (or choices?) whether to stay or to leave.

It’s not only things that happen to us that result in career decisions. It is also about things that happen inside us, that do.

Not everything that happens on stage and in the theatre, is art. Not everything that is exhibited in a museum is art. Not everything that is danced to tango music is tango. We have seen churches that are now used as modern offices and milongas held inside the functioning church. And we have read books so skillfully translated into our native language, so that we don’t notice we are not reading an original.

Where am I going with this? Not every work that you do (or will do) will have meaning or impact or visibility. Cleaning is also a work – that gets noticed when things get messy. Some roles are just support roles, and although valuable, will never be treated as essential, - as they are crucial to support, not to core business.

What you can do though is to list a number of duties and tasks that you have, perform a 80-20 exercise (what is the core and what’s secondary for you) and then confront it with the 80-20 seen by the eyes of your key stakeholders (bosses or clients). What is primary for them? What is secondary? What is a nice-to-have? And what is invisible? Invisible would mean that you hardly get credit or recognition for it.

Based on what you see, you can make decisions and take choices going forward.

Icebreakers are supposed to be light, funny, and help establish some initial connection.

“if you were a superhero, then which one?”

“if you were a drink, which one?”

“if you were to choose studies again, what would it be?”

“how would you explain your job to a 4 y.o. kid?”

But how often are they stumbling? At my workshops, I use examples like “if your current career stage is a title of a book or a movie, then how does it sound?”. With this, you’re usually able to get the temperature in the room without asking directly. The power of a metaphor.

And what is the hidden power of an icebreaker? Why could they be stumbling? Because the choice is huge. “What kind of drink are you?” Well, how do I choose between tonic espresso, earl grey, coca-cola, lemonade, a glass of mineral water with mint, ginger beer or a bloody Mary?

Feels exactly like being at the career crossroad. It is a question of how do I want to show up in this world. As an expert, who is learning and teaching and applying his knowledge; as a researcher who is looking for truth in experiments; as a visionary who wants to build something disruptive and revolutionary; as a manager who’s at his best when achieving with the team; as a craftsman, a mentor, a priest, a policeman?

With drinks you’re probably seeking for an effect you want to get.

With self-discovery, maybe what you’re seeking for, is the effect you want to create.

“When it’s a doubt, it’s no doubt”. I heard this for the first time from a bright and talented person, maybe with Maximizer in top-5, and this motto stayed with me for a long, long time. How many times it saved me effort and money… a thousand times. And how often has it failed me. At least as much.

Doubt is part of a choice, and when it’s not, – self-assurance (or intuition?) have decided for us.

A classical career dilemma: should I stay or should I look elsewhere?

A rational approach is: what happens if I stay, what happens if I leave, what doesn’t happen if I stay, what doesn’t, if I leave.

But. A lot of these are hypotheses and assumptions. And some of these are doubts. And, most importantly, none of them are apple to apple.

So what do I do? Accept that doubts are part of the journey – and not indicators of your mistakes, or your forecast accuracy. No one can foresee the future, and zero doubt does not guarantee your choice is right (or wrong).

Yes, storytelling is a powerful tool. When you are the one who tells the story.

When we listen to a story, and it’s so seamless, like a tailor-made suit, where nothing draws unwanted attention, it’s so easy to buy it. Exactly because it’s a powerful tool.

The question is, powerful for whom.

I help my clients build plausible stories around career gaps in their CV, their professional journey, motivation to join one team and reasons behind leaving previous teams. I don’t encourage them to lie to the future employer, but to skillfully frame the truth so that it achieves the goal.

And I ask them to listen carefully to the story being sold, - why the role is needed and why it is important (or not?), and why the hiring need is urgent.

Be the storyteller when it’s you who’s telling the story.

Be the critical thinker when you listen to the story being sold.

It’s a game.

I am not a big fan of discussions around professions of the future, - because I think they cannot be foreseen with a today’s mindset. For efforts like this, a tomorrow mindset is needed, which I don’t have.

