Why Career Decisions Need Shapes, Not Spreadsheets
Spreadsheets hide what matters most in career decisions. Learn how hexagon visualizations reveal the trade-offs your spreadsheet can't capture—and why your brain needs shapes to make better choices.
Samira Patel
Product Designer
Written by our expert panel: career coach, psychologist, HR leader, and product designer. Every article includes exercises you can try in the app.
Why Career Decisions Need Shapes, Not Spreadsheets
Sarah's spreadsheet said stay. Every number was green: $185K base, equity, bonus. She felt hollow.
She was building consumer growth tools at a Series B startup. She cared about climate tech. The spreadsheet couldn't capture the disconnect.
When Sarah Plotted Her Role
Sarah needed a way to name what was wrong. That's where six questions come in:
What am I learning? (Learning)
Does this work matter? (Alignment & Purpose)
Do I like my colleagues? (People)
Does the world respect this? (Prestige)
Can I sustain this pace? (Pace)
Am I paid fairly? (Profit)
These six dimensions—LA4P—each get rated 1-5. Plot them on a hexagon. Connect the dots. The resulting shape tells a story.
When Sarah rated her current role, the problem became visible:
Dimension What to evaluate | Sarah's Current Role Series B Startup | |
|---|---|---|
| Learning | 3 | 3 (acceptable but plateauing) |
| Alignment | 2 | 2 (building consumer tools, cares about climate) |
| People | 4 | 4 (good team, solid manager) |
| Prestige | 4 | 4 (strong brand recognition) |
| Pace | 3 | 3 (sustainable but uninspiring) |
| Profit | 5 | 5 (exceptional compensation) |
| TOTAL | 21/30 | 21/30 |
The hexagon was lopsided. Profit dominated at 5 while Alignment collapsed to 2. The visual shape—stretched toward one corner—made the misalignment literal.
Sarah sat with the hexagon for twenty minutes. First came relief—so that's what's wrong. Then grief—she'd spent two years ignoring this. Finally, clarity.
She was experiencing cognitive dissonance—the discomfort when behavior (building consumer apps) conflicts with values (climate impact). Her spreadsheet couldn't capture this because dissonance isn't a number. It's a pattern of mismatched priorities.
She couldn't see this pattern in rows of numbers. But she could see it in the shape.
Why Shapes Work
Your brain can juggle 4-7 things at once. Spreadsheets force you to compare row by row—salary in this row, mission in that row, team culture three rows down. You're making sequential comparisons, overwhelming your working memory.
Hexagons let you see all six at once. Simultaneous comparison. Lower cognitive load.
But there's something deeper happening. The hexagon makes losses visible. Behavioral economics shows we feel losses twice as intensely as equivalent gains. When Sarah saw Alignment at 2 while Profit sat at 5, she wasn't just seeing low satisfaction—she was seeing a loss relative to her values. The psychological pain of sacrificing purpose became concrete.
This is loss aversion at work. The hexagon transformed an abstract feeling ("something's off") into a visible gap ("I'm losing alignment"). And visible losses motivate action.
How Sarah Reduced the Dissonance
When you identify dissonance, you have three options: change your behavior (quit), change your beliefs (convince yourself consumer apps matter), or add consonant cognitions (find climate angles in your current work).
Sarah chose the third path—psychologically sustainable, practically achievable.
She used the hexagon to negotiate. She showed her CEO the visual, explained the Alignment gap, and proposed pivoting to climate-adjacent features: carbon footprint tracking in their consumer app, partnerships with climate-focused brands.
Six months later, her Alignment score was 4. She'd stayed at a company she almost left.
The hexagon didn't eliminate the trade-off. It made her priorities concrete enough to negotiate around.
The Future Self Problem
Hexagons also solve a temporal problem. We naturally overweight immediate rewards (current $185K) versus delayed rewards (long-term career satisfaction). Economists call this temporal discounting.
When you plot your current role and see Alignment at 2, you're not just seeing today's dissatisfaction. You're previewing the shape of your five-year regret. This activates prospective memory—planning for your future self.
Sarah wasn't just unhappy now. The hexagon showed her she'd be more unhappy in three years if nothing changed. The visual made future regret visible today.
That's what motivates change. For a deeper framework on making decisions your future self won't regret, see The 10-Year You decision framework.
Visualize Your Career Trade-offs
Plot your current role and potential offers as hexagons to see patterns your spreadsheet can't capture
When You Have Multiple Options: The Francisco Case
Francisco had eight job offers in a Google Sheet. Eight rows. Six columns: salary, equity, title, location, team size, vibe. Color-coded cells—green for good, yellow for acceptable, red for concerning.
