Initiating Rituals
An application task, known as the Creative Task, is a dramatized, first-stage evaluation device used by SX gatekeepers to select students into the school. Applicants to all of the SX programmes are assigned a specific challenge and their task is to demonstrate how they can solve a particular ‘real-world’ problem. The Task is often announced with much fanfare as applicants eagerly await its reveal. Participants will then offer a submission that could be visualised using any form of digital technology. The Creative Task is evaluated based on the criteria of ‘innovation, feasibility, and originality’, although it is stated in the requirements that evaluators should not have to take more than five minutes to review the submission.
Aspiring participants of SX hold this test in high regard because they view it as a way to offer good first impressions. Yet, due to the open-endedness of the task, applicants are generally unsure of what is expected of them in their submissions. This uncertainty was felt across the group of aspirants, regardless of their previous educational backgrounds. One aspirant, Erik, who had already undergone another type of vocational training before enrolling at SX, felt that the Task was very vague (or flummig, the actual Swedish word he used). One of his contemporaries, Kim, who had dropped out of a leading technological university in Sweden to enrol in SX, was nervous because according to him, getting into SX was ‘the one thing’ that he wanted. Yet, he was uncertain about what the school was ‘looking for’ in the Creative Task as he felt that it was an application process that was not based on grades or clear requirements.
Typically, in school admission procedures, admission artefacts are private; filed in admission folders, hidden behind closed doors of audition rooms, visible only to a select panel of gatekeepers. Embarking on the Creative Task was however a more public act of initiation for the aspirants. It is common for SX applicants to showcase their Creative Task on online portfolios or video channels. The aspirants in the interviews shared how they searched for past and present submissions as a means to model applicants who had been successful or as a way to ‘suss out’ the competition in their cohort. The public display of an admission artefact appears to serve several functions, such as signalling competence to other competing applicants or, upon entering the school, serving as a badge of honour. For the group of aspirants, their submissions for the Creative Task were rather diverse: one produced a video, another coded a game, while others submitted prototypes. Nevertheless, their experiences converged in their description of the amount of time they had put into preparing for the Task, a demonstration of commitment to the process of getting into SX.
SX capitalises on the Creative Task as a means to begin the process of initiating interested candidates into the school, even before they are admitted. The school organises workshops where people intending to apply can gather at the campus for a brainstorming session that will, according to SX, help ‘kick-start’ their own creative process. Staff at SX also curate an online support group where applicants can solicit feedback from the SX network (alumni, existing participants) before submitting their application. The school uses its admissions procedure as a platform for competing recruits to meet and work together, thus inducting them into an environment of collaborative competition.
If applicants make it through the first stage of the Creative Task, they get a call-back for an SX event called Admissions Day. Over a full-day of assessments, applicants undergo a second-stage of admission activities such as personal interviews, group assignments where they have to collaborate with other applicants, and an individual task. According to SX staff, Admissions Day is not only an opportunity for the staff to get to know applicants, but also for applicants to ‘feel safe’ in their decision to join SX, if they get accepted. Candidates attend presentations from current students, hearing what to expect from the school and what is expected of them.
For the aspirants, the ambiguity of the selection process was nerve-wrecking yet enticing. They described how after experiencing Admissions Day, they wanted nothing more than to get into SX. A consequence of the perceived difficulty of ‘getting in’ is that the participants tended to justify to others the significance of the selection process. One of the aspirants, Leila, who already had a university degree when she applied to SX, related how she appreciated the application process because the candidate–school fit was not measured merely through grades or her CV. At our T1 interview, she described herself as shy during first encounters and that partaking in initiating rituals like the Creative Task and Admission Day allowed her to ‘prove something else’ that went beyond her shyness and introversion.
Honestly after that day, if [SX] said ‘no’, I would accept it… because they analysed me in a very different dimension. So, if it’s a ‘no’ — well, there’s a reason… It seems like a very fair selection.
Leila suggests that she would have viewed a rejection into the school as an outcome she would have accepted because of the mode of selection that was used. She repeated several times in our T1 interview that she found the recruitment into SX to be a very fair process, even though there was a level of ambiguity in the selection tools used. Due to the publicised nature of SX’s selection of potential students, the rituals of initiation cultivate aspirants as candidates through a process of collaborative competition, leading them to experience separation from those who did not secure a spot, and a sense of unity with those who did. Rather than viewing selection and socialisation as distinct from each other, selection into a school like SX could be seen as the start of vocational socialisation. Rites of selection into selective institutions permit us to see how the ‘performances’ of applicants are evaluated and thereby conferred legitimacy (Nylander 2014). The journey of winning a spot in selective schools invokes a transformation that allows participants to recognise for themselves that they have been consecrated, separated from the others who did not make the cut (Bourdieu 1996).
