Definitions of Growth!

“Am I growing here? I am doing well but the structural constraints here are hampering my growth. There are no vacant positions in the hierarchical level above.”

“He has spent significant time with us and has been performing consistently well. He must have career aspirations. It is probably time for us to start working on his development.”

“Who are our stars? What are we doing for their development?”

How often do we hear these statements at work? I do hear them quite a bit, if not often.

It makes me wonder about the assumption/belief behind these statements. “Growth is only, or mostly, about vertical movement up in the hierarchy.”

How does this belief get manifested at the workplace? Some obvious manifestations are:

• We work on the development of subordinates when we feel it is time for us to consider him/her for a higher order role (note: a higher order role also necessarily connotes a vertical movement up the hierarchy. Other possible definitions of higher order role don’t seem to be considered).
• When it comes to our careers, we wonder about what’s next for us (and what is next for us is usually a “higher order role” or a role which prepares us for a “higher order role” – a career road map we call it!).

There are other manifestations too – the absences!

• As managers, do we work on the development of subordinates who we are not considering for a vertical movement up at this point of time? If the only definition of growth is a vertical movement up, and I am not considering someone for such a movement at this point of time, I surely should not be working on his growth/development, right?
• As individuals do we consistently indulge in a reflection process on what areas we need to work on and go about working on them even after just getting promoted or in the first few years in a “higher order role”?

What kind of a social system are we giving rise to if the only definition of success and failure is our ability to continuously grow vertically up in this pyramid?

If there are few definition of success, and we make that definition scarcely available, then most of the people in the system would feel like failures. What kind of energy would exist in that kind of a system?

Let me give you a few analogies. Till about a few decades back, in India, becoming an engineer or a doctor was the scale on which success or failure was determined. Today we seem to have many more acceptable definitions – look at the sprout of high achieving professional in fine arts, commerce, business, etc. Along with the growth of income, one of the major growths for India has been its ability to broaden the definitions on which success or failure is determined. We can always argue whether we have become more materialistic, but then atleast we have more ways in which people can become materialistic. It enables us to create a social system where there are much more success stories.

What do we do when we come across as a social system where we find that the definitions of success are limited? I feel we should start with widening the definitions of success and then enabling people to be successful– but this is easier said than done. We are talking of questioning people’s beliefs here! But then, someone’s got to make a start. Why can’t that someone be us?

-

Sourav