I started out my adult life (after high school, I mean) thinking that I should choose a career that could fit within a marriage or I could be fulfilled in as a working single (in the event I didn't marry, for example). I did feel called to ministry, as part of that search that every young person goes through in one way or another, as to what they should do with their life, but, still there were different ways I could approach that chosen career once decided upon. And there were 3 times along the way, before deciding to go do Bible school, which would more or less clinch the decision. The first one was my first year or so of college (1978-1979) when I was actually planning to study international business, although I hadn't declared my major yet. When I decided that wasn't a good fit for me I decided on missions, although that translated into an undergraduate degree of European Studies with a Russian minor. But once decided, I threw my energies into that pursuit, taking advantage of various opportunities, in addition to my college studies, that could prepare me for that work. At that point a serious relationship was not really under the radar, and I figured if God wanted me married he'd bring the right person along. That's not to say I didn't have crushes or date at all, but I dated a lot less that I did in high school, when I dated a lot, really.
The next decision I toyed with, but which I was averted from by my father's strong reaction against, was joining the Navy reserves (I believe it was Navy) as a Russian specialist. The reason I was thinking about this was because I was going to a private college and I didn't want to end out with a lot of debt from my studies, which could be a hindrance to my going to the mission field. I think if I'd gone ahead with that it's very possible that my attitudes and beliefs would have been affected by the training that would have required and my subsequent career would have been affected by that in one way or another. Even if I'd kept my eyes set on missions, things might have turned out differently than they did.
The next potential career affecting decision came when I was considering graduate school options. I narrowed it to two possibilites: going to the Monterey Institute of International Studies majoring in East European Policy Studies or going to the Bible school I eventually did attend. Both were prestigious institutions in their fields, and I was in fact accepted by both, but I chose the latter route, which pretty well clinched my choice of missions as a career.
While in Bible school and, to a lesser degree, there were times when I thought it would be nice to be married and even struggled a fair amount with this issue. I'm referring to internal turmoil relating to this kind of thing, and which is common among singles at one time or another. I never let this divert my attention from ministry, though; I thought that the two didn't need to be mutually exclusive.
But one thing I never really thought about was the impact of being a woman and what affect this might have on my work life. Choosing mission work, or just about any hands-on ministry work in Evangelical circles (with some exceptions), meant I would face bounds as to what I could do or not do. I didn't think that I wouldn't be taken seriously as a fully committed career-minded missionary professional, though, but I did feel that way in Vienna.
I think when you are raised in a context you don't necessarily realize their are social bounds like that, or you don't understand the significance or the extent of such bounds. If I had chosen to pursue any of the other 3 options, I might have had more options open to me than in the world of Evangelical Christian ministry. Once it seemed that marriage probably wasn't going to happen (although it could still be possible, of course), then I wouldn't have to be burdened with thinking how I might balance work and marriage responsibilities if I did get married, and I could put myself whole-heartedly into my work. But then to be knocked down and treated as anything, it seemed to me, but a professional missionary, after all I'd been through and all my preparations, was a real shock to me.
I don't think my upbringing ever really prepared me for the likelihood that I might be a career woman. I would have had to pick that up from school, and I mean during my K-12 years, because it wasn't going to come from home or church, which were the other 2 major influences in my life. It might be that on my dad's side, such as from grandmother, there could have been some influence that way, by way of a more cosmopolitan view of life. But that influence wasn't as strong as the other 3 influences in my life (school, family, and church). I don't think my friendships would have pointed me in the direction of being a career woman either, especially the friendships from church. At church, if a career was pushed, it was one of ministry, and there were role bounds for women, but our church upbringing (such as through Pioneer Girls club activities) prepared us largely for a domestic life. And my experience in Evangelical circles is that once married, the wife is pretty much expected to stay home and raise the kids, especially while young, so having an outside career is much less likely as a result.
It wasn't until my Russian years that I began to break out of these attitudinal bonds that might have put such restrictions on my life as a career woman. But by then my career had been largely sabotaged (intentionally or otherwise) and it was harder to get on a career track; and certainly a lot of time had been lost in the process.
***
Returning to our text, this last chapter session, titled "Coda" is, as the title indicates, sort of a wrapping up of the topic (of socialization to work).
One thing of note mentioned here (p. 116) is that the research literature regarding "inefficacious socialization", as of the time of this publication, which was 1976, was sparse and so the theoretical framework for understanding this phenomenon doesn't have a lot of research backing and is probably also not very well developed. I'm not in a position right now to be able to update my files, but I'm sure I could learn even more about subjects that could help me understand difference aspects of my life if I were able to correct this lack. This lack of updatedness is true of the other files I'm discussing in this blog too.
***
"Throughout this chapter, socialization has been viewed as an interactive process carried on largely between the individual and the organization. This perspective suggests that a conflict model may provide an excellent analytic tool by which to view the socialization processes. Such an approach would postulate a game analogy, the results of which could be case in terms of zero sum or non-zero sum outcomes. Furthermore, this frame of reference would feature certain power variables which are so noticeably lacking in most of the research to date. Perhaps viewing the entire organization as an 'ecology of games' could encompass all boundary passages and provide a fruitful framework for building a comprehensive theory of organizational socialization." (p. 117)
I would really like to see some of these ideas developed as they could very well prove insightful guidance for making sense of my Vienna years.
***
"Finally, it was mentioned that organizational socialization may occur as a gradual process or as a result of a climactic event... It is probable that many organizations depend upon these 'baptism-by-fire' situations as a mechanism of socialization. For example, many police recruits are not considered fully integrated into the department until they have experienced certain 'street' episodes (e.g., making an 'on view' arrest, engaging in a 'tavern brawl', etc.) The examination of such turning points across organizations is likely to result in fruitful findings both in terms of the socialization processes and of the culture of the organization itself." (p. 117)
The "climactic event" theory is one possible way of looking at what happened about 5 months into my tenure with the mission, at least regarding the mission's intentions in what happened. If this does explain the missions action, however, it ended out being unsuccessful.
I think the mission's treatment of me in that 5th-month event would, did and does most definitely provide insight into the mission's nature. In fact, it might well reveal more about the mission than it about me, although I highly doubt that would have been desired.
Also, I don't think that this kind of (rather dramatic) turning point was necessarily the standard operating procedure, unless you consider the pinnacle giving in to debasement efforts as a climactic event as described here. I don't think that the usual debasement process and the resultant giving in of the individual fits the event described in this text, though, because the debasement and effects of it was not necessarily so dramatic, but occurred usually, I think, over time. So if this was to be categorized as a "climactic event" in the sense used here, it would be on the fringe ends of this process, and even then couldn't always fit at all under this label.
***
That's it; so next time we'll move on to another text.
