By Jordi Cabanas-Danés
At some point during my growing years, comments such as “He’s just not so good at sports” became the conviction: “I’m just not so good at sports”. Now, several decades later, I find myself thinking: What did this even mean?, that I am not naturally fit with an outstanding condition and VO2 max value?, or that my motor and hand-eye skills are so poor, that I am incapable of even trying any sport? Well, you probably know where this is going: that comment I often heard as a kid, which had an infinite number of possible interpretations, turned into an impactful conviction which imposed an infinite amount of limiting beliefs. This and many other examples made me more aware of people- or self-labelling and its impact on self-confidence, growth and social interactions (just to name a few). Far from being an exception, academia is an environment that to a large extent relies on a solid labeling system. And as time progresses, it becomes apparent that this is more of a bandwidth problem, making the system incapable of using holistic evaluations and thereby reducing scientists into a few labels instead.
A sorting society
Classifying and categorizing situations, objects, people, you name it, is an intrinsic need of human beings. As useful as this can be to better understand the world around us and not be overwhelmed by our vastly diverse environment, labels can be limiting and destructive both to ourselves and to others. In fact, the label “not so good at sports”, that since I was a kid has hung on me, limited me in ever considering I could at least try or that I could even enjoy sports. The danger further increases when these labels also extend to how others perceive you and, consciously or unconsciously judge you, thereby limiting your opportunities to try and improve. If this all wasn’t bad enough, labels can be interpreted differently by different people, so it wouldn’t hurt to be specific and mindful before branding yourself or others. The world and people are so complex that “male”, “female”, “gay”, “straight” or the “good/bad” array of labels such as: “good/bad PhD candidate”, “good/bad parent”, are not sufficient. In other words, there will always be many more possible combinations and relative nuances to human trait than all the labels we can come up with. Perhaps we should then consider leaving the labels in the supermarket and lift those on people to embrace and try to understand and learn from each other's differences instead.
You are not these labels
Another risk of people-labelling (including self-labelling), perhaps even more dangerous than their limiting power, is when labels turn into goals or when we feel we need to live up to these labels. Do not get me wrong, of course it is great to have ambitions and goals to pursue, that’s what will lead to self-growth, but not because you are expected to or have been told to. The approach should be more a bottom-up one rather than top-down. Do you want to stick the label “good PhD candidate” on yourself? That’s perfectly fine, but think first what a good PhD candidate even means to you, make a progressive and solid plan to get there, and revisit and modify your plan when necessary. Being mindful of your limitations will also make you less prone to think of yourself in terms of those labels only.
A few years back, I started running. Am I now a "runner"? No, I just like to run. In fact, the first time I tried, I set my sights on running for 20 minutes and I did not enjoy a single one of them. I was more focused on making sure my breathing system was still working and that I wouldn’t faint before getting home, that I didn’t even see anything of the surroundings. At this point, I could have just listened to the voice that said “I’m just not so good at sports” and given up. And I probably had done so if I would have set my next goal as running for 21 minutes but this is what I learned: your horizons are yours and only yours to decide broadening them in all directions. Not always more means more minutes or more effort. More can also mean running for the same 20 minutes but trying to enjoy the run more, or focus less on your breathing or even running for 18 minutes instead if that helps. In any case, it is important to not be limited by the pre-defined idea of what your horizons are and at the same time, to broaden them progressively in the different dimensions.
Balance commitment and compassion
There were and are many days I still do not feel like going for a run, even knowing that I will probably enjoy it and feel better afterwards. And I can come up with far more reasons not to go than to actually go but I started being more self-compassionate and at the same time committed to my plan, how contradictory this might sound. The days when I do not really feel like going for a run even when I had planned so, I push myself to go for only 12 minutes. If after 12 minutes I still don’t want to continue, I’ll go home and if not, I will continue. Someone might think of this as fooling myself but it has so far worked for me. There have been other days I simply didn’t want to go and I ended up not going. This is also ok, cause I am much more than the labels “consistent”, “go-getter” or “lazy”, “weak”, etc. Will I keep always running? I do not know. But in any case, if I decide to stop, it will not change my identity nor my values, cause this is a label I decide not to stick on myself.
Do you recognize yourself in this article? The PhD advisors are here for you. Get in touch with us for a consultation (phdadvisor@amsterdamumc.nl).