Converting Rituals
Successful applicants begin their first weeks in autumn at an intensive orientation week. Participants are made to learn about the school’s culture, colloquially known as ‘The SX Way’. Participants from various programmes are brought together and entrenched in exercises and challenges that pertain to experienced-based learning, self-insight, active participation, and group dynamics. The intensity of this orientation week, according to the aspirants, pushed them out of their comfort zone as they were made to learn different types of group dynamics and understand non-violent communication. For example, as strangers, they were made to engage in intimate tasks like drawing portraits of each other, publicly sharing about turning points in their lives, and giving feedback to others they hardly knew. These activities were not about learning technical or specialist skills. Rather, as Erik notes in our T1 interview:
The first weeks we didn’t even do any work. We just learnt ‘The SX Way’, which is this really sketchy thing. Feels like you’re in a sect. You get to reflect upon yourself, learn to talk with your group members… you get this kind of work environment guidelines that you have to learn, which we will also be assessed on.
As demonstrated by the usage in the quote above, the words ‘cult’ or ‘sect’ were inserted rather casually in several interviews (with both the aspirants and alumni) to describe SX as a peculiar organisation. What these interviewees describe loosely as sectarian conversion, sociologists have called rigorous socialisation, a condition often observed in elite professional schools and one that is necessary for influencing members to adopt standards of the occupational group (Van Maanen and Barley 1984). Rigorous socialisation has also been found to be most powerful when the outcome is uncertain and the aspirant is embedded within a community that requires its members to adopt certain types of values (Van Maanen and Schein 1979).
In the same interview I had with Erik, his suspicious reference to the cultish ways of the school pivoted later on in the interview to a positive explanation of why they had to learn the SX Way. He defended that if participants did not learn the SX Way within the first two days, they would not be able to arrive at a shared platform as a cohort that would allow them to work together: ‘we had these rules -- this is how you should work. And everyone was more or less willing to do this, try everything out’. The conversion to and adoption of organisational standards demonstrate how rituals of getting in and fitting in can serve as potent facilitators in processes of socialisation.
What was noteworthy in the aspirants’ experiences was that after partaking in these rituals on a regular basis, some of them took these practices into their own workplaces or transposed them for use in new ventures. Two of the younger aspirants, Annika and Kim, described in our T2 and T3 interviews how they took rituals they regularly performed at SX into their own workplaces to conduct ‘retrospectives’ or reflective sessions with colleagues. Maria, one of the older aspirants in this interview group who was part of a team that conducted development workshops for companies using ‘tools’ learnt at SX, described at our T2 interview the euphoria she experienced from diffusing the ‘SX way’ of creative collaboration.
When we do these workshops, it’s kind of giving you a high. It really does. It feels like you’re really empowering people, and seeing them grow, and that it gives a really positive energy in the room... That is fun ‘cause you feel like you provide so much value for them and they appreciate it so much and that they really have learnt something that is useful for the future. That is a lot of positive energy.
In the wake of experiencing conversion to the SX Way, Maria and her peers set out to ‘converting’ others. In inviting others to partake in rituals she had herself participated in, Maria describes how she gets a ‘high’ from the ‘positive energy’ these workshops engender. This quote amplifies the emotional significance in partaking in these organisational rituals for aspirants, and is reminiscent of the effects of successful social interaction ritual chains (Collins 2004). As we will continue to explore below, these collectively-produced occasions create frames from which participants acquire a sense of belonging and incorporation into a community.
“Teaming” Rituals
SX is a very emotional place. We’re always creating a group, developing the group, terminating the group, giving feedback.
Daniel, in our T1 interview, noted this key attribute of his experience as a training participant at SX. With learning in SX structured around projects and every project constituting a new team, the participants experienced the seasonal nature of the group as well as the creation, development, and dissolution of team cultures (Fine 1979). Throughout their training programme, SX participants were rotated across teams to deal with business problems posed by different companies. Under a learning partnership programme, organisations are invited by SX to provide a challenge to participants in the form of a brief. Participants then worked on these challenges over four to eight weeks to produce and deliver a concept, strategy, or prototype to the client. SX pitches this as a unique opportunity for organisations to work with the ‘next generation’ of digital creatives. In return, the organisation has to contribute a ‘small sponsorship’, and according to the school, the donation will go directly back into running and enhancing training programmes.
