As I continued with my coaching and guiding work, the conviction to help others and the sense of purpose behind that has grown. A regular reader of my writings will noticed that I often write about education as much as I pen commentary on the culture we live within. It is probably because our education forms a very significant influence in our lives and moulds a lot of our foundational thinking and approach to conducting ourselves in society and life. And all of these make their way into the challenges we encounter as we join the workforce – which is where my coaching practice comes into play.
The goal of my coaching work is ultimately to promote self-reliance. I’m not trying to coach you so that you can rely on me to deal with your problems whether it is with discovering your aspirations, charting a career or just securing a job. I run alongside you to cope with the challenges you face because ultimately, I hope that you are able to retune your internal compass to get it to point your direction again; and for you to develop that awareness and sensitivity towards yourself in order to move forward in all the situations in life. The ability to rely on oneself is going to be central to mental health and the well-being of our society as a whole over the next few decades.
Our parents or even grandparents lived through messy times. There was war, strife, riots, slums and disorganised markets. There was adversity and children mostly did not even complete schooling. In the ‘school of life’, the learnt and they grew, developing self-reliance. Today, our efforts to plan just about everything and desire to get things organised rather than allow kids to grow organically means occupying our children with structure sort of learning of all forms. In part, it is also because parents actually have more financial, mental and physical capacity to manage the children’s childhood and experience. As a consequence, we are indulging in our children, spending ever more resources to help them get a headstart in all forms of socially-recognised credentials, and also on new toys, tools and entertainment for them.
In part, as we see other parents do that for their children, we think we fall short if we do not. And when our children makes mistakes, we feel responsible. When we judge them to be inadequate, we blame ourselves. What is the easiest way then, to avoid all of these? That is to control our kids; control their time, ensure they are ‘kept occupied’ through all kinds of programmes, helicopter parenting, lining up all things in life for them. Doing your best for your children then becomes simply making them extensions of your aspirations, dreams and your life.
To a some extent, that was what quite a lot of us who are now in the early years of our career have been subjected to. And that is also what we are doing to our children. What happens thereafter is that children lose their self-reliance. They prefer to live under the direction of someone else. They learn the rules of the game, the authority that they need to comply with, the things they should do, to be elevated socially. Once they have to be truly on their own, they are lost. The consequence has huge social implications to our mental health and resilience.
Because we are so used to taking directions and hearing from the society, we become less sensitive to our inner motivations and compass, relying more on extrinsic motivations. I started my coaching practice to help young adults and youths build up that mental resilience and also to develop greater self-reliance. It helps to be more aware of how one’s internal narratives are shaping our motivation, and to develop the ability to rewrite these stories. That does mean life will get messier, more complex, ridden with what we normally think of as ‘uncertainty’. What we do not recognise is that sense of loss we feel – when we reach the career point we had been working for and realise it wasn’t what we thought it would be, or when things are turning out dramatically different from what you expected for the first couple of times in life – is exactly the reminder that the certainty we think we have had is often false.
For shorter muses, follow my instagram. And to gain further exclusive insights, subscribe to my mailing list.
So for over one and a half month, I’ve been doing a lot of posting on my Instagram page (@kevlowco – please follow if you have not yet done so) as I committed to do so daily in order to practice the discipline and consistency of posting relevant, useful, inspirational materials. It’s been a very interesting experience because there’s just a continuous stream of ideas that comes along as I plan for the materials to put up.
Quite frankly, the topics I hope to share about keeps on coming because there’s just so much ideas surrounding thinking about the purpose we want to imbue in our work, and the overall ideas surrounding motivation, mindsets, and handling of difficult situations or challenges. The curation of quotes however, was more of a challenge as I often have to check the original author/speaker’s background and also appreciate better the context.
That is especially important because of how much I came to learn of the manner by which Robert Frost’ poem have been misinterpreted or misconstrued. There are many articles online about it covering the entire poem but I’ll just go on to talk about the last stanza:
I shall be telling this with a sigh Somewhere ages and ages hence: Tworoads diverged in a wood, and I— I took the one that dared me to try, And that has made all the difference.
