Comment Comment
Comment on the blogs Log in here Become a member Register now
 
Tim Smedley

Tim Smedley

25 Sep 2009 | 15:11

(Maximum of 120 characters)
Articles more than one month old can be viewed only by CIPD members or PM Subscribers.


A conversation over lunch got me wondering. Which of the two groups are the happier in their jobs: those who knew from a young age what they wanted to be when they grew up, and then promptly became it (group one); or those who through several muddled attempts at various types of qualifications and/or career paths, eventually fell into the particular career that suited them (group two)?

First, it must be pointed out that I’m not assuming that everyone fits into one of these two groups. There are plenty of grey areas. But for the purpose of this particular mental wandering, let’s stick with the two. Initially, it seems easy to answer – surely group one, with their achievement of goals and worry-free vision of where they fit into the world, is the happier? However, wouldn’t boredom set in at some point? Along the straight road of wanting to do and then doing, the only possible end destination is then not doing. Doesn’t seem like a life full of spice.

As is generally the case with a mental meander, the internet soon played a part. A quick search found this little gem of insight from celebrity tearaway Lindsay Lohan: “I think I always kind of aspired to be like Britney Spears. I wanted to be in the tabloids when I was in middle school.” So there you go. Lifelong ambitions can sometimes be disappointing from the very outset.

So does this mean that group two is the happier? Well, again it’s easy to argue both cases. Yes, because they know the delight of accidentally happening upon their true path, and so will relish every moment. No, because they are always playing catch-up against the group one-ers they work with, and are all too mindful of opportunities wasted before they arrived at their chosen job.

Without wanting to delve too deeply into the aforementioned grey areas, perhaps it doesn’t matter at all. No matter how we find ourselves in our current line of work, isn’t it largely the nature of the particular organisation and profession, the quality of manager and learning and development opportunities, that retain our interest or keep us happy?

I’d be interested to know what group you think you fall into, and whether it’s had any effect on you. And – perhaps more importantly – whether (assuming both were equally keen on the job offer and company, and equally qualified) you’d be more impressed with a group one or a group two candidate at a job interview.



 
 

About the editors

Claire Churchard

Claire Churchard

News and features writer on People Management

Claire Warren

Claire Warren

The deputy editor at People Management, looking after the features section

James Brockett

James Brockett

News editor at People Management

Jill Evans

Jill Evans

Legal editor on People Management

Rob MacLachlan

Rob MacLachlan

Editor of People Management

Tim Smedley

Tim Smedley

Features writer on People Management.

Apprenticeships that work

New guidance to help you in developing high-quality apprenticeships

Read the new CIPD guide

HRD Conference 2012

Add value to your business with practical L&D solutions from HRD

25-26 April. Find out more
Links open in new window
 
People Management neither recommends, nor is responsible for, the content of external sites listed here.
Your link here: contact the PM sales team.

It’s untenable to have a normal retirement age in public-sector schemes that is significantly different from the state retirement age

Brian Bailey, Director of pensions, West Midlands Pension Fund and member of High Pay Commission