It was one of the reasons why I was never good at, and never actually enjoyed, working with teenagers on choosing their studies. Human beings usually want to safeguard the future, and parents want to choose well for their kids.

Choose-well-for-kids. As if kids have nothing to say. And often, they don’t. They aren’t clients for professional orientation services, - parents are.

But okay, some signals are quite clear already, and I will share my top-3 superpowers of tomorrow, and only time will do the reality check.

• Attention span. More, much more content will be there for consumption, and the day will still have 24 hours. Opportunity cost for paying attention here or there will grow.

• Critical thinking. With deepfakes, and cameras elsewhere, how shall we decide if we can trust “our own eyes”.

• Physical health. Not only because of posture problems – look around today as you walk – but also because of brain health, cognitive implications, and ability to handle stress well.

Professions will come and go, so maybe the better source of predictions aren’t agencies selling educational services, but science fiction books.

What makes people stay with the employer and what makes them leave? Very often, it’s the same answer, - people. What gives you energy at work? People. What drains your energy at work? Also people. Sometimes, the same people 😉

Money and tasks are also part of the equation, but look what happens when we compare offer A with offer B, or the current employer with a new place. We compare money and tasks, and sometimes status (title). And we leave people factor behind, because it’s less predictable.

And look what non-compete clauses are trying to secure. Information, yes, but also that you take people with you somewhere else, - be it colleagues or clients.

And look how people drift in the labour market. Some will apply for open roles, but some are following people they know. Even when tasks or money or brand isn’t your first choice, you choose the boss or the team to be with.

Some obvious things are obvious enough, and yet it doesn’t mean we do something about them. People are important, and sugar is bad for your health, - nothing new.

So what?

So next time you are making a career decision, ask yourself:

Who are you running with? Who are you running for?

I am starting to suspect that meritocracy alone cannot deliver on every expectation we have of it.

“if I constantly deliver on quality and quantity, my work will speak for itself”.

“I need to collect certificates and proof of evidence that I have a right to have a say in something”.

“I am fully engaged 100% of time for the past X years [hmm, how real is that?], so someone should notice”.

Someone is usually a manager or the company. Shall notice, - and then what?

“I am delivering better work than others, and still I am not getting promoted”. And I either don’t get it or don’t accept it and keep fighting.

“No one has ever spoken to me about advancement”. As if it’s someone else’s career.

Look what’s happening here. There is an unspoken (and maybe even unrealized) expectation that meritocracy will do its work. On it’s own. Otherwise it’s unfair.

But where exactly have we inherited these assumptions? Because these are assumptions, not truths.

Assumptions that “great job” will be rewarded. That the reward should be “fair”. That expertise (or delivery) is what backs it up.

Sometimes the rules of the game are different from what we want them to be.

…things might go differently, and they will.

Some of us might get that impostor syndrome is the trigger, not the root cause, of never-ending learning. And it won't shut up, however many certificates you show him.

Some of us will get that until expertise sits in our head, it’s not much of a use, as others can't access it. Your brilliant insights are just as brilliant as how many more insights ripple in heads of other people.

And some of us will finally get, that visibility is not something fabricated or artificial, but a condition of existence. If you are not on a map, Google won’t find you. If your company doesn't know what you are good at, then how will they pull you into the next exciting project?

Marketing is about being present in the market, and that means participating in exchange. Not merely observing.

“I have no choice”. What it means in fact, is, “the choice is obvious, straightforward, and taken”.

My mom recently said that I had no choice but to learn Polish (as well as Swedish and English) before moving to the country. But I know many people who don’t even start with the local language until the absolute necessity pushes them. These are two 180-degree choices, but these are choices, not dead ends.

“I don’t get this”. What it often means, is, “I don’t like it”. “I don’t get that others are promoted, and I don’t”. “I don’t get it that do I my job faster thus I get more job to do than a low performer”. I mean, we comprehend, why and how, but we aren’t happy with the outcome.