Robert Frost in The Road Not Taken
The common quote from the poem that talks about taking the road less traveled would be the last 3 lines in the stanza. But the truth is that nowhere in the poem did the road he ‘dared to try’ was one that was less taken (in fact in earlier stanzas he was rather ambiguous if at all that the conditions of the two roads was too much different, nor did he even suggest that they pointed to different destinations). The key context that perhaps was missed in people using the quote is the point that he said ‘I shall be telling this with a sigh / Somewhere ages and ages hence‘. He is imagining himself in the future, making this point with a sigh which could imply he has either regretted it or that he has suffered or wearied much through it. But he hasn’t lived through it yet – it could still be the well-worn road that was way too boring!
Either case, context is important and this message from Robert Frost is also a nuanced and subtle one that I would like to emphasize pertaining to the ‘wisdom of the world’. At the end of the day, it is up to us to write our own story and to interpret the outcomes of our actions – what intents they had been meant to serve in the first place and how does it look from the other end of the tunnel. Thanks for staying with my musing thus far. If there’s a message I want to leave with you, it would be for you to follow me on Instagram. Thank you!
This is going to first sound like a rant. But I need you to stay with me and read through this patiently. I’m in the process of getting over the fact that Citibank charged me over $100 worth in late fees and interest charges on a credit card bill of about $260. They declined my fee waiver request and when I called in to appeal, it was declined again.
My latest attempt to appeal further through the secure mail system once again resulted in my request being declined. While you may think I’m an angsty customer just looking to air this in public to shame the bank, I am more concerned that you, as a current or prospective customer, knows about the vicious cycle that banks and credit card companies are now getting themselves into.
Sign-up bonuses and customer acquisition costs
Just a quick look a Milelion’s credit card page shows you the active sign-up bonuses for ‘new-to-bank’ customers which have been getting more and more generous since 2-3 years ago. When I first got my credit cards more than 5 years ago, the competition for customer acquisition was just getting heated up and the best prizes they were giving out were just American Tourister luggages. Then came the one-off cashbacks on minimum spend within months of activating the credit card, grab vouchers thrown in on some. And then it grew bigger, freebies that became more costly: Apple Airpods, Nespresso machines, and even Airpod Pros. Often, these sign-up bonuses don’t even have minimum spend requirements. Just sign up by a certain date.
Assuming that with all the marketing efforts and tie-ups with various web platforms, the cost of customer acquisition comes down to $300 per customer. Let’s suppose further that the customers then goes on to spend about $500 a month for that year. Assuming a 2% fee charged to merchants, the credit card company earns only $120 over that entire year from you gross, not withstanding the other infrastructure costs and the administrative cost of billing you, etc. Even if you spend an average of $1000 a month, that is only $240, not enough to cover the cost of acquiring you as customer especially when first year annual fees are usually waived to lure you in (in any case, we all absolutely hate credit card annual fees).
Problem of having to cover acquisition costs
You can see how that is a problem, the credit card companies need to cover their cost, but also they are forced to acquire you in order to maintain their market share so that they can tell merchants they have a certain number of customer base and convince merchants to continue accepting credit cards. There are some network effect that helps maintain some degree of stickiness but competition from other e-payment methods is intense and being incumbents, the credit card companies have the most to lose from the new entrants.
So they have to recover more of their costs from you. How do they do that? They can hope you pay only the minimum payment and incur interest charges on the balance. The interest rates are as high as 28% on some bank credit cards so they can earn quite a fair amount from here if customers willingly borrow at such rip-off rates. Unfortunately, most customers are not so clueless and also have access to cheaper credit so credit card credit is not viable as a form of consumer credit for most people. Only those really out of options resort to “borrowing” on the credit card. Now, if majority of the credit card customers would pay their bills in full anyways, then how else can the companies generate more income to cover the costs?