He stared at it for three days. Couldn't decide.
The problem wasn't the data. The problem was choice overload. He was making 8 × 6 = 48 individual comparisons. His working memory couldn't hold all those trade-offs simultaneously.
When he plotted his eight offers as eight hexagons, he made a decision in 20 minutes.
Seven offers looked roughly similar—balanced hexagons clustered around 22-24 total points. One was an outlier: a lopsided shape with Learning at 5, Alignment at 5, and Profit at 2.
Dimension What to evaluate | Francisco's Choice Unknown Startup | |
|---|---|---|
| Learning | 5 | 5 (exceptional, rare opportunity) |
| Alignment | 5 | 5 (mission-driven, values fit) |
| People | 4 | 4 (strong founding team) |
| Prestige | 3 | 3 (unknown startup brand) |
| Pace | 3 | 3 (intense but sustainable) |
| Profit | 2 | 2 (significant pay cut) |
| TOTAL | 22/30 | 22/30 |
The outlier hexagon looked different. Not better or worse—different. Two dimensions maxed out. One dimension sacrificed.
Francisco realized he'd been trying to optimize across all dimensions simultaneously. The hexagon showed him he needed to choose a shape—a pattern of trade-offs that matched his current priorities.
He took the outlier. Two years later, he'd learned more than in his previous five years combined. The Profit score had climbed to 4 as the startup raised a Series B.
The hexagon didn't tell him which offer to take. It showed him which shape matched his priorities. For more on comparing multiple offers, see How to Compare Job Offers Like a 40-Year Investor.
How to Use This
Your Career Hexagon
Visualize your LA4P scores as a shape to see patterns that spreadsheets hide
💡Rating Scale
1 = Dealbreaker • 2 = Concerning • 3 = Neutral
4 = Strength • 5 = Exceptional
Current Role | |
|---|---|
| Learning — Growth & skill development | 1 2 3 4 5 |
| Alignment — Mission fit & purpose | 1 2 3 4 5 |
| People — Team & manager quality | 1 2 3 4 5 |
| Prestige — Brand recognition | 1 2 3 4 5 |
| Pace — Sustainability & balance | 1 2 3 4 5 |
| Profit — Compensation & benefits | 1 2 3 4 5 |
| Total Score | 21/30 |
📊 Visualize your options
Compare multiple options side-by-side with hexagon visualization
Try the Interactive Visualizer →💡 Remember: Use the interactive visualizer to compare multiple offers side-by-side and see which shape matches your priorities
Try the Interactive Visualizer →For a single role (stay or leave):
- Rate your current role on all six dimensions (1-5)
- Plot it on a hexagon
- Look at the shape—what's lopsided? What's collapsed?
- Ask: Which dimension matters most to me right now?
- Ask: Can I improve the collapsed dimensions here, or do I need to leave?
For multiple offers:
- Rate each offer on all six dimensions
- Plot all offers as separate hexagons
- Look for patterns—are they all balanced? Are there outliers?
- Ask: Which shape matches my priorities for the next 2-3 years?
- Remember: You're not choosing the "best" offer. You're choosing a shape.
For tracking over time:
- Rate your current role every 6 months
- Plot each rating as a new hexagon
- Watch how the shape changes
- Notice: Which dimensions are improving? Which are degrading?
- Act before a dimension collapses completely
The Skill That Compounds
Spreadsheets optimize for precision. Career decisions require pattern recognition.
When you train your brain to think spatially about trade-offs—to see shapes, not just numbers—you build a skill that compounds over 40 years.
Sarah didn't just solve her immediate problem. She learned to see the shape of satisfaction. Now when she evaluates a new opportunity, she doesn't start with a spreadsheet. She starts with a hexagon.
The shape reveals what the numbers hide.
That's why career decisions need visualization. Not because charts are pretty. Because your brain needs shapes to make sense of complex trade-offs.
And career decisions are the most complex trade-offs you'll make. For more on recognizing when it's time to act on these patterns, see Exit Patterns: Which Career Dimensions Actually Trigger Job Changes.
Free while we're in beta. No inbox clutter, no selling your data.
Apply this guide
Use this guide to refine your 1–5 scores.
Review your existing chapters in 40yearscareer and adjust each axis based on what you just read. You’ll see patterns that were invisible before.
Free while we're in beta. No inbox clutter, no selling your data.