Should you apply for more than one position at a time? How long should you be in a position? Can you really “do anything” for a few years as long as it’s good for your career?
In my blog post Career planning is the crux of personal development and team development, I shared a career planning framework to assist leaders as they mentor others as well as help them with their own career planning. In this post, I cover some important questions and considerations that often arise during the career planning process.
One question that regularly surfaces is whether to apply for multiple positions at the same time. Some worry it can be viewed as being undisciplined with their careers, akin to throwing spaghetti against the wall to see what might stick. Others are concerned they will not win any position because leadership might consider them less committed to any single position than other applicants. But human beings have many interests. It would be more unnatural to find someone with a single pursuit in life. It’s not uncommon to be interested in multiple positions and to be equally good at a few of them. Leveraging the career discussion framework provides a way for an individual to describe why he is interested in different positions. Describing to the interviewers how the positions share similar characteristics is an effective way of demonstrating he thought deeply about the positions and how he can excel in any of them. It demonstrates a level of maturity in thinking others may lack.
How much time in a position is too much or too little? Another common question when career planning. Sometimes there are cultural norms in a company that influence the answer. Perhaps it is common for lower and mid-level associates to move to a new position every two to three years while higher-level non-executive leaders regularly move every three to four years. The people you mentor may feel “stuck” or “behind” if they are not consistently moving within this norm. I encouraged those I worked with to think differently. First, to think about goals and outcomes achieved during their tenure and not duration in position. Second, to consider what is most important to the next position the person is interested in pursuing. To the first point, has the person accomplished meaningful goals that can be described in a winning way during an interview? If not, additional time in the current position to accomplish something is warranted. To the second point, if the person is interested in certain positions, can he articulate how the work performed in his current position (and prior positions) makes him the best candidate for the position? If not, additional time in his current position focusing on aspects most relevant to the next is necessary. Ultimately, there is no right or wrong answer. But duration-based discussions are problematic compared to those that emphasize accomplishments, relevant skills, and competencies. How often do you see someone walk into an interview and win the position by stating he has been in his current position for four years and that alone makes him ready for the new position? Likely never.
Duration discussions can be valuable, however, in shaping someone’s expectations around how long it takes to make a difference once he starts in a position. For example, leadership positions often require a ramp up time of six months or more. From there it takes time to establish your strategy and guardrails and for the team to modify the way it works to meet your defined goals and outcomes. And then it takes time to accomplish a few of those goals and outcomes. Ask the person you are mentoring to lay out his particular timeline and see if his thinking aligns with the reality of having multiple significant accomplishments.
A final benefit the career framework provides is to prevent people from taking positions that could break their spirits. There have been times associates told me they were willing to take a position in which they had no interest and would not really enjoy, because it would be good for their broader career. They stated, “I can do anything for two or three years.” I asked them to really think that through, pointing to the Dislikes column. Think about it for yourself. What if your job felt like living in the Dislikes column every day and you rarely had the feelings you desire in the first column? How miserable might you be? If you have ever been truly unhappy at work, you know how painful it can be. How it wears on you, dominating your thoughts and following you home. Is it worth it? Can you really do “anything” for two to three years as long as it expands your background? Some say, “What doesn’t kill you makes you stronger.” I tend to say, “What makes you happy makes you better.” If you really believe it could be a good thing to take such a position, you had better be very thoughtful about it or you may find you are so unhappy your performance deteriorates and impacts your career in exactly the opposite way you sought by taking the job.
Share your thoughts below.
How do you think about time in position and applying for multiple leadership positions at the same time?
Leave a Reply