Late fees. That’s a big way of generating income to cover cost. Basically be a payment punctuality Nazi and zap every single customer with late payment charge as long as they are just even hours late. Now you’ve got a huge pool of customers who are beholden to you and have to pay you the late fees. Then you can look at your customer acquisition cost and ask yourself, how much late fees do I need to collect in order to cover my costs? So having decided how much you need to “keep”, you can then feign magnanimity by allowing for fee waivers to those who call in to request. Of course, the biggest spenders whose acquisition fees have been more than covered by the merchant fees, they’ll be happy to waive the late fees and interest charges. The rest to missed their payments, but are low-spenders like me, become victims who will have to fork out to pay for and shoulder the customer acquisition costs.
This creates perverse scenarios like this where I now owe the credit card company $366 – where $106 consists of late fees and interest charges and only $260 was my actual spending. In a climate like this with Covid-19 still wrecking havoc in the economy, the banks are hardly doing their part.
So you, prospective customers, think twice before being drawn to that Airpods Pro. And the current customers who have got your Airpods Pro; you might end up having to pay for it anyways!
So over the past 2-3 weeks, I’ve been pondering over our education system. It all started with that chat I had with my friends, and then the article I wrote, and then more thinking. I even thought at one point I want to start a podcast about education and go around interviewing people how they want to change it. The truth is majority of us have brushes with it and experiences with it – pleasant or not. And those were worthwhile voicing out, to augment and improve the system. You don’t need to be an educator or professional to do it. I was not just thinking about the system in Singapore but this whole industry of education, testing, whether it is about building up or just sieving out; whether it is implicitly defining merit rather than bringing up people to merit.
Now the recurring question I had in mind was whether education, which is supposed to be the great leveler, should be ‘sorting’ people with its system of testings and exams or ‘lifting’ people up to a certain level. To put it at another layer, it is also about whether education should be tuned to provide signals about a particular person or be tuned to develop a person. What underlies this difference is implicitly the ‘fixed mindset’ vis-a-vis the ‘growth mindset’ that the one tuning the system have about people, and the potential of the society at large.
Signaling Function: Separating or Pooling
Now the title of the article references this feature of systems that are set up to create signals. It assumes there are different ‘types’ in the environment and the system design can result in everyone signaling the same (ie. pooling) or signaling differently (ie. separating). In general, examinations are designed to create separating equilibria. We are taught to think that a test that results in everyone scoring A is pointless because exams are to help us differentiate the best from the rest. Or is it? Shouldn’t an exam or test be used to measure students/learners against a benchmark you want to train them up to?
So shouldn’t we be keeping the testing constant and adjusting the teaching and content to ensure we can ‘lift up’ everyone rather than ‘sort them out’. Because when we design exams to generate a ‘normal distribution’ outcome, then we are implicitly saying someone in the room deserves to be last when it is just a natural outcome of a relative system. We can no longer trace ‘culpability’ back to the students commitment and efforts because someone has got to be last in class – someone has got to be in the lower tail of that normal distribution. What a depressing way to think about education outcomes.
Therefore, this signaling function of education runs against the grain of all the effort, sense of purpose that we are imbued with as we try to develop our students into people worthy of our society, yet that is the way we design our assessment, which nowadays seem more like the end of school rather than just an instrument that the schools use to provide a means for students to check themselves against some kind of standards.
Competing with yourself
Now the way our assessments are designed also means that you are creating competition amongst students. Because results are somewhat relative, you can do better when your classmates do worse. At national level or in moderated standardised testing which is really used to perform ‘sorting’ at cohort population level, the results gives you your relative position within the society rather than your absolute standards. Well, people will say, that’s all that matters isn’t it? Life is a competition and it’s about getting ahead of others.
