Many harbor the illusion that joining a company in a booming industry guarantees job security and a promising future.

For instance, the AI and robotics sectors have surged in popularity in recent years, prompting numerous individuals—ranging from engineers to administrators and public relations professionals—to strive for positions in large-scale model or embodied intelligence firms. They believe that hot industries promise better prospects (or perhaps just financial gain) and, at the very least, offer greater job security, which can also be advantageous for future job-hopping.

But is this really the case?

Not necessarily.

Whether an industry is thriving has little bearing on the majority of workers within it.

Is AI a booming industry? Are there not still programmers being laid off?

Is embodied intelligence in vogue? Among those who have sought advice from Zhike Bookstore in the past two years, some have found themselves compelled to switch companies every few months.

Ultimately, in a highly visible industry, the profitable positions are always reserved for a select few "at the top," while the stability and prospects of ordinary workers are influenced by a multitude of factors and do not receive special protection simply because the industry is "hot."

Consider an example.

Brand-related functions have been on a steady decline for over a decade, in the traditional sense. Whether you work at a robotics company or a small factory makes little difference.

Why the decline? The root cause lies in the fact that brand-related functions, including the very concept of branding, have long held a weak position within corporate operations. Business owners and company authorities view them as executive or support functions lacking real power.

During the era of positive globalization, when everything seemed to be thriving, creativity and individuality were not only needed but also tolerated across industries. However, times have changed, with various forms of competition becoming increasingly brutal and intense. Support functions without power find themselves unable to fight back.

You possess creativity? Ideas? Insights? You believe brand strategy should play a significant role?

Sorry, but you'll likely be immediately suppressed. Those who flatter are expected to merely execute events, issue press releases, and handle publicity according to the company's intentions (which, bluntly put, are the intentions of those in power). You are not expected to harbor your own thoughts or ideas.

Why? Because independent thinking and professional opinions imply the potential for seizing power!

In an era of scarce resources and eroded trust, do you think those in power within the company will tolerate your independent thinking? Even if you have no such intention, it is not permitted because your professional opinions might challenge the existing power structure.

Many people fail to understand why companies make clearly unreasonable decisions. That's because they make decisions from a power perspective, not a professional one.

Therefore, if the fundamental value of brand functions cannot be redefined, practitioners will