When you listen to what is said, and what is not said, you start noticing that common sense isn’t that common, and that some obvious things are invisible and thus unnoticed. Like the crossroads of choice.

This is one of my favourite coaching questions.

First, it anchors all those who complain and cling to goals outside of their locus of control. “I don’t know what is expected”, “I don’t know how to be useful”, “I want to build a skill but I don’t know what is future-proof”, “as soon as I know what is the right direction (one and only😊), I will follow that path”. Oh yes – if only life was that easy, and we could select one career per life.

So this is the question that cools down thoughts like these and channels the conversation into productive mode.

And second, it also works for those who do a lot and tend to underestimate themselves and the own work. If they are not on 10 out of 10 on their imaginary scale, they have done “nothing!”. Here, on the opposite spectrum edge, we need this question to notice and recognize steps and efforts already made. Exactly to highlight that you are not starting from zero, - but perhaps you are already mid-way.

Two-in-one showing the counterintuitive: do more steps instead of complaining, do less steps instead of self-blame.

For all those managing people, and all those who coach, feel free to experiment with this question. I am sure you will discover more that I have (so far😊).

Is actually an oxymoron. Paradoxically, when you address all of them, none of them is prioritized.

Priority is something in a singular form.

But in practice, I guess, everything is important and everything is urgent. And yet, not everything gets done. Or, at least, not with 100% quality. You now see where perfectionism and sky-is-the-limit lead – to absolute terms which aren’t helpful.

They aren’t helpful exactly for the same reason why back to back meetings aren’t feasible. At some point, you WILL BE late. One minute or 15 – depends whether you just need to refill a glass of water or you kid called. At some point, you will NEED to eat or pick up the phone or answer on chat.

So allow for reality margin , - things WILL go differently from what’s planned, whether we like it or not.

Ambitious timelines are ambitious because there’s less time booked than it should usually take, to accomplish the project or task.

But where do they come from?

From the assumption of fast results being desirable, and doable.

- How much time do you allow yourself to get this promotion?

- Lets say, a year.

- And what if it doesn’t happen within a year?

When we realize that the ambitious is the only scenario we’re content with, then what happens when it doesn’t materialize? When you’re not losing weight as fast as you’d like? When you don’t get comfortable with the language in 3 months? When you aren’t ready for the split in half a year? When the leadership changes, or the strategy is new?

Several years ago, at my beloved coaching school, we were working (or playing?) with reframing assumptions. My entry assumption was something like “standing still is no progress”. What we’ve come up with, was “everything in life happens in its own time”.

Just because you don’t like the tempo, doesn’t mean that the tempo isn’t right for you.

The slow dance is beautiful, too.

When we speak of high performers in corporate lingo, we often say that they are “ahead of the curve”, usually meaning that they learn faster and can handle more.

So, they are often promoted faster. And what comes with a promotion, is the rising bar. Up to the 31st of the previous month A was expected from you, and as of the 1st next month, it’s 2*A, or 3*A, or ABC, or something else, but it’s anyway more than it used to be. Hence, the ‘readiness’ to take it on. But who decides whether one is ready for the next role or not yet? Usually someone(s) who’ve walked this path before.

The thing is, readiness is not only about the potential, it is also often about the pipeline. Which means that those in the pipeline are educated to wait to be chosen. Thus those who don’t want to wait, have two choices: influence the decision makers, or exit the game to build something else somewhere else. Or accept the pace, but they often refuse to see this as a choice. Because what’s coming next seems so much more satisfying than now. Until the next “next”.

Recently I came across this one assumption that looks so logical, but can actually hold us back. It may sound like:

“If this is my true calling, it should feel right / good”.

“If this is the right path, I will know it straightaway”.

“If I have doubts, it’s probably not it (yet)”.

When you look closer, you can read the underlying assumptions, which are:

“There’s just one path among many waiting for you, keep searching”.

“The choice should be clear”.

“The choice is known at the moment”.

(the riskiest one): “I will judge it based on how I feel, and when I don’t feel great / excited / certain, - I should reject it”.

