Who are you working with?
Your collaborators say more about you than what you produce.
The world is full of gurus, ninjas and rock stars, and they are all quite willing to tell you. But when we speak to employers, everyone seems to say the same thing: “We hire people who are a good cultural fit for our organisation.” For most employers, technical excellence doesn’t even register — it’s an expected prerequisite.
In the end, it is the people that create the work, not the work that defines its creator(s).
So, in a world fascinated with individual brilliance and people telling you how good they are, how do you figure out whether someone is the right fit for your team? The traditional ways of showcasing your work, like offline or online portfolios, place a heavy emphasis on finished work. Work that has been continually polished long after the actual job has finished. Websites like Behance and Dribbble exacerbate this impression, by placing the focus on pixel perfect portfolio pieces that do not provide any real insight into the conflicting forces that produced the work. This approach doesn’t provide us with any real understanding of the people behind the work. In the end, it is the people that create the work, not the work that defines its creator(s).
You may say that using portfolios to compare work creates a meritocracy, but the concept of meritocracy is an ideal rather than a reality. Merit is not a fixed concept, it is in the eye of the beholder. Likewise, what constitutes “good” work is also subjective. Who is to say what is good or bad, especially when it’s a client that dictates the shape and direction of that work? Ultimately, happy paying customers are what it’s all about, not the subjective “cool” of passing trends. The current system is comparing apples with oranges.
Studying the patterns between the people you work with, and how often, unearths a much deeper story about you than a portfolio piece frozen in time.
Focusing exclusively on portfolio pieces also ignores the way people work — which is a mistake. It is how we work that defines the good from great. Would you rather work with someone who is difficult or easy to work with? Someone who is efficient or inefficient; who delivers on time or misses deadlines?
Portfolios only represent a single view of how you work, namely, when you have plenty of time to sweat the details. They also represent a little white lie: that you did everything by yourself. While some people may end up doing everything themselves, this is the exception rather than the rule. The truth is more likely to be that they were a part of a team, whether that be as the main protagonist or in a support role. For a project to be successful, each person must play their role, big or small.
Ultimately, it’s who you are, not just your end product that makes you attractive to work with.
So, if it’s not all about finished work, what is the best reference point to find out whether we might work well together? It’s your collaborators, Grasshopper! ☺ Who you work with and how often says more about what you are like to work with than just what you produce. Say you’re a genius, but a difficult person (just imagine). You might work with lots of people but probably with less frequency than someone who might be less talented but easier to work with. Similarly, there is a better chance that you’ll work well with a person that often works with with one or more of your collaborators. Studying the patterns between the people you work with, and how often, unearths a much deeper story about you than a portfolio piece frozen in time.
What stories do your projects tell? What stories do you share about your projects and the people you’ve worked with? Think about it. Are they the type of projects or people that you’d want to work with again? People collaborate for more reasons than just technical ability. Ultimately, it’s who you are, not just your end product that makes you attractive to work with.
