The (Creative) Class Issues of "Career Evolution"

I've been thinking back to a job I used to have with a company that was very keen on "evolving" their employees to new and different positions over time. If you didn't move from position to position within the organization (taking on more responsibilities or adding to your skillset), you got yourself moved (through re-orgs or the addition of offshore staff who you trained to do your job). There was a huge HR initiative around helping people who'd been with the company longer than five years to find out what their career options were, in the face of increasing offshoring.

We were presented wtih a number of different paths:

1. Become a subject matter expert and serve as a mentor to others in the organization who could benefit from your experience.

2. Be more of a "team lead" and take on more project direction responsibilities.

3. Move into management and put your technical experience to good use.

4. Leave.

Now, while options 1-3 might seem like they're viable options for someone who's a technical producer and wants to move to the next level in their career, there's a certain conundrum with this. Namely, if you're an Author or Builder in the Cyclopraxis model and/or you're a bona fide member of the Creative Class, and you derive much of your sense of purpose, direction and self-respect out of making things and having something tangible to show for your effort, then the prospect of managing others or leading others or directing others to do things that you'd much rather be doing yourself, will not necessarily appeal to you.

Indeed, while becoming a team lead or taking on more managerial responsibilities might be the ticket for career advancement within the Movin' On Up paradigm, it's a recipe for disaster for those who thrive on the actual creation of things themselves. Those of us who really, really, really NEED to make things, and make them WELL, are just going to be thwarted and infuriated by people coming on-board who are dependent on us to give them guidance and leadership.

I'm not talking about ALL developer types. I'm talking about those Creative Classlings who are Authors and/or Builders by nature. We're probably a pretty small subset of the overall population, but remember, we're the ones who build what you need to sell. And if you can't keep your Authors and Builders happy, how will you manage to stay ahead of the pack in terms of innovation?

I really think a lot of careful consideration needs to be given to these concepts by HR. Not just because it's incredibly annoying to be a Creative Class Author/Builder (CCAB for short), and have HR constantly implying that the high quality work I've been cranking out for years, just isn't what they're looking for... but because that annoyance can translate to attrition. And it happens among the very people that the business Cannot Afford to Lose, if It's Going To Keep Its Edge.

Effective Career Choices

Following a layoff by a large business unit in the extending lifecycle stage, hundreds of professionals were forced to seek new employment. Most of the displaced workers naturally gravitated toward similar large organizations in the extending lifecycle stage. Several quarters later they were once again targets of downsizing. The late lifecycle businesses in this industry were undergoing some significant structural changes. The CycloPraxis Group was called to make a presentation on why the employment picture was so glum in the late lifecycle stage industry and on what differences an employee might expect from employment at other lifecycle stages. A few weeks after the presentation, the CycloPraxis Group received feedback from several of the displaced workers. CycloPraxis had given them the tools to re-evaluate their career and they were starting 2nd careers with building stage businesses. CycloPraxis had helped them see that their work preferences aligned with the builder praxis.

Excellent work and an excellent point! Knowing your praxis, should you be displaced (as I've been), really takes the edge off. Speaking from personal experience, it really helped me narrow my options and find a position with a start-up whose needs matched more closely what I was willing to offer.

Knowing your praxis is a valuable self-defense mechanism, when things get dicey in the business world (as they often do).

An introduction to CycloPraxis

CycloPraxis identifies the natural working preferences of employees according to the lifecycle stage of a business.

Much has been written about evolutionary stages of firms, disruptive technologies, new ventures, and high technology marketing, but it seems that large firms continue to experience difficulty in deploying the necessary new products and opening new markets necessary for tip line growth and employees continue to wind up with assignments for which they are poorly suited. CycloPraxis explains this behavior and prescribes novel approaches.

The classic match between worker and job is function: operations, manufacturing, marketing, finance, sales, development, etc. Certainly it is important to match job function to an individual's preferences. There is another equally important dimension to the fit between workers and their jobs: cyclopraxis.

And there's more to it, yet. The concepts of Praxis can be applied all across the board.

I came across this idea a few years ago, in Darwin Magazine. After digesting the CycloPraxis ideas and applying them to a number of different areas in life and the world where we are seeing a lot of conflict (the culture wars, religious differences, the clash between the creative class and other groups), I believe Mr. Johnson has hit upon something that is farther reaching than technology companies.

I find his theories work well in explaining the inherent conflicts all over the world and throughout cultures, right now, and they dovetail nicely with the concept of the Creative Class and Lawrence Lessig's work on intellectual property... not to mention all the brouhaha about emerging digital media licensing rights, who holds them, who doesn't, etc. The concepts he's laid out, when raised to a "meta" level, can offer us a whole lot of insight and depth about the challenges which we face as an increasingly creative society ... and an increasingly creative world.

It's quite brilliant. Take a look, when you can.