Sounds like the promise of love at first sight. And sometimes it works out. But sometime is not most of the time.

And most of the time? We don’t know what we don’t know, but we assume (or believe) we’ll get the signal right.

The good news is, there are usually more than one path available, and we aren’t choosing “for life”. And another good news is that we can start crafting instead of searching, and this process can transform us and lead to places we’ve never imagined before.

I have had various experiences with the Future Me exercise, both personally and with clients. Sometimes it’s the visualization that makes the flow hard – many of the cognitive talents are quick to judge, and “critical thinking” gets critical as the vision starts to emerge.

Sometimes it’s the gap “but that’s the bright future. How do I build a (yellow brick) road from where I am now?”

Sometimes, it’s resistance and alertness to estimate feasibility when it’s not yet needed.

And those experiences have led me to think that perhaps the career question “where do I go next” is a lens to a real question – what kind of life do I want to live?

And yes it can be a result, but even more so, life is a process.

John Adams, the 2^nd US President, in his letter to Abigail Adams, his wife, writes:

“I must study politics and war, that our sons may have liberty to study mathematics and philosophy. Our sons ought to study mathematics and philosophy, geography, natural history and naval architecture, navigation, commerce and agriculture in order to give their children a right to study painting, poetry, music, architecture, statuary, tapestry and porcelain”.

It’s the year 1780. Still relevant today.

That’s why I don’t fully agree with the “follow your passion” career advice. Sometimes there’s no place for our passion, or no space to make it a profession and earn. Simply because of the economic cycle or geography of birth.

In this context, I don’t think Gen Z are unique, - rather, they can afford to “study tapestry and porcelain” because preceding generations worked hard to make it happen. It’s a cycle, yet human life is too short to observe or absorb cycles like these.

So when you don’t know where to start, or don’t have access to inner answers, look around and ask – what time is it now? What kind of time?

As times get chaotic, and we live longer, thus being able to build three different careers within one lifetime, both uncertainty and abundance of choice urge us to hunt for instructions and cling to them.

That’s understandable and that’s OK.

Yet there is a nuance we might tend to neglect.

The playbook is for playing, not simply following the steps.

Some people ask me, where do I find inspiration for the blog posts? And I wonder, where do people who produce daily posts look for inspiration? It’s easy to take for granted what we’ve already achieved (such as a new habit, for example), and look for more. Or for better.

To the question, - I guess inspiration is all around us and it has always been there, waiting to be noticed. In daily conversations with people, in random phrases strangers say when walking in the park, in observing kids, in books and movies and all forms of art. I think what is needed for the magic to happen, is the trained ear or eye, some sort of a radar that will recognize extra in the ordinary, which is the extra-ordinary 😊

Curiosity is a useful habit, as it can help us replace fear and judgement, and it is among the small number of things that lies within our locus of control.

Perhaps someone needs this question that may sound uncomfortable when we first face it, but can actually bring clarity and relief.

During my Job crafting workshop, I propose the following exercise:

1) List what’s currently on your plate – tasks, responsibilities, to-do things

2) Try the 80-20 approach: from this list, what actually creates value, and what is “noise”, or just maintenance. If 80-20 is challenging, at least try to prioritize, what is important for you.

3) List your key stakeholders

4) Try to assess, what’s important for them.

And at this point, we are ready to ask ourselves, - what am I paid for?

Sometimes it’s not the massive effort, or long hours. Most of the times, it’s the output. Sometimes, it’s changing the outcome of the meeting. Rarely, it’s attending the meeting. And sometimes, it’s the good-enough version, not the perfect one (because perfect is subjective and judgmental).

Then we can look at our calendar to see where time actually flows, and assess our capacity better.

So this question can save us hours of effort and ease anxiety. And it can laser-focus when to say yes to the next initiative.

And for those who want more, I also have a bonus question: what do I want to be paid for?

How many talented people refused to try out an attractive opportunity because of this assumption.

How many exhausted ones stayed with the same employer for a year, or two, or five, and didn’t choose change, because “changing jobs often doesn’t look good on the CV”.

