History is a gift

Learning through your own mistakes is a vital way to survive; but learning through the mistakes of others is surely a way to go beyond survival and even to thrive. The reason for mankind’s success is manifold but surely one of the reasons we succeed is the ability to accumulate knowledge and that includes accumulating our learnings from mistakes, the ones that we didn’t make ourselves, and to be able to learn things beyond what other organisms can learn within a single lifetime.

Cultural artefacts, language, writing, all kinds of interesting designs and format of things are each a scaffold for us to scale above our limitations. And to that end, history is a gift to us because it is the sure way to learn from the mistakes of others, the experiences before us that we may never in our lifetimes get to encounter. They are all there! Recorded for us. Granted, there may be some biases in storytelling and I’m not here to champion ‘herstory’ over ‘history’. It is history as a concept that has so much value that we overlook.

Just because things keep on changing doesn’t mean that that what was experienced in the past is irrelevant. It just means there’s a bigger picture and a lot of creativity needed to interpret the implications of history for our lives today. But history is still relevant and it is a gift to us. Imagine being able to acquire experience without going through things; or getting a certificate without going through a degree. That’s how we should start looking at history. It’s a gift, and a waste not to learn it.

Learning journey

What if learning was a journey and not a place to get to? What if there’s no target benchmarks of grades, no exams to sit for, and just a practice to get better? The beauty of the modern society and system is that we’ve created so many different scaffolding structures to help us learn and be better that we forgot what we were doing them for. We had created so many milestones along a journey so that we can walk it, so much so that we now care only for the milestones but not the journey itself.

So when we join a class to learn something, we want a certificate; we think we don’t need the peer support, the social pressure, the breaks and banter. We think it’s about the training, the content and the knowledge. We forget the interactions, the joy of learning and being uncomfortable.

What can we do to keep reminding ourselves it is a journey and we want to be in the place of tension, to be emotionally committed to the work of learning? How can we see the discomfort as a journey we embark on to be better and get better than one we want to get done and over with?

Practice versus testing

Should practice be harder than the real test so that we are less challenged by the actual testing? And that we’ll be able to respond well?

How much tension and discomfort should we be subjected to in the course of our education? Should we expect our kids to have it easy? What are our expectations on the teachers? What is the role of parents and how should they set their expectations?

Shouldn’t parents be trained in parenting before they are allowed to be parents? Drivers need licenses, accountants have to be certified and so why do we assume humans can grow into good parents? Do we not want some minimal hygiene level of ability in parenting?

Recruitment & HR

There are plenty of job scams around; and then there are lots of recruitment agencies running around trying to gather a huge database of profiles and just tossing them around to various parties who needs people. I get people contacting me about job opportunities every other week.

But incentives are pretty misaligned. The question is who does the recruitment and HR industry serve? Does it serve the employer, or the employee? Or is it just serving itself? Because “helping you find your dream job” or “finding your dream candidate” sounds compelling and yet from the revenue generation perspective, if people stay at the same jobs and employers hold on to the same people, they do not gain.

The presence of recruitment agency makes the whole process of hiring, handling resignations, searching for another candidate a very negative sum game. Is recruitment really so value-adding to the system? Or is it just really about value diversion.

Thinking strategically III

So when it comes to thinking strategically about jobs, and filling of roles, I’d like to give a brilliant example from Seth Godin’s blog post last month. Look at how it builds up this reasoning and strategic thinking step by step:

The typical online job site lists millions of jobs. And just about every one of them is a cry for expertise.

From the title to the requirements, companies hire for expertise.

Logic helps us understand that only one out of ten people are in the top 10% when it comes to expertise. And that means that most companies are settling for good enough. If the organization needs people with expertise in the top decile, they’re going to have to pay far more and work far harder to find and retain that sort of skill.

So most companies don’t try. They create jobs that can be done pretty well by people with a typical amount of expertise.

That means that the actual differentiator in just about every job is attitude.

This is a demonstration of how you can develop insights about the market, the jobs and work that you’re seeking to do. If there’s a certification, a clear degree-specific requirement on a job role in order to satisfy regulatory needs, then there’s no point fighting over it. Otherwise, things should be negotiable and how you get yourself through the hop would depend on what you identify to the more important attributes the company is actually hiring for.

Held up by systems

Patient consultations are at least 2 minutes longer per patient and the interactions less ideal because the system used to load medical records for the doctors are slow. The doctor tries to engage the patient but keeps glancing at the cursor to check if the records have loaded.

The website is down today so the electronic forms you were supposed to submit today cannot be filled in. You’ll have to wait till tomorrow and you’d be considered later in submission.

This form only has boxes for filling in Chinese characters for one’s name; so if you have an English name, you’ll have to try writing all the words within that small space and hope they accept the form.

You need to get the job experience, and put it on your CV so that the ones recruiting will select your CV while screening them. But how do you get the job experience in the first place then?

There are lots of systems put in place to improve lives, speed up processing, make things more ‘predictable’. In reality, they often are about trying to standardise, ignore idiosyncrasies, and reduce problem solving to ‘processing’. If you were brought up to think that life is about standing in line, obeying the commands to get your bowl of soup, then it can be hard to start being creative and seeing reality for what it is about rather than just what the systems are about.

For those working out the systems, ask ‘who is this for?’ It can’t be for everyone because if the system tries to serve everyone, it serves no one.

