Regrettably, quantifying has become the standard, all-in-all measurement for defining success and identity.
Quantifying is a global practice, yes, but distinctly North American. Numbers are thought to convey everything important: the all in all of a business’s bottom line; an individual’s legacy or value to society; a sports team’s record; a university’s national ranking; and for some, even a measurement of sexual prowess. Frequently it’s cloaked in the language of “indicators,” such as “economic or performance indicators.”
Since I’m attempting to re-enter the workforce full-time, everything related to “finding employment” that I read in blogs, books, articles, or hear via webinars suggest that my chances are slim to none of finding prior comparable work if I can’t quantify my work and life experience in such a way as to inform a would-be-employer how I will either make them money or keep them from losing it.
How do I quantify and communicate a career built to date on the qualitative – aka, interpersonal?
Since the majority of my work experience has been in Africa, it’s imperative that I convey my transferable skills and accomplishments for a North American context and audience. But how?
If I were my former Kenya-based colleague, I could display an impressive photographic portfolio of rural children’s community development centers, replete with annualized financial and enrollment figures.
But . . .
Because my skill set resides primarily in the qualitative realm of the interpersonal and intercultural, my challenge is to try and sell what my colleague once described as a “non-sexy” product. That is, he was implying that North Americans like to give and invest in projects and ventures that result in quantifiable and self-branding payback potential (e.g., “Look what we built!”).
Therefore, how do I quantify, for example, a life and work goal – one shared by US Peace Corps – of “helping to promote a better understanding of North Americans to the world,” and conversely “helping promote a better understanding of the world to North Americans?”
“Success” should not be excessively based on quantifiable activities and accomplishments as currently exists.
Equally important are the intangibles such as: lives mentored and supported, local profit and non-profit initiatives empowered, conflicts ameliorated, clients engaged and retained, partnerships mediated and MOAs facilitated, interdisciplinary-interdepartmental-intercultural relationships fostered, and good will, mutual understanding and respect engendered.
An essential problem with the prevailing measurement of success is that people and relationships can’t be quantified – at least easily. They can’t be framed, stuffed and put into picture frames or hung on walls for donors, investors and the like to copyright or affix their brand logo.
A final example, yesterday my wife was one of 64 MSN graduates from The University of Texas’ School of Nursing. Also graduating were 7 PhD’s, and 76 BSN’s. One graduate from each degree program, plus two alumni, were recognized as “outstanding.” The 5 had the honor of sitting on stage among faculty.
“Outstanding” was (apparently) determined based on: 1) International service – mostly Africa. 2) Service that benefits the many under-served populations. 3) Prodigious research and publications. 4) Highest grade point average. And, specific to the alumnus: 4) Management oversight of millions, and in one alumnus’ case, billions of dollars.
I highlight my wife’s commencement’s traditional pomp and ceremony to make a point:
America’s over-zealous valuing of and reliance on quantifying – whether it’s in the area of work, resume/curriculum vitae, study, life, church, et cetera – is less reflective, to me, of how “outstanding” a candidate, corporation, body, team or country is or could possibly be.
Rather, it’s more reflective of how unskilled and uncomfortable we have become with the interpersonal.
It’s my opinion, that frequently to most often times, “outstanding” people, projects or achievements attain this fleeting accolade at the expense of others and relationships, whether it be work/study colleagues, spouse, children.
It’s as if we have learned to deflect our many painful and failed relationships by throwing up smoke screens of numbers. Instead, we pour our energy, time and focus into activities and achievements, all of which are more easily controlled, manipulated, rewarded and promoted or publicized.
Impartially speaking, of course:), I believe my wife attained “outstanding” status, in that, she completed a difficult 3-year graduate studies program; she did so during midlife and after birthing and raising 5 children – plus, as of yesterday, 05/18/2013, she succeeded in staying married to the same, sometimes cantankerous man for 28 years!
But then . . . who will ever know about many of her “outstanding” candidate qualities because they are not quantifiable according to standard curriculum vitae or certificate of merit protocol!