I really appreciate how Adam has laid out the analogy to an escalator. I’ve often thought of this as headwinds and tailwinds. In some work environments the culmination of all these inputs can actually make work feel easy and therefore motivating. However the same work in other environments can be drudgery.
Nice frameworks. My one question is where does personal interest come in here. For example, just for the sake of argument, if I identify my environment to be high potential but also my skill level to be high but I don’t want to progress in my career in the direction that the company offers , what weight do I place on it?
I think a combination of the two framework is also enlightening. For example, I clearly recognize that I’m not in the flow zone, and that the potential in reverse 9 box is moderate to low even though the skills may be high, this leads me to believe that exiting might be the best option.
I really appreciate how Adam has laid out the analogy to an escalator. I’ve often thought of this as headwinds and tailwinds. In some work environments the culmination of all these inputs can actually make work feel easy and therefore motivating. However the same work in other environments can be drudgery.
Nice frameworks. My one question is where does personal interest come in here. For example, just for the sake of argument, if I identify my environment to be high potential but also my skill level to be high but I don’t want to progress in my career in the direction that the company offers , what weight do I place on it?
I think a combination of the two framework is also enlightening. For example, I clearly recognize that I’m not in the flow zone, and that the potential in reverse 9 box is moderate to low even though the skills may be high, this leads me to believe that exiting might be the best option.