I completely agree with this. This is why we put so much emphasis on our general framework and how to choose process. Finding options that do well according to the framework is what ultimately matters; not the specific career path you’re in.
I agree that your framework and process can apply to opportunity-level decisions as well as field-level decisions—I just think that it isn’t emphasized in proportion to how useful I found it.
For instance, to me it looks like those pages are framed almost completely in terms of choosing broad career paths rather than choosing between individual opportunities. E.g., the heading on the framework page reads:
Our career evaluation framework helps you compare between different specific career options, like whether to go into consulting or grad school straight out of university; or whether to continue at your current for-profit job or leave to work for a non-profit.
To me this seems to emphasizes the field-level use-case for the framework but not the opportunity-level use case.
I completely agree with this. This is why we put so much emphasis on our general framework and how to choose process. Finding options that do well according to the framework is what ultimately matters; not the specific career path you’re in.
I agree that your framework and process can apply to opportunity-level decisions as well as field-level decisions—I just think that it isn’t emphasized in proportion to how useful I found it.
For instance, to me it looks like those pages are framed almost completely in terms of choosing broad career paths rather than choosing between individual opportunities. E.g., the heading on the framework page reads:
To me this seems to emphasizes the field-level use-case for the framework but not the opportunity-level use case.
Ah ok, I had ‘specific career options’ in mind, but then I see the examples don’t give the right impression. I’ll change this.