How many bright candidates were turned down at the CV screening stage because the journey wasn’t straightforward?

I am starting to wonder, are we building careers for ourselves, or for someone undefined else? For someone else’s future judgement?

Many years ago, when I was a fresh grad with a MSc degree looking for a decent entry-level job, I faced numerous CV turndowns and went through many screening calls. At some point, heading for another interview at a recruitment agency (oh, irony), I thought – this is my life, these are my choices, and I am ready to justify them no matter what the hiring representative thinks. I didn’t get that job (of course!), but it was fun to listen to stories why that particular role was so fundamentally important 😊. And I learned how to tell stories, too.

Some things don’t need to look good or “make sense”.

Some careers are uncertain cases with great turnaround stories.

And some profiles are simply non-conventional, and require curiosity, not bureaucracy, in dealing with them.

I’ve just finished wrapping up this year’s summary, - an exercise I’ve been doing in December for several years now. And I got curious to see what I wrote in e.g. 2022 or 2023. And I read: “I want to be in a holistic role that gives me an overview and ability to pin different pieces together into a bigger picture”.

Hmmm.

What I’d say today to my younger self would be something like… You can approach nearly any role holistically, even when your JD is fragmented. That is, cooperate with the beginning and end of the process (thus broaden exposure), identify key stakeholders (and what’s important for them), modify tasks that you can modify, so that they serve you, not distract you; find someone who is doing a similar job in a different [part of] organization, or someone who has a seemingly different role but helps the same clients, and so on, and so on. Endless list of “advice”.

What I am trying to show is that our assumptions about ourselves at work change with time, as we change. Maybe you wanted to be an astronaut when you were a kid. What part of it is relevant now? Well, some parts might still be relevant; it’s a matter of digging. Or maybe you believed in just one or two dream employers? How about now? Does the world look bigger or smaller with the knowledge that you have?

And when we choose not to change, okay. (With one caveat: life can choose otherwise).

This year, I managed to read more books and less social media (and even delete 2 Meta products from my mobile). I like my progress, and, as this year is coming to an end, I’d share some of my picks when it comes to career-related literature.

1. Playing Big by Tara Mohr. This is my winner of the year – having read it, I started recommending it to every talented lady I meet – and I meet many of them, on a daily basis. For all those who feel that they are being held back in their careers, looking for ways to replace the inner critic voice for something supportive, and using sophisticated (and seemingly rational) hiding strategies – this is a very good book. I also felt cuddled by Tara’s tone and writing style, and it resonated with me on many levels – rational, emotional, and spiritual.

2. What’s Next? by Elena Rezanova. This is Lena’s first book in English, and I am happy that I can spread the word about this author to a wider audience. Lena is one of a few career strategists who has developed independent thinking and a distinct voice in her work with clients on career-related topics. For me, Lena has always been a beacon and a benchmark of how to approach client needs.

3. Linchpin by Seth Godin. I am a huge fan of Seth and his work. Linchpin is an eternal classic, and when you go through it and internalize its ideas, you don’t need any further advice on job crafting, positioning, or self-search.

4. Ustavshie by Alena Vladimirskaya. This is my latest read – for now, only for a Russian-reading audience, but if you can access it, it’s worth it. I guess the title can be translated as The Exhausted. Alena writes about burnout very practically yet also very personally, using the language that is light on a topic that is heavy. I literally swallowed the book in 2 or 3 days, which is unusual for me.

And finally, if you, like me, want to read more books but don’t know where to start, take a look at the McKinsey reading lists – even if it doesn’t inspire you for a particular item, it might inspire you on a topic or author out there. Enjoy your time away from the screens 😊

…are the projects we are particularly excited about. They are usually big, important, pivotal, - in our heads. And we want them so much. Too much.

And they are risky, where the risk is that we burn out in the end. Why?

Because over-excitement raises expectations and paints pictures in our mind, we look forward to and visualize success and want to do our best. We take this dopamine loan that we’ll need to repay.

