What’s in a name?
Reading Salman Rushdie’s biography recently, I was struck by how significant a name can be. Rushdie’s father invented his name …
Reading Salman Rushdie’s biography recently, I was struck by how significant a name can be.
Rushdie’s father invented his name – and gave it to his family – because of his admiration for Ibn Rushd, a 12th-century philosopher at the vanguard of the rationalist argument against Islamic literalism.
More than 800 years later, when the Ayatollah Khomeini issued the fatwa against Rushdie for the publication of The Satanic Verses, Rushdie reflected: “At least… I’m going into battle bearing the right name.”
Rushdie’s ‘made-up’ name is key to his philosophical position in the world. The same is true of the names we give things at work. Job titles, for example, are great indicators of organisational culture.
Trawling through heritage sector recruitment websites recently, I came across a huge variety of job titles and was struck by the differing impressions they gave, both of the jobs advertised and the organisations themselves.
Some job titles seemed to mask or aggrandise the real nature of the job. For example, a “retail steward” or “customer experience associate” by any other name would be a shop assistant.
Other job titles did the opposite, seeming to diminish the responsibilities of the role. Here, particular bugbears of mine include “volunteer coordinators” and officers of all kinds: heritage officers, principal museum officers, interpretation officers and so on.
A volunteer coordinator, for instance, gives the sense of a role focused on day-to-day resource management, rather than one responsible for nurturing and developing volunteers to enrich the organisation.
“Officer”, with its military connotations, suggests a firmly hierarchical institution, with little scope for independent thought and action.
In some places, these job titles might be a true and depressing indication of the nature of the jobs themselves and the organisational culture. In others, they will be misnomers for roles where creativity and personal responsibility are highly valued.
On the bright side, there are examples where job titles genuinely reflect great organisational culture.
Scarborough Museums Trust, where I am a trustee, has recently advertised for a community curator, echoing the trust’s strategic focus on becoming a museum at the heart of its community.
“Visitor experience” job titles are another good example because the name shows how much more there is to a visitor’s sense of a place than the “visitor services” (cafe, shop, leaflets) on offer.
Perhaps it is time for organisations to make sure their job titles give an accurate reflection of the jobs themselves and of the sort of organisation they want to be for their people and their visitors.
Alex Lindley has a background in corporate human resources and volunteer management and engagement.
alexlindley@email.com
Rushdie’s father invented his name – and gave it to his family – because of his admiration for Ibn Rushd, a 12th-century philosopher at the vanguard of the rationalist argument against Islamic literalism.
More than 800 years later, when the Ayatollah Khomeini issued the fatwa against Rushdie for the publication of The Satanic Verses, Rushdie reflected: “At least… I’m going into battle bearing the right name.”
Rushdie’s ‘made-up’ name is key to his philosophical position in the world. The same is true of the names we give things at work. Job titles, for example, are great indicators of organisational culture.
Trawling through heritage sector recruitment websites recently, I came across a huge variety of job titles and was struck by the differing impressions they gave, both of the jobs advertised and the organisations themselves.
Some job titles seemed to mask or aggrandise the real nature of the job. For example, a “retail steward” or “customer experience associate” by any other name would be a shop assistant.
Other job titles did the opposite, seeming to diminish the responsibilities of the role. Here, particular bugbears of mine include “volunteer coordinators” and officers of all kinds: heritage officers, principal museum officers, interpretation officers and so on.
A volunteer coordinator, for instance, gives the sense of a role focused on day-to-day resource management, rather than one responsible for nurturing and developing volunteers to enrich the organisation.
“Officer”, with its military connotations, suggests a firmly hierarchical institution, with little scope for independent thought and action.
In some places, these job titles might be a true and depressing indication of the nature of the jobs themselves and the organisational culture. In others, they will be misnomers for roles where creativity and personal responsibility are highly valued.
On the bright side, there are examples where job titles genuinely reflect great organisational culture.
Scarborough Museums Trust, where I am a trustee, has recently advertised for a community curator, echoing the trust’s strategic focus on becoming a museum at the heart of its community.
“Visitor experience” job titles are another good example because the name shows how much more there is to a visitor’s sense of a place than the “visitor services” (cafe, shop, leaflets) on offer.
Perhaps it is time for organisations to make sure their job titles give an accurate reflection of the jobs themselves and of the sort of organisation they want to be for their people and their visitors.
Alex Lindley has a background in corporate human resources and volunteer management and engagement.
alexlindley@email.com