« Old birds, new tune | Home | On Creativity and Design »
June 28, 2009
Do what the crowd says
What will you tell your children to be when they grow up?
When I was a child, I often heard that I could be anything that I wanted, but in my mind I always hear the same occupations: doctor, lawyer. As an adult I generalize doctors as often unhappy, overworked, and not passion-driven. Lawyers I equate to low ethics, licentious lifestyles and paying your dues--forever. I'm not sure I'd push my child to be either, though they should do whatever they set their minds to.
Why would people tell their kids to be doctors and lawyers? They make a lot of money, yes. But was there anything more? I like to imagine that the original incentive was the ability to do something desperately needed and in short supply. This guaranteed perpetual demand, unlike the factory and machine-based that perhaps was the norm of that period. Looking back even further, perhaps one encouraged their child to be a metal worker rather that worry after the finicky harvest of farming and animal husbandry.
Today, however, there are tons of doctors, and even more lawyers. I wouldn't go so far as to say that there is no longer a demand for these fields, but the return is not as guaranteed as it was even a decade ago, let alone a generation.
The thing most concerning, however, is that these jobs are information based. It is the information that the doctor, the lawyer, the MBA gained through years of study that made them valued. It was the checks and balances of their peers that made them trustworthy, and it was the relatively high cost to order this information that kept them well. In today's era, where information is much easier to sort, qualify and transfer, where records are available both as reputation and as precedent, and access becomes pervasive, I wonder whether the bell tolls for the mediocre of the craft (in much the same way that it has for the mediocre journalist, the mediocre print designer, and so many others).
The same with going to college. It was a certain advantage that clearly set one apart; now, it is basically expected that all high school graduates should go.
Should I tell my kid just to get into computers? What if software and hardware development and maintenance become the equivalent of writing recipies and changing oil? Sure, there will always be some people who need it, but mainly because they have chosen not to learn the ability themselves.
Perhaps I'll tell my little one to learn to see what it is people need. If they can provide that--even if it means several different careers over a lifetime--they will have an adaptive security that should weather any economic or technological climate.
There is a word of caution in this; I am telling myself not to be comfortable in the status of a position. Needs ebb and wane, and only those able to stay afloat avoid being pulled under. Trust demand rather than norms, and even if you're overly cautious, you'll always be relatively safe.
Is there anything wrong with encouraging a child to do for self? Sure you can follow crowd needs and stay in demand—but what is to be said for learning to provide for self independent of societal demand?
Certainly the farmer can live most consistently despite external fluctuation—his food and his work are tied to him; only when he relies upon selling to generate income does he become linked. Are there modern, non-agricultural professions that have this same autonomy?