Extra importance creates extra effort, and we provide that effort, loading long hours and lot’s of energy. We get tired, but prefer to hide it.

And when the deadline comes, we expect the reward, or at least that our vision comes true.

If that happens, we get the signal – “that is the way, repeat”.

And when it doesn’t… the dissonance is there. When the project is long enough, and a reward isn’t there, there are no funds to repay the loan.

So what?

This scenario starts with the over-excitement, which is usually socially approved, and welcomed. The key is to get better at noticing changes in yourself. Pay attention to your reactions, and what your body says – don’t wait until it needs to shout. It’s better to deal with the core of the issue instead of consequences, and to begin early.

Today’s assumption: if I don’t have a clear plan, I don’t have a plan (and what it usually means, I am not moving from where I am now, stuck).

This is an example of how perfectionism can kill action. Unless the plan is clear, I am not moving forward. But how plausible is this assumption? When you want to change jobs or make a career transition, how possible is that you know the entire route in detail? It’s like starting the hike knowing exactly what the path is like.

Sometimes we walk or drive in the fog, and we only see this far.

Think of a longer project you’ve done. How much did you know about it in the beginning? What went as planned? How much wiser are you now? And what experiences would you have deprived yourself of, had you resigned to start?

I know not having a clear plan might be a roadblock, and after all, uncertainty is not a pleasant state to be in. But before judging yourself, maybe it’s worth challenging the assumption.

The fog clears as you move.

Often, when I ask clients what do they want to achieve as a result of a consultation or career coaching process, I hear something like “to have a clear understanding what my goal is and a step-by-step plan of how to reach it”.

That is an understandable, reasonable, I would say even proactive – and also very, very high expectation of yourself. Not me as a coach – the path is yours, and if we, together, don’t find all the checkpoints, you might feel disappointment and want to look somewhere else.

Why is it hard to reach an outcome like this? Because of a universal thing, which is change. And change that we cannot predict or foresee or plan for. You will change, the world will change, and the concept of having a profession is changing all the time, - only that now it’s happening faster so is noticeable within a single lifetime career.

Expecting clarity when there is complexity may lead to never-ending search and disappointment when you can’t find it.

This desire tells us about our expectations and scenarios that might be unhappy. Sometimes, we only understand where the bar was when we don’t reach it.

The world is outside of our control; but our expectations are.

The fact that something is measurable, does not necessarily imply that it is important.

The fact that something is important, hardly gets supported by being unmeasurable.

That is what makes soft skills tricky. More and more often leaders tend to agree they are very important, but how do we measure them? And without measuring, how do we assess or reward them?

In big companies, there might be buckets like “client hands”, “thoughtful advisory”, “collaborative team mate”, “good listener”, and so on.

And what is the scale from good to great?

Let’s say, if my Maximizer is high, someone’s “great” is the starting point for me, and my average is good enough for someone else’s context and needs. This is like going to a student theater and then watching a piece from the British National theatre. This is like your local ballet show and the Bolshoy ballet.

I don’t have an answer on how to tell the difference between the “good” and “outstanding” listener, and it’s not the point.

Like with art, it is our previous experiences that lead us to see what we see (try to discuss a book or a movie with someone who disagrees). We rely on tests because they give us scores and the passing threshold. But when people come into play, too many filters interfere all at once.

Maybe we should focus on what is enough, instead of applying scales to attributes that are relative by nature.

…sometimes defines the success of the “what”.

In so-called difficult conversations (performance, feedback, conflicts) how we say things is often as important as what we say. Putting too much into the “what” relies on an assumption that human beings are logical.

Sometimes we are, but even more so, we’re emotional, and we feel.

When we recall difficult conversations we had in the past, often we remember words. And very often we still remember how we felt – delivering, or receiving the message.

For those of us who have Empathy talent high, we intuitively know what to do. And for those who don’t, what influences the “how”?