As I mentioned previously, this is a recipe for a society-wide mental health disaster; especially if job options are strongly correlated with academic performance subsequently. Worst, the parents and society shares the idea that only jobs requiring those qualifications are worthwhile going for. In reality, the most important competition in your life is with yourself and it is important for you to be able to track your progress, to know you’re growing. Take for example when you measure the height of a child to see he is growing; you might look at the height percentile chart at any one point to say, oh he is 40th percentile, below average for his age, but we know he used to be 136cm but now he is 140cm, he is definitely growing. You don’t get worried that he used to be 55th percentile when he was a year younger but now at 40th percentile in height.
You might say because relative height don’t matter as much as academic achievement in life. But the same principle remains that having an objective way of tracking your progress of growth helps give you the encouragement to keep going. Our school testing and exam systems does not help us achieve that. They do not allow students to compete with themselves; at every tests, they are just taking the same cohort, sorting them into grades/scores again and again with different combination of topics and subjects. How this really helps the growth and development of a single child is anyone’s guess. It doesn’t matter so much when your parents, society at large and teachers focus on your attitude, your character and values more than exam results. But I have a feeling that we naturally gravitate more towards what is measurable and allow that to become the dominant yardstick.
By ‘pooling’ students into just a few ‘prestigious subjects’ (eg. the sciences) and ‘separating’ them into grades within these disciplines, we risk funneling them further and deeper into intense competitions when we should be training them to find niches for themselves to escape competition. In business or society, when you encounter a red ocean (full of sharks, ie. competition), you run, and you try to define your own market, a blue ocean you can swim in. Yet in schools we don’t prepare students for a life that involves seeking blue oceans, we try to force everyone to swim in the bloody waters and create artificial bloodbaths.
An alternative: Sorting by strengths, Lifting up everyone
I thought long and hard about what the education system should really be separating and pooling instead of the traditional model. And I have an alternative to suggest. It will be aligned with the ideas I proposed previously. To prepare students truly for society, the system should be sorting students into various areas of strength/practice/disciplines that they are to be nurtured for rather than choosing a fixed set of disciplines and then sorting students according to their abilities in those disciplines. And be serious about nurturing them in the areas they are sorted into. Expose students to more things whilst they are young instead of specifying subjects and saying they ought to have headstart in those areas and drill them with content. Sort people horizontally across a spectrum of different areas rather than vertically along a spectrum of ‘abilities’ – help students develop their strengths and hone their craft.
A well functioning society requires a good spread of people with head, heart and hands. You may say that we are exposed to the competition of the global market but price need not be the only signals we heed, quality matters, identity as fellow citizens matters. And these are values that we can cultivate when we sort people not by their ‘abilities’ in narrow areas of human endeavour, but by sorting them in a way where they see the value they can contribute to the society.
Why this is so important is because so much of Singaporean’s students lives are squandered meandering around the system designed to not so much to genuinely develop every student but to sieve out the top academics/intellectuals. Imagine you are clueless about your strengths but you know you’re not a study-type. And each year you try hard but you’re consistently sorted into the tail end of the distribution, for every single subject where there’s a test/exam. You score A for arts and you are told you draw well but none of those are reflected or considered when you have to select which school to go into. You’re continually told you’re underperforming, ‘doing badly’ – of course you try to deal with the feelings of inadequacy and being judged harshly by ‘rebeling’ against the system. And then the system tells you that you’re doing badly precisely because you’re behaving badly.
If we had an alternative system, I believe Jerome Yap’s story would have turned out differently. Of course, if I were him now, I wouldn’t want it to be any different because the adversity I went through made me who I am. But under the different system, he would be ‘discovered’ at an earlier age, and his talents will be nurtured by his parents and teachers (who do not have to seem like they are working against the system); and he might have already started his own successful design business by the age of 28 – with degree or not. In fact, the degree won’t be what we are celebrating, it would be the fact that we have such talent from this small city state.
A couple of days back whilst at friend’s (yet another teacher) place, I got asked, ‘If you were a parent, how would you like the education system to be?’ For those who know me for years, you’d think I’m an educator at heart, and also cut out to be a teacher. But more often than once, I have declared that I will never teach in the mainstream education system because there are too many things about it that I’m against. People would often tell me I should go and change it; but trust me, you don’t want to get me started. Yet with this license to day-dream, I gratefully seized it.
