Regarding his/her: that was a dumb assumption on my part. Apologies. It should be her.
To the content of the article. This is what the author describes as the scenario to be avoided:
> Your choice becomes limited to employers who want a cog in the big machine while your career will fade into a 9-5 job.
As if this is per se a bad thing. As I said, if your career is your life then indeed, follow the authors advice. However if your career is just a tool to financially enable your real life, it’s great to be a cog in a 9-to-5 machine: you get to go home in time for dinner every day and you probably have mental energy to spare when you do.
Further down, this is written:
> If you're not paying attention, you lose precious years stagnating and being unhappy.
Below, signs of unhappiness are: lack of work accomplishments, lack of “resume worthy work”, lack of new skills for future employment, lack of overthinking work problems in the shower, lack of kinship with colleagues felt.
Again, for many people, work is not a goal in itself. I like my colleagues and I enjoy my job, but in the end the place I really want to be is not my office (but my home) and the people I really care about are not my colleagues (but my family and friends).
Final exemplary quote:
> You have at best 120 quarters left to make something of yourself. A year wasted at a poor job or role is equivalent to you throwing away 3.3% of your career.
Again, apparently “making something of yourself” is equivalent to not wasting time at a job and having a good career?
I fully stand by my points:
* It’s fine to be very career and job minded.
* You need to read the linked article with a lot of flexibility and creativity to come away with any other impression than the author is very career and job minded.
* It shows a lack of perspective (or an abundance of personal insecurities) to write a preachy article like this without even considering that your goals (the authors goals) might not be the same as everyone else’s.