Career Analysts

Another self-indulgent piece I have been hesitant to post, but what the heck, it was all so long ago. 

Long-time readers may recall I left accountancy to go to university in my mid-twenties. Nearly everyone said it was stupid, and even my most supportive friends were dubious. “Don’t cock it up this time”, Brendan said, face contorted at the thought. 

My record hardly inspired confidence: weak and failed exams at school, the same in accountancy, and teacher training abandoned after just one term. I couldn’t succeed at anything. Examinations either asked questions I could not answer, or questions I could not remember the answers to. It was destructive and self-defeating, but you keep it to yourself and pretend to the outside world that all is well. What gave me the nerve to try again? 

Desperation, you could say. But there was one other factor. In 1976, I sought professional careers advice. This was not the free-of-charge Local Education Authority service I had tried a couple of times and found superficial and low in quality. It was from a leading London firm called Career Analysts. I can’t remember what it cost, possibly around £80. It also involved a day in London. It was not cheap. Career Analysts still operates, and similar advice is nearly £900 now. My employer might have paid, they were good like that with staff development, but having given notice, I had to fund it myself. It was money well spent.  

There was a lengthy morning of pencil-and-paper tests, followed in the afternoon by a searching face-to-face discussion with an Occupational Psychologist. It is interesting, after fifty years, to look back at the report. 

One test, the Connolly Occupational Interest Questionnaire, identified preferences for different kinds of activities. I scored highest on the Welfare and Literary scales, but below average on Persuasive, Artistic, Computational, Scientific, and Practical activities.  

Another test looked at values. I had above or well-above-average Altruistic, Intellectual, and Aesthetic values, but much lower Power, Material, and Religious. This was said to indicate someone “rather emotional, sensitive and imaginative”, making me “fairly quiet, reserved and introverted”.  

But it was the longest and most extensive set of tests, the Morrisby Differential Test Battery, that surprised the psychologist. This was an intelligence test of seven different aptitudes. It was very difficult. I was above average in everything, scoring exceptionally high in problem-solving and numerical skills, and in the top 10% for Verbal items and handling detail. Perceptual, shape, and mechanical aptitudes were also high. The report said it showed a “very high level of ability”, and I was “certainly capable of passing an Honours degree or professional exams”. And I had thought I was no good at anything! 

It was flattering, but before being accused of showing off it is no big deal. The tests simply say that I am good with numbers and can concentrate on detail. As regards the CST (Compound Series Test) of problem-solving, it is only like Sudoku with shapes instead of numbers. The other things are not unusual; for example, lots of bloggers are better writers, blessed with wit, wisdom, and powers of expression the likes of which I could never hope to have. And whatever intelligence may be, the tests show but a part of it. They say nothing about important qualities such as memory, motivation, social skills, emotional intelligence, plain common sense, and so on, in many of which I am sadly deficient.  

However, it did raise the question of why my exam results had not been what they should have been. From our discussion, the psychologist thought I had been scraping through without proper study and exam techniques, and that emotionality had held me back. It explained the inability to do exams. He was not surprised I was unhappy. I was not occupied in ways best suited to my interests, aptitudes, and values, nor at an appropriate level, my succession of accountancy jobs having deteriorated into the compilation of monthly reports. Career-wise, it left the difficulty of obtaining the basic qualifications to change or progress. 

One of several suggestions was to take two Advanced Level subjects at evening classes, with a view to university the following year. I could work full-time until Christmas and save enough then to concentrate on studies through to the exams. They would be happy to act as referees for my university application. It was only what I wanted to hear, but to be told it was not unrealistic by an unbiased, objective, third party, helped repair confidence and sense of direction. 

Regarding subjects, the aptitude tests rules nothing out, but interests and values suggested avoiding the scientific and mathematical in favour of people and ideas, such as Literature and History. Then at university, Literature, History, Psychology, or Sociology would be appropriate, depending on whether I might prefer an administrative or welfare type of career. I took English Literature and Geography at evening classes, and Psychology at university. I worked hard, got the syllabuses, practised answering past questions, followed all the advice, and things began to go well. 

Considering my interests were not “of a scientific, technical or design kind”, it might seem odd I later went on to gain qualifications and work in Computing, but occupational interests give a snapshot in time, which reflected a desperate wish to escape accountancy and work more with people. At other times the results might have been different. Also, my kind of computing involved a large slice of psychology and creativity. Most areas of science and technology are exciting if they catch your imagination. They crush the wonder out of it at school. 

Unlike interests, I doubt personality values change much through life. My dad always said we were too sensitive as a family, and I say the same to my children now. Should I worry about being labelled “emotional, sensitive, quiet, reserved, and introverted”? Does it sound weak and ineffectual? It probably overstates it, I am no pushover, but I would certainly not be much good as a ruthless salesman, or in dominating a class of unruly teenagers. Much as we might wish we were different, it is better to know and be happy in ourselves. I sense that most bloggers have this kind of contemplative nature. 

It makes us easy prey to those who do score highly on the Power and Material scales, especially the shits that seek to control and use others to further their own careers. It has been my misfortune to fall into the jurisdiction of two such individuals. They cannot understand that some of us are cooperative rather than competitive, and work for satisfaction as much as material reward. It helps to understand this. DLTBGYD.