The first warning before I get started is that I think about systems as a collective whole so I don’t see our education system as separate from our economy, our culture and our identity. All of them work together and reinforce each other. This is why I often try to make a case for the idea that culture and education could be the cause of our productivity problems. And that brings me to the second warning that the system of my dreams will probably be ‘far-fetched’ in that what we’ve been doing in our schools is nowhere close to it. But if we can agree on a future society we are striving towards, then we can collectively make that a representation of our vision to strive toward.
Anyways during that short time I had with my friends, I shared only 3 main points which I’m going to pen here for the record. There are many more dimensions that I envision and I welcome Singaporeans from all walks of life to augment this vision and to build it out in greater details and to tweak it more. If you’re an official in the education system today, let me first encourage you not to think about the practical constraints or just dismiss these as ‘idealistic’ but to consider the difference any of these would make on to the students, on the future economy and society you’re trying to shape. Let the end goal rather than immediate challenges fill your mind and vision; because, as Watt Emerson once said:
What lies behind us and what lies before us are tiny matters compared to what lies within us.
Ralph Waldo Emerson
Abolish cohort-based education (or teach for mastery, not grades)
I start with the most radical one to weed out those readers who have no commitment towards discarding flawed premises. I think cohort-based system is helpful because it is where we find a little more of our social bearings, and perhaps from a cost and administrative point of view, using a cohort is just ‘easier’. But I call for it to be abolished because we should not be forced to promote students who are poorly prepared for the next level of education. In fact, a single student should be allowed to progress for subjects he/she is strong for and held back on subjects that he/she have not gain certain benchmark of mastery. Salman Khan, the founder of Khan Academy once described very well what is wrong with having that kind of system that focuses on tests one year after another rather than focusing on mastery.
Now of course, the focus is actually not on cohort but once we focus on getting students to gain mastery, then we have to break up the idea of a cohort and to stop comparing across students but against the benchmark of the standards they have to get to. If you think about it, the current system promotes a student scoring 51% together with one scoring 91% on Maths exams to the next grade and then teaching them as though they are no different, only to achieve the same gap end of the year, and the weaker student is discouraged. Compounding this over a period of over 10 years, a society that prizes head above hands or heart, and you seeding mental and emotional health problems of an entire group in the society.
It’s been 5 years since Salman delivered that short speech and it’s been viewed millions of times. And the fact is that we already have the tools and technology to achieve this sort of system. But because of sunk cost fallacy and the unwillingness to disrupt the current education infrastructure, we seem only capable of making incremental changes which will not be able to get us anywhere close.
Focus on core skills before content
At younger ages (up to 10), schools and teachers should be really focused on helping students acquire language, numeracy skills, and give them chance to explore these skills in various different contexts of life. So language needs to be more than just speech and words, but getting them to practice persuasion, comforting those in need, expressing themselves, displaying empathy and so on. Numeracy needs to be expressed in monetary transactions (such as purchasing decisions at a school canteen or bookstore), as well as in the calculation of reward points, even quiz scores or even getting them to form up into the right groups of players for different sports.
Of course, it is an easy win to teach science to these kids and then when they express superficial understanding of deep concepts, we are wow-ed and misled into thinking they already got their fundamentals sorted out. This is because by the time we (during our time) learnt those scientific knowledge ourselves, we were already more advanced in our mastery of other fundamentals. The truth is that they’d have none of the core skills, nor the genuine understanding to take them to the next level in life. Better to forgo content which they can acquire later by themselves than to give them an illusion of being ‘intelligent’, even risking them having oversized egos.
Our younger brains are better suited to pick up skills and learn new ways to learn, rather than to be somehow acquiring dense amount of information and trivia. Skills for knowledge acquisition is more important than knowledge acquisition itself at this stage.