Someone has to do the work

My mum left her job recently. There were red flags about her employer early on but she ignored them. The employer didn’t pay her for the salary she was entitled to during her sick leave (she had a certain amount of fixed annual paid sick leave though it was a part time job); and that included some of the days when she was down with Covid. My mum, being a traditional worker just stayed on. Five years without a single increment, working on her tasks responsibly and keeping things in line when the management was not maintaining the structures and protocols laid down.

She knows the structure, the service and work she was supposed to deliver, and she believes someone needs to be doing the work. She can’t quite figure out who will if she doesn’t. So she does the work. This is a model of the responsible worker we were brought up to consider a believe in.

But there can be an alternative: Must the work be done? Are there other ways management can observe things besides having more employees filling out paperwork and doing reporting? Are there tools the company can adopt to automate the tasks? Can the boss write an email or text message rather than call for a meeting? Must the decision be made by the boss? Why can’t the staff be empowered to do so?

The industrial complex around all kinds of systems will not throw up such questions because it takes a human, a creative mind, one that cares and not one who ‘just do’ to ponder over these. We need to consider how to make the work of the future more human, more flourishing for workers, not just the shareholders.

What is the most important thing you can teach?

What does success look like for a teacher? I heard a story about a school principal who realised that the Secondary school system was so good at drilling students for the O Levels exams that despite getting incredibly good grades at the national exams, they struggle when they rise to the next level (in Junior Colleges). She went to the teachers and wanted to do something about it but the teachers thought that their existing techniques worked to produce results, so why change things.

So she waited. And soon a former student approached her about this problem, having struggled in junior college despite having done well in O Levels. She invited this student to share at a staff meeting. And it woke the teachers up to the reality of what they were doing; they convened a committee to look into this. Was that a success? I don’t know. What does it mean for teachers to address this issue? Was it about making sure O Levels really gave a more truthful assessment of the students’ abilities? Or was it about teaching students higher level stuff to cope with A Levels? Was it to encourage them to truly learn and that it doesn’t matter if they didn’t do so well in O Levels?

I have no clue because the story ended there and it was all there was in a story. Teachers need to consider for themselves what they pride themselves upon and what is really the important thing for them. Was it really the grades of the students? Was it the attitude? Was it their ability to learn something on their own? As a culture, what do the education service really expect of our teachers? What kind of aspirations do we really desire, and how are these aspirations working out on the ground?

Service sandwiches

I’ve been very open and frank about one’s struggles in terms of working in public service. Should a public service officer be serving the people right in front of them based on what is possible, potentially stretching themselves dry and yet having to meet high level policy objectives or should they toe the policy line and just try to serve in accordance to what the policy allows and don’t? I think the truth is we are expected to be both, and they are often fundamentally at odds. The fact such political realities contaminate the work of public service officers feel really distasteful but so many people face it day to day.

They face it within the environment where there’s emphasis on company performance and yet also demands for managers to care about their people. How many companies hold management meetings on staff welfare metrics regularly? How often do shareholders ask the CEO how the employees or staff are responding to the new strategy to bring in new businesses?

And they face it again when they are under pressure to sell to clients but they are under-resourced to truly meet clients’ needs. There’s the question of who you should be serving? The clients, or your boss? In the case of public service; the people directly, or your management, or the political masters? Or the cabinet?

We are all sandwiched by these competing demands and tensions. They didn’t use to exist when we were building up the entire system and network with a more common objective. They appear less visible when diversity wasn’t the focus and people were just supposed to stay in ‘their place’ in society. They were not the point of policies when we could see the potential to grow and improve lives with clearly marked signposts of development. But we no longer do, and so we are sandwiched.

Thinking strategically II

Given the university and scholarship application season, I thought we could discuss applying strategic thinking towards the application process. This could also be useful pointers for job applications. If you need more help, feel free to reach out for career-coaching of course!

Just to distill it down to a quick list of steps to think through:

  1. Consider what is your long-term goal or target and why
  2. Consider how you connect the programme you are applying, to that long-term target, explain how
  3. Ask yourself who are the other people vying for the university places or scholarship slots – what can be a differentiator for you
  4. Put yourself in the shoes of the evaluators of those applications – what are their interests, how do you think they select candidates, what will catch their attention

Long-term Goal

I always explain that this is the logical end of a trajectory you are on. It is not necessary where you will land eventually. And it does not matter whether it can land or not. Being reasonable or outrageous isn’t the point here. It is about extrapolating the path you’re taking to an end point. It needs to be something you convince yourself of.

It can be taking the form of a career, a lifestyle, an activity you get to do regularly and so on. If the logical outcome of what you are about to embark on isn’t to your liking then what is the point of doing it? So you have to consider why you want this as well.

The Programme

Whatever you are applying for must match that long-term goal. If you are applying to a music school you can’t be telling them you want to be a professional wakeboarder. It is just part of telling a story that is compelling, that draws people to desire to help you achieve your goal. When you clearly articulate how the programme serves you; then you’re activating the staff of the programme to see the impact they can potentially make by having you on board.

Competition

As much as I don’t want to think about this, there are others applying for places and ‘competing’ with you. At some point, there isn’t really an objective sense of who is perfect for the programme. Because the rubric is subjective to begin with. So we need to consider how they contribute to the pool of accepted candidates if they do get in; and how can you be differentiated from that competition, so that you’re not just pitted against them on simple, obvious attributes.

Evaluators’ interest

We can go back to thinking about what are really the interests of the evaluators in a practical sense. They might want to be entertained by your application; they might want to be surprised. They are interested in reading a good story and be invited to allow their decision to supplement that narrative in a beautiful way. So how is your application going to do that for them?