Your title ≠ Your job ≠ Your work ≠ What you do ≠ Who you are
Kegan’s slippery career slope
1. I am my title
2. I am my job, I have a title
3. I am my work, I have a job with a title
4. I am what I do, I have work to do in a job with a title
5. I am, I have doings
-
Show this thread
-
Boyd’s “be somebody or do something” is a 4-5 leap. You can’t do something effectively until you stop being your doings. It’s a form of outcome attachment. Especially when the outcome is your own survival (do or die). To really have a doing you have to let go outcome attachment.
2 replies 3 retweets 28 likesShow this thread -
In general I find the Kegan model to be of limited use due to the linearity of progression (I like the greater expressivity of branching divergence) but it’s a good model for careers because they’re also a linear-progress context. Ladders work on pyramids.
3 replies 1 retweet 12 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @vgr
hmm weirdly I find focusing on the outcome allows me to avoid being attached to titles. Like - if I want to learn about a new industry, make a decent salary, want different work practices, its ok that I'm not Group PM or Head of Product. Its fine to be PM at a space company eg.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Focusing on outcomes is not the same as being attached to them. I’m basically alluding to nishkam karma without citing it (since it confuses people unfamiliar with the Gita)
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.