Involving the entire society in education
Currently, parents are not taking enough ownership of their children’s education; more often than not, they can practically outsource all of education to schools. This was never the intention and parents who are reading this, should recognise their role in partnership with schools and teachers to bring up their children. Not only that, the entire society is in a partnership to bring up the next generation. The fact that our young is largely educated in a taxpayer-supported system is part of that; but more than that, companies, industries should start playing a role in terms of adopting schools and being connected with them in terms of sharing with students about the company, about the role they play in the market, and the economy, as well as to provide students with some experience with work, or to catch more of a glimpse of the ‘grown-up world’.
Parents will need to work with schools especially when students are younger; by moving focus away on content, the load on parents trying to understand what is covered in school shifts towards appreciating the intentions of what the students are being taught, hence allowing them to easily try and reinforce it at home. By shifting content-heaviness towards a point when the student is more mature, they can handle the learning independently and be less reliant on adult guidance for content.
I know there’s already a lot of pressure on our educators and I’m going as far as to try and suggest that they should be responsible to help reshape the economy of the future. Perhaps the government really needs to divert some of the quick-fix kind of approach such as providing business incentives and grants towards supporting an education system that really contributes to the economy. It is no use incentivising businesses to hire Singaporeans if the education system is unable to prepare a labour force deserving of those jobs. Of course, the system cannot predict what specific sectors will be in vogue or the skills demanded. But as you can see from my vision, the skills I speak of is not programming, or STEM, or arts. There are foundational matters like core skills in language (communications), emotional intelligence (empathy), numeracy and above all, knowledge acquisition, that the education system must build up within students – these will prepare them for just about any market they graduate into.
And if job creation is really important, why not encourage entrepreneurship right from schools through a focus on asking the right questions rather than finding the right answers? During the earlier days of our nation building, we really needed our workforce to be plugged into the industries and so we just basically ‘trained’ rather than ‘educated’. Whilst we now have the ‘luxury’ to get away from this ‘training’ kind of approach, we ought to.
In today’s work life, too much thought goes into how to do the work rather than the culture and enabling environment that surrounds the work. There are countless anecdotes about people at their deathbed would not wish they had more days to work; or stories of the employee who passed away and the company was just busy trying to find someone to replace him/her, whilst complaining about the hassle and delays caused by his/her death. All of these tries to discourage people from pouring out way too much of themselves into work even as our society as a whole is actually increasingly consumed by work.
What I don’t understand is that for almost all of our work in life, there are ways of making it more fun, conducive to put effort into, and to stress us positively. Yet we don’t do that, nor explore ways of doing that. Good culture that enables rather than disable is a luxury, people say. And they see it being at odds with generating value and profit, as though precious resources are either committed to employee well-being or shareholder returns. This is just lack of imagination and the inability to think dynamically and across time.
For some reason, a 2015 article from INSEAD appeared on 2 separate of my social media platform news feed, shared by different people and with different commentary. It was about the fall of Nokia; and yet as I was reading through it, I am struck by how applicable those lessons are today. And how important it is that we invest into reworking our culture.
I shuddered at several parts of the article that describes behaviours no different from what I’ve observed in large, important institutions and business organisations that I’ve had experience with. Allow me to quote 3 portions of the article that really stood out for me:
Although they realised that Nokia needed a better operating system for its phones to match Apple’s iOS, they knew it would take several years to develop, but were afraid to publicly acknowledge the inferiority of Symbian, their operating system at the time, for fear of appearing defeatist to external investors, suppliers, and customers and thus losing them quickly. “It takes years to make a new operating system. That’s why we had to keep the faith with Symbian,” said one top manager. Nobody wanted to be the bearer of bad news.
Hiding bad news is a result of the lack of an open communicative culture resulting from poor responses to ‘bad news’. It will be reinforced by a sense of helplessness about the communication; either by the belief that management will not believe it, or will not respond to it. Such erosion of trust does not bode well.