Higher vocational education and training programmes in Sweden are formulated with the advice of steering committees, composed of employers and industry representatives. Members of the steering committee also contribute to the programme by giving lectures or offering work placements (a mandatory component of the programme) to the participants in their own companies. The chairperson of the steering committee of the Digi programme, Nora, described to me how the learning partnership programme was an effective tactic used by the school, as it ‘communicated’ to businesses that the participants that SX trained were ‘valuable… you don’t get them for free’. She asserted in our interview that if any of the ‘big companies’ wanted to get the participants to work on a project for them, ‘then they pay for it’. These arrangements offer a degree of legitimacy to the learning activity and in the process, shapes and reinforces the teaming rituals the participants experience. Furthermore, legitimacy through collaborations with organisations external to the school is perhaps particularly important in the context of training for weak-form occupations, where work-tasks are newly defined and the emergent occupational group is grappling for visibility.
A consequence of working in teams on digital data strategising projects for ‘real clients’ was that it convinced the aspirants that they were amassing valuable vocational know-how. In several T2 and T3 interviews, the aspirants related how they saw SX graduates as being in ‘another league’ as compared to their contemporaries in universities or other occupational schools. Robert, in our T3 interview for example, described a colleague who was trained in another occupational school, but did not possess the same kind of confidence that he had learnt to muster at SX:
If I compare myself with the guy who was from [another Swedish vocational school] … he likes to ask for things, “Can I do this, can I do this?” And I think what you learn at SX is to be a little bit cocky about these things: just kick in doors and then you ask for forgiveness and understanding. Actually, there’s not that much you can screw up in a big sense. It only involves ‘clicks’ — no one is going to die.
Working repeatedly on live projects in school, accumulating work experience through compulsory work placement and shorter school-based learning engendered a sense of certainty among the aspirants. These teaming rituals generate confidence which then lead to the aspirants announcing their ‘difference’ from others who are traversing similar pathways. The quote from Robert’s interview above illustrates a confidence he sought to exhibit in his role as a newcomer, working in an area of work where rules were constantly evolving and where he believed he had to display a level of ‘cockiness’ against the backdrop of unpredictability.
One teaming ritual the aspirants spoke frequently about in our interviews was that of ‘checking-in’ and ‘checking-out’. At the start and end of a school day or project team meeting, participants stand or sit in a circle and are invited to share one thing they check-in with: a feeling, a reflection from the previous day, or an attitude they are bringing into the session. An alumnus of the Digi programme told me that there were no limitations to what one could express when checking-in. If someone was hungover from partying too hard the day before and felt like it was valuable for teammates to know, that would be shared with the team and regarded as a form of accountability. They checked out in the same way, sharing, one by one, a feeling (e.g. ‘I did not appreciate the way you handled the conflict just now’), or something significant they take with them (e.g. ‘I was extremely challenged during ideation today’). The process of checking-in, as stipulated in the SX Toolbox, ‘emphasises presence, focus and group commitment’, while checking-out promotes ‘reflection and symbolic closure’. This teaming ritual appears to serve as a regulator of emotions for the aspirants and compels individual accountability to the collective.
Another regular ritual at Digi is team development sessions — a scheduled activity where participants are made to reflect on how their team is performing (or not) to meet with project requirements. These sessions typically occur in the middle of project cycles and are led by SX facilitators. During a campus visit, one of the aspirants, Annika, had emerged crying from a two-hour team development session. She described the session as one where participants had to remind each other why they applied to SX in the first place. She exclaimed, ‘It was so intense, like us being against each other for like the first hour and like disagreeing! But then in the last hour [of the session], everything changed. Now we’re working so much better together’.
The aspirants often related to the team development sessions, emphasising its impact on their learning process. Take, for instance, this passage from Erik’s T2 interview when he had just commenced his work placement:
Before SX, I always thought a malfunctioning group was a conflicting group with a lot of conflicts, which I learnt by now that it isn’t. Because you need conflicts, and there will always be conflicts. And that doesn’t mean you have a malfunctioning group? It’s more that your group is progressing towards trust, and structure within the group, since you’re starting to question each other.
Erik describes the teaming ritual, restating jargon from conventional team development ideas such as the cycle of fighting, progressing toward trust, and finding structure within the group. Although it was uncomfortable in the beginning for the participants to be repeatedly put in random teams and to work toward common goals, over time, the aspirants described how they learnt to ‘trust the process’. Teaming becomes a ritual for them to rehearse cooperation, and the expression of cooperation becomes a situational performance through which conflicts between them are managed (Sennett 2012; Collins 2004). By being located in a team, they are viewed as incorporated into the organisation. That sense of belonging becomes necessary for them to build up a kind of ‘vocational faith’ as they progress in their education-to-work pathways.