- When we’re in a hurry, and it’s 10-minute call instead of 45-min meeting (“I have to go!”);

- When the (eye) contact is interrupted: your camera is off, you’re busy with something else like responding to chat messages, or you’re driving at the same time;

- When the tone of voice speaks for itself;

- When we’re afraid of silence;

- When only one voice is heard – too much of me, not enough of you (or vice versa);

- When we fall into a parent (patronizing/criticizing) or child (pleasing / needing) role;

- When we diminish the other’s experiences by “been there” attitude;

- When our beliefs fight for the status quo.

This list is not exhaustive, and examples are taken from real life.

When we analyze the outcome (how did it go?), maybe sometimes it’s not the talking points we should look into; maybe it’s discounting emotions we’ve allowed for.

When we consider a career change, what we usually want to achieve is the change for the better. And that’s tricky! Because “better” accounts for a number of things.

Just like your reward is not only cash, but also benefits, insurance, brand, community, - the same way “better” is compared to something. To what?

That’s the price of the change: we’ll lose something here to gain something else there. Better money for bigger scope. More flexibility but a longer commute on the office days. More prestige, but rules of the game change during the game. And so on.

It is usually part of the package. Change package, where everything is personal and subjective.

I haven’t seen cases where it was possible to leave all the annoying things behind and exchange them for positive stuff only. Sounds obvious, and still – when we think of grass that’s greener elsewhere… do we know for how long is it covered by snow? Or how much time we’d have to actually enjoy it?

I guess now I sense why I felt uncomfortable with the coaching question “and what do you want to have / see happening instead?”. I just don’t know how to use it productively, dealing with the future that no one can tell.

I had this thought recently, that perhaps getting better at writing prompts help us better frame what we think, have to say, need, or want to achieve. That’s my hope 😊

People working with other people know (knew?) intuitively that an accurate question is 50% success of the answer. Especially when you listen – in coaching, psychology, mediation, interviewing, or client work.

How you ask and what you ask matters, - but you only know it once you get the answer. This is what feedback actually is – information about how the other party heard you. And you can use this information to learn more about the other party and their preferences.

Just like with chats, - we tailor prompting to achieve some result in response, and we learn.

That’s why “feedback is a gift” – it gives us insight into others’ expectations, and what works for them.

Recently, I’ve started paying attention to how much effort we pack into working with the future. My motive was to better understand the Futuristic talent, which I personally have quite low (it’s nr 22 for me).

Basically, the entire idea of graduate career counselling is about the future: which studies do I enroll in so that I’m safe to have a profession that is – choose appropriate – well-paid, prestigious, challenging, allows me to travel, etc.

The future-me exercise is clearly about some version of myself in some time from now.

The entire discourse about skills for tomorrow, especially given the AI wave that nearly everyone has something to say about (just like with vaccination some years ago).

The personal finance area and choice of assets and portfolio weights.

And yet, no one knows what’s coming on the right side of the graph (i.e., tomorrow). No one knows what the future-proof skills are because we don’t know what future brings. We can anticipate, but it will still be a forecast, more or less accurate.

I guess we as humans want to prepare and secure ourselves, which insurance companies are well-aware of. And I guess I have two thoughts on that.

One: how feasible is the assumption that we can actually fully prepare for what’s coming? How much effort is packed into an attempt to diversify what cannot be diversified?

Two: there is a creative notion to this, too: our imagination. What we can imagine being possible is the place where the power of a dream starts.

I came across one post here on LinkedIn, that caught my attention and rippled my thinking. It went more or less like this (I am simplifying): “I have seen pattern X happening in establishments X throughout my X years of hands-on experience. And I can say that it is not factor X that defines success but the factor Y. (Why is that). Now I am selling a product to help you become better at Y”.

What caught my attention was the statement “factor Y defines the success of” let’s say, a company. So I started thinking: what makes us believe in solution A and not solution B?

One idea is that our previous experiences do, - but if so, which experiences do we trust?

Second guess – the topic we are currently working on impacts our focus, and we see it everywhere, even when it’s not there.