Fearing the reactions of top managers, middle managers remained silent or provided optimistic, filtered information. One middle manager told us “the information did not flow upwards. Top management was directly lied to…I remember examples when you had a chart and the supervisor told you to move the data points to the right [to give a better impression]. Then your supervisor went to present it to the higher-level executives.
Encouraging miscommunication, whether intentional or not, will only lead to organisational decline. This is especially if the flow of information about reality or truth is obscured, and top management makes decision on the basis of such flawed or misconstrued information. This is the issue when there’s too much emotion caught up in reporting. Reporting should ideally be unemotional, clinical and rational.
[T]op managers also applied pressure for faster performance in personnel selection. They later admitted to us that they favoured new blood who displayed a “can do” attitude.
This led middle managers to over-promise and under-deliver. One middle manager told us that “you can get resources by promising something earlier, or promising a lot. It’s sales work.” This was made worse by the lack of technical competence among top managers, which influenced how they could assess technological limitations during goal setting.
Misalignment of incentives that drives unhelpful behaviours throughout the organisation. So to that extent, being able to create a culture that implicitly rewards honest behaviours through praise and recognition; punishing or frowning upon over-promising, and inaccurate reporting, sows the seeds for success of an organisation. There will naturally be a tension between behaviours which promotes the interest of the organisation and the need to ‘perform’ at an individual level. The ability of the organisation culture to protect behaviours that promotes the sustainability and long-term interest of the organisation is so vitally important.
Yet in most of today’s organisation, we have not invested sufficient thought into the culture; focusing instead to utilise our resources to drive work performance, measured mostly by short-term metrics. A good place to start is really by reworking the prevailing narrative, especially rewiring the mindset obsessed with linear, unidimensional growth. Caring for the mental health and well-being of employees at the level of supporting them to deconflict those tensions mentioned above will go a long way.
For those who are subscribed to my mailing list, you might already know that for some time, I’ve been planning to have an instagram account to post bite-size materials of the longer form articles I write. There is really a lot of wisdom to distill from many places and I had envision the instagram to be really about curating the best materials and thoughts to share with my audience.
Being one of the more senior millennial, I had to enlist the help of my young cousin to provide ‘expert advice’ and also to help me with the graphics that I wanted to put up in my instagram. My posts will be oriented around some of the mindsets and thinking around identifying life goals, and how it connects with career choices, and the steps to get there. Almost coming to a week on since the launch, I thought to share it here on my website so you can follow and benefit from it!
I half-jokingly left the last Ikigai question to your own imagination but I have deeper thoughts to share with you in this additional article I would like to add on to the Ikigai series. Ultimately, the question on what the you’d be paid for, will bring up a point about how much is enough for you. This is the deeper question that the Ikigai framework should be harking at. Just as ‘What the world needs?’ makes you think more deeply about your purpose, the ‘What you can be paid for?’ implicitly makes you consider the lifestyle you want.
And today, in this world of plenty, where you even have the option to consider how you may live a more purposeful life rather than just go with the flow, shows that you actually know there’s a minimum lifestyle you can quite easily satisfy and secure. The point is to understand how much is enough for yourself. You might then think you want to fulfill your potential and not be mediocre or just allow your income to stagnate or to be complacent. I agree; but I think fulfilment of one’s potential doesn’t always come in the form of earning a higher income – you can also be compensated through a sense of meaning and satisfaction from the success of your clients.
Anyways, the key question here is about the selection of lifestyles; how much more enjoyment are you actually working for when you are trying to get more income for a more lavish lifestyle? And how much pain are you going through to hit that spot? So one way to consider finding possibilities in this category is to work backwards from the lifestyle you want. You may have an option that gives you more time to pursue other interests, or one that gives you more resources to live life more lavishly – you’ll have to weigh which one you gravitate towards.
This is an additional article to the multi-part series of writing on Ikigai. The cover article explains why I’m writing all of these.Read part two, three, four, and five. Download the worksheet here.
Congratulations on reaching this fourth and last question on the Ikigai framework! Lest you think that this article would be about salaries and all kinds of different jobs and remuneration, it isn’t. I just have one word of advice on this:
Don’t be lazy. Go do your own research.
