
Key Ideas from “Deferring Good Careers (Part 1)” Post (Dec 20, 2011):
- Philanthropy may be a subject of passion for those who already have made or sit on a good deal of money, but for the rest of us it should not be as relevant because (1) there are not enough of us with a lot of money and time to worry about where to put them to the best use and (2) philanthropy is not a full time job; it in fact detracts from the harder, more important idea we should think about, which is how we can incorporate a significant portion of our “do good” intentions into an attractive, life-long career instead of relegating it to mostly a by-thought or feel-good hobby in our spare time (or retirement)
- The questions we left with were (1) how should a young person choose between making more money sooner and engaging in “doing good” later, vs. pursuing sooner an occupation that promotes his or her ideals of “doing good” and is meaningful, but potentially sacrificing building wealth in the long term? and (2) how much ought this “doing good” thing be valued both by employees and employers?
In this Part 2, I will now try to set up the conversation by first examining what the actual availability of positions is we are talking about. In Part 3, I will then attempt to qualify the career trade-off at stake and focus on the problem of compensation within this space for available positions.
Continue reading →