Third guess: “I’ve seen it working, so it’s probably it”. But in this case, what happens to the contexts, and how much does the current context define?

And the fourth is – professional lens that shape our worldview. Mine is offering questions, not answers, so that everyone derives their own “so what”.

For me as a career consultant, screening for what people do professionally has become a habit and almost an autopilot (with all the biases that come with it, of course). I look for professional journey unconsciously, almost everywhere I go. Part of the reason why I do what I do is that I’ve always been interested in why and how people make decisions (choices?) about their jobs. Just like renovation guys assess the quality of the walls in a coffee shop, and medical students find all the diseases they study, I guess – that’s my lens. And since that’s my lens, I have no idea whether others look for it or see what I see.

Another evening, my husband and I were dining at a restaurant celebrating a couple of family occasions. Next to us sat a couple, obviously on a date. They were there before us and stayed after we left. Sometimes you hear what people say even when you don’t listen. For quite some time, their dialogue was around what and why they do for life.

I thought – ok, it is often a good topic to start with – already personal but not too much. But what do people do based on that info they get? How does it influence (if at all?) the decision about the relationship? How far can one go if the other’s profession is beyond a given social circle?

Maximizer (one of the CliftonStrengths themes) is nr 5 for me, which is quite high, and I have its bias.

That is, when I see an early-career profile with a degree from top university, or a degree in a demanding field, with fluency in 2-3 foreign languages, it is hard for me to accept that this potential can spend their time in roles that are less ambitious than the person who is positioned to perform them.

And when I see a profile with excellent credentials simply doing their job and waiting to be picked, instead of taking initiative and asking for a piece of project to lead, it is hard for me to consent.

And when I hear development advice that is focused on gaps instead of leveraging strengths, I know it is a different kind of advice.

Not everyone is ready for, and happy with, the development imperative and continuous improvement. Not everyone wants what we want or knows what we know. For someone, wasted effort is a bigger loss than wasted potential.

…the old saying goes. And yet, when the child becomes successful, we see the child, and not the village behind. “No one is independently successful”, as Curt Liesveld put it in one of the Gallup podcasts. Other people, and luck (or its absence) have contributed to the end “result”.

That’s why sometimes mentorship doesn’t work: it offers customs from a different village. A different path walked by a different person in different time – led to what can now be followed (or not).

That’s why role models can be helpful – for some of us and during some times. E.g. for people with high Competition talent role models are almost necessary, because they serve as a benchmark. But for someone else it is counterproductive to observe others’ successes and look for motivation in comparison. Especially when you compare yourself to a child, - ignoring the village.

Many organizations claim and post in job descriptions, that they encourage (or even expect) thinking out of the box from their employees.

And then they require (and expect) good functioning under pressure, navigation in ambiguous environment, proactivity without clear guidelines, and all that. I can hear and understand that need, - especially when it comes to senior roles.

But there is the other side of the coin. To be able to think outside the box, the brain needs conditions, - and continuous stress, lack of psychological safety, or noisy open space aren’t always the conditions that help.

My second concern is that often thinking out of the box involves challenging the status-quo and questioning the ways things “have always been done here” – for which I guess not every set-up is ready at the point of framing what they wish for.

Declaring and doing are two different things.

Are the tools we use less of, - and they are subjectively useless, of course. My favourite are “the ideal day” and “recall what you enjoyed doing as a kid”. The ideal day is unlikely to happen often, and when it does – maybe we aren’t going to work at all. Childish memories are likely blurred, and apart from it, even most enjoyable tasks can be spoiled by the way you approach them, by their amount, or other factors such as lack of sleep.

The “wheel of life?” I can’t see where it’s heading, and if it does, I am not fond of a normative tool. “Smart” goals? Quite rigid and lacking flexibility for today’s realities. And, for perfectionists, may potentially hold them back if a single letter is a question mark. Weighting options and counting percentage for choice A vs. choice B, - but based on what judgement?

Some questions are more useful than answers. My reason for using less of those tools is that I can see them erasing magic.