Kevin Low, 2020
Go through the worksheet that you’ve filled in. What worksheet? I developed a simple worksheet for you to fill up and the first 3 questions would have allowed you to identify activities/jobs/roles that satisfies all 3 of those other elements. Now you can identify those areas where you can actually get paid for, and fill them into this section of the worksheet! As for the exact remuneration, you’ll really have to do your own research because there are a lot of local variations on the remuneration for different jobs and everyone has access to different opportunities as well. This is where you have to pull your weight and do more work.
The reason I’ve put the lists on the sides of the venn diagram is to allow you to try listing possibilities in each categories first and then find common ones which you can fit into parts of the venn diagram that is overlapping. You may not find you are filling every single portion of the diagram and that’s completely fine. Because you will then be able to get into the ‘troubleshooting’ mode of identifying what are the gaps in terms of reaching the sweeter spot. Mapping out those possibilities also gives you a sense of which direction you need to shift your focus in life: have you been too obsessed with making money? Or bankrupting yourself with your passion? Or losing your soul in trying to fit your strength with getting paid?
But more importantly, you can prioritise your energies with this. You can consider new combination of activities that unlock a sweeter spot. Or you can pick up a hobby to plug the gap. And if there’s a hobby that plays to a little of your strength and in due course you could be paid for it; you might use this to encourage yourself to make it more of a jobby (get paid for it!) rather than just a hobby.
This is the the actual final part of the multi-part series of writing on Ikigai. The cover article explains why I’m writing this.Read part two, three and four. But this will not be the last time I’m writing on Ikigai; we will explore how this framework helps with many other aspects of life as well!
Having done more introspection, we now need to go beyond and consider the external circumstances. Asking a big question like this can be intimidating; not least because the needs of the world cannot quite be exhaustively listed down by an individual, nor be dealt with in that way.
But I think we should start by understanding the draw of this question. It is actually about a sense of purpose. In other words, there might be things that the world needs but it does not reasonate with you. You might think certain needs are more pressing than others though not everyone agrees with you. For example, climate change issues vs local unemployment problems. Both needs to be dealt with and you might happen to find that one ignites energy in you while the other discourages you, or simply awakens the desire to ignore it. So here are the 3 steps when it comes to trying to answer this question.
Start with the Big One may think about starting with looking at your neighbourhood to identify what the world needs so that it is more actionable but that is the last step. You have to start with the bigger issues at hand, whether it is mental health stigmatisation, climate change, ageing population and so on. By finding out a bigger domain or issue that reasonates with you, you create the space which you can flexibly pivot around as you try to balance other factors.
Listen to the purpose Then having identified the big ‘need’ that the world have, listen to the purpose underlying the need. For example, SpaceX was created because Elon Musk thinks humanity needs a Plan(et) B and he wants us to be able to colonise Mars. But at the heart of it, the sense of purpose is for the continuation of humanity and mankind. Having a sense of the underlying purpose allows you to continue to justify that ‘need’. It answers the nagging ‘why’ that may loom even as you are focused on analysing the problem you are trying to solve.
Narrow down to the Small This is the right time then to try and narrow down to the small. From the big issue of climate change, you need to start thinking about local action for example; what can you start with in the more immediate surroundings. It could be doing more recycling to reduce consumption (say, working for a recycling company), it could be trying to help people reduce their carbon footprint from commuting (say, working for a video conferencing company) and so on. The motivation and the values of the organisations you join may not always reasonate with the ‘need’ and ‘purpose’ you have identified but as long as you can make that connection, you’re good.
Try to distill all of these into specific work roles or potential work positions and list them down properly under the ‘What the world needs?’ header in your own personal worksheet (Download the worksheet here).
This is the fourth part of a multi-part series of writing on Ikigai. The cover article explains why I’m writing this.Read part two and three. Surprise coming up in the next part. Stay tuned.
