The Parallax View Of Your Career

Parallax is defined as “a displacement or difference in the apparent position of an object viewed along two different lines of sight”. It is often used when talking about the motions of stars and planets, since parallax can be used to calculate distance to far away objects. Parallax is also how the moving background image of your iPhone works, too.

But parallax can also be applied to your own life timeline. Let’s focus on one particular object in our lives: our careers.  

I recently came across this blog post titled Is College for Everyone? An Introduction and Timeline of College in America

It’s a wonderful timeline of college education in America. The part I want to bring to your attention is the “Early 1900s” section:

Early 1900s — Thelin lays out a set of characteristics that we see emerge that come to define the great modern American university of the time. You’ll notice they carry an immense likeness to universities today:

1. Philanthropy on a large scale. Wealthy donors gave institutions a financial base that they had never before had, giving them the opportunity to grow, almost as businesses.
2. Strong university president. In this age, presidents functioned almost as entrepreneurs. They were civically involved, politically involved, and leaders in their communities.
3. Full-time professor-experts. As universities gained stature and wealth, professors were soon expected to devote all their time to their university. Full-time professors became the norm, and were expected to continue to research in their fields and be prominent intellectual voices.
4. Unified teaching methods. Two teaching methods came to be the norm in American universities. First was the lecture. There was a large audience, little discussion, and an expert professor at the front. The second method would complement the first: the seminar. A professor would meet with a small group of advanced students to discuss and research a niche theme.
5. Curriculum. Students in this era were being funneled into “majors” of specific study. Classical education was quite broad in the 1600s and 1700s. Studies were becoming more and more focused in modern American colleges, particularly to business and practical sciences.
6. Modern facilities. The campus itself emerged as a large and complex institution, often with the university library being the central intellectual hub.

Two things I want to point out about this section. First, the teaching methods. Those methods exist today and are most familiar to everyone that has attended college (even for just a few classes). I was fascinated to learn that such methods were not always how classes were taught, and that this format was only fairly recently brought about as colleges became more like a business while still trying to remain an educational facility.

The lecture format is what I find in use at most conferences, too. I’ve written before about how if you aren’t putting your hands on something then you aren’t being trained. The reason for my views on the subject go back to my days teaching mathematics as a graduate assistant at Washington State University (GO COUGS!). My experience as an educator is that teaching, training, and talking are all very different things.

But don’t just take my word on the matter. Go read Telling Ain’t Training: Updated, Expanded, Enhanced for more details on why a lecture style format is much different than putting your hands on something. It’s also one of the reasons I applaud Allan Hirt (blog | @SQLHA) for adding labs into his already wonderful lectures, giving attendees a proper SQL training experience.

The other point I want to mention is the “full-time professor-experts”. These words hit home for me:

…professors were soon expected to devote all their time to their university. Full-time professors became the norm, and were expected to continue to research in their fields and be prominent intellectual voices.

Why did I focus on this? Well, let’s change a few words and take another look at that sentence:

…professors Technical evangelists were soon are expected to devote all their time to their university company. Full-time professors Technical evangelists became the norm, and were are expected to continue to research in their fields and be prominent intellectual voices.

As Professor Don Tillman would say, “very interesting”.

See, I’ve been struggling trying to explain to people what it is I do for a living. Whenever someone asks  what it is I do I find it difficult to say “Technical Evangelist”. Heck, even just saying “Database Administrator” is hard to explain. For some folks I just tell them “I work in Marketing” because it seems to be something they can understand.

But there, in that one sentence, buried into a blog post about colleges, is what I believe to be the best way of describing what it is I do here.

While at Washington State I thought I was going to go on to earn my PhD in Mathematics and become a professor somewhere, maybe even coach some basketball. One of the assistants basketball coaches at WSU at the time even suggested my new nickname, “Doc LaRock”. I still love hearing his voice say that to me all these years later. Anyway, my PhD wasn’t in my future. I sometimes think about it, but not often.

I may not be in academia. I may not have my PhD in Mathematics. But I realize that my current career is similar to that of a professor. In fact, the more I look, the more parallels I see:

• I devote all my time to my company, Solarwinds.
• I am expected to research new features and functionality.
• I am expected to have a prominent voice (we can debate the intellectual level).
• I am expected to teach (and learn) from others.

I am exactly what a university or college would want from a professor on staff. Someone to help draw in students, and money, during my tenure.

I find it rather interesting that my career is essentially what I had envisioned when the words Doc LaRock were first spoken. But it’s not math, not numbers, not theorems…

It’s data that is my canvas.

Think about where you are with your career today, and where you thought you would be. All too often I hear about people saying “how did I get here?” when reflecting upon their current jobs. To me that is a very negative way of thinking. Instead, think about the parallels that exist.

I am willing to bet that the positives of your situation will draw parallels to what you thought years ago about your career and yourself.

Try it for yourself and discover the parallax view of your career.