Julio Gonzales, like many of his fellow students in a one-year midcareer master’s program, approached the end of his sabbatical with a mix of anxiety and anticipation. That year had given all the students a chance to design experiments, to make new connections, and to step back from daily routines. A lot had happened in that year, enough to raise awareness of the problems, but in many cases, not enough to point to good solutions. Time had run out. When Julio and his peers started the program, a year had seemed like an eternity. But major transitions often require two or three years. Now the questions burning in their minds were: “Can I take an interim step? If I do that, how do I protect myself from falling back into the same old, same old? How long do I have before inertia sets in?”
These are very good questions. In a series of studies on the introduction of new technologies (for instance, software engineering tools or graphics software), MIT researchers discovered a windows of opportunity effect.[20] They found that managers have only a discrete time period in which to effect a real change after introducing a new technology. After that period, use of the technology tended to “congeal,” freezing unresolved problems in the technology and fixing its use in a specific organizational context, at least until the next crisis. Adaptation to new technologies was rarely a smooth, continuous process. Rather, it occurred in fits and stops; whatever changes did not get made at first were put off for much later, usually not until the consequences of those latent problems accumulated to provoke a crisis, opening the next window for change. Research on leaders newly taking charge of organizations shows the same effect: New leaders have a fixed time period in which to make changes; after that, it gets harder.[21]
Nathalie Gaumont, a thirty-nine-year-old French nutritionist and M.B.A., came to understand the windows-of-opportunity effect. In the heat of the moment, she informally accepted an attractive job offer from a former boss. It was the perfect offer, according to Susan Fontaine’s logic of CV progression. Nathalie would move up a big notch in prestige and responsibility, moving from heading a European group to overseeing operations worldwide. The new firm, Nomad, was moving up economically, while her current employer was losing market share. But as a senior nutritionist for the European division of a major U.S. food company, she was already feeling burned out; the new job meant even more responsibility, more hours, and more international travel. The one thing she knew was that she wanted less of all that. And the new job offered only an incremental change. Approaching forty, she wondered whether the time was “now or never” to make a sweeping change in her life. But could she pass up a concrete offer that promised at least some change to her professional life?
Reason told her to go for it.
I figured there would be more opportunities for growth—lateral moves, taking on other brands. I can’t go any higher at Packard and stay in Europe. And, the company is not doing so well; it’s losing market share worldwide. Now I have a staff job and report to a vice president rather than a division head. I’m getting further and further removed from upper management and am losing visibility. I’m spending a lot of time on regulatory issues, lobbying work, when I’d prefer to be closer to the heart of the business. The downside at Nomad is that I’d be reporting to someone based in Japan. The areas Nomad wants to develop are in Latin America and Asia-Pacific. I already travel more than I want to, but at least it’s within Europe. At Nomad, I’d have two or three big trips each month. I’ve tried to ask how much, but the answer is always that it would be up to me. And I just found out the job will not be based in the city, as I thought. That means a long commute each day.
It was confusing. Nathalie had had little time for any activity outside her job, much less time to devote to any kind of concerted job search.
My job has been very intense. I’m very committed and passionate about it. I work every weekend. Two or three times a week I’m on an airplane. I just endure; I’m a good soldier. I let people put stuff on my back. I have a hard time saying no. But I feel that I’m caught in a spiral. Am I going to keep going in circles? Here is change coming to me on a silver platter. It isn’t perfect, but it’s an escape hatch. I know myself. If I stay here, despite all good intentions, I will easily fall right back into the routine.
Two unexpected events made her question her decision to take the new job. A close friend died, at the age of fifty, from liver cancer. Before she died, she advised Nathalie to get out of the rut and pressure of her business life. Then, a necessary surgical procedure resulted in a one-month medical leave. Nathalie suddenly had time to think through what she really wanted. Jolted by her friend’s untimely death, on medical leave she started considering things she never before found time for.
This month, I’ve had some ideas but they are not precise. I’m interested in doing a thesis on the sociology of eating behaviors, to understand the real barriers to healthy eating. When I was younger, I went to an arts high school and joined a dance company. But then I gave that up when I thought I’d go to medical school. I’ve been wondering about going back to something in the health field. I think I’d be happy in a medical setting dealing with real people rather than with dossiers and projects. I wonder if I can transfer my business school skills to a health-related NGO like Doctors without Borders.
Realizing that the proposed job change would only delay the serious thinking she needed to do, Nathalie decided to decline the “perfect offer” in order to buy some time to pursue a true career shift. Then, true to her own predictions, she got caught right back in the routine. Two years later, she was still at the first company, still not sure how to move out. Maybe she was not yet ready for change, or maybe one month was not enough time to build momentum. Or maybe failing to start something new in the window right after her leave kept her stuck.
Nathalie’s story is a cautionary tale. Windows of opportunity open and close back up again. We go through periods when we are highly receptive to major change and periods when even incremental deviations are hard to tolerate.[22] What we do in the period immediately following a time-out determines whether we will be able to use that experience to effect real change or whether, instead, old routines will reassert themselves, leaving basic problems unresolved until urgency builds the next time around.
taken from; Working Identity: Unconventional Strategies for Reinventing Your Career
