go bold

I think I wrote something awhile back about good companies vs. good people – but what about good companies vs. good work? I just finished up a conversation with a friend who’s in the situation of being in love with the company he works at, but hates the tedious, somewhat degrading, but admittedly necessary work he actually does there. (Yes, he was an intern – but what an awful experience to have, and lesson to be taught!)

When should you sacrifice your own happiness / career development / intellectual stimulation for a product you’re excited about? Can you love the product and love the work? Or does loving the product just blind you to what you’re doing (and vice versa)?

I suppose it all boils down to how idealistic you are. Is this going to be the game-changer? Is there really nowhere else as, or almost as, exciting – but where you get to do interesting and challenging work? I usually think so – he may not. How does loyalty play into this – when are you obligated to stay with a company when you’re only being satisfied ideologically and not intellectually? (I say almost never – or that it’s only up to you to effect a change so that you are intellectually satisfied. But I’m only selectively idealistic, and incredibly selfish when it comes to my development.)

(p.s. – failed a bit with blogging once a week – but hopefully I can put something up soon about last weekend, which I spent at http://w2sf.startupweekend.org/ , and get back on track.)

In tech and the startup world, there are tons of options – new startups spring up every day with “the next big thing” – or “the ____ killer,” or “____ for [insert platform here],” or “____ meets ____, AGGREGATED!!”

So when something really cool comes around – it seems to make sense to want to jump on board and share in their (or your expectation of their) success. But when you know little about the actual team you’d be working on, and conventional wisdom seems to put “the people” at the top of the list when considering school / workplaces / environments in general, how do things play out?

I like to think that good people want exciting projects. A good developer wants stimulating work, and once put in an environment with that stimulus taken away (either by a boring project or, for example, being bought out by a company which stifles the exciting parts), they’ll find a new place to play out their cool ideas.

So I think instead of worrying whether product.good > people.good or people.good > product.good… I’ll stick with product.good implies people.good (with the converse unfortunately not always being true, without good management / vision / etc). Here’s to the future.

I got into an extended argument the other day with a friend who made the claim, “MIT does an awful job of making sure its students know what they want to do after graduation.”

Another graduating senior choosing to pursue the one-year Master’s of Engineering next year (like most, to have some extra time to discover his career interests and direction), he is dissatisfied with how MIT has guided him along his path to graduation. A sound bite of his I can’t seem to forget: “I know less about what I want to do now than I did when I entered MIT.”

It makes me laugh, this sense of entitlement – the idea that a student enters this prestigious institution, often and widely advertised by its “huge range of opportunities,” and expect to be helped and told what he or she specifically is passionate about. The discovery of one’s interests, one’s passions, one’s desired area of expertise – these pursuits seem to need to be by definition self-driven.

Figuring out what you want to do with your life is a problem to deal with every year of your life, as priorities and interests change. It should be something to constantly search for, lest you find yourself at a point in your life dissatisfied and unfocused. As a student, it’s not the Institute’s responsibility to guide you. Provide lots of information and resources, yes – guide you and direct you, never.

It’s your responsibility to try our internships and research opportunities, to take an interesting range of classes, and to explore your field (academically and in the industry) as much as possible.

One other interesting viewpoint that came up when I discussed this with another friend was – MIT does an amazing job of challenging preconceptions. Plenty of pre-med majors are made un-pre-med by the Institute, simply because MIT makes them ask themselves, “Do I really want to do this? Do I really want to be a doctor (and go through this pain of being pre-med), or is this just something I’ve expected to do?” And I think that’s a positive thing – being forced to, as I mentioned earlier, constantly reexamine your own goals and expectations for yourself.

This is the time to explore – this is the time to discover yourself, and let your interests flourish. Why would you allow that responsibility to anybody but yourself?

I was hoping I’d be exempt from having to find a summer gig this year, counting on being able to just work on my Master’s and get paid through the department. Apparently not – I’ve got no funding and get to find my own way. Know anyone small hiring summers and doing exciting things in email / analytics / events? :)

I did it — after having reserved my plane tickets two weeks ago (cancellable via JetBlue, so I could chicken out if I wanted to), I finally felt confident enough that I won’t be missing anything crucial over the weekend of SxSW that I… swallowed hard and registered for the conference.

I’m ridiculously excited. There’re a few things I’m missing (plus I just found out, the weekend afterwards is not only super busy with some extracurricular activities, Barcamp Boston2 is also taking place at MIT) in order to be in Austin, but hopefully it’ll all be worth it in the end.

On another Silly Excited Christine note, my business cards came in the mail today… or “identity cards,” being that I’m still only a student. My first chance to give them out might actually be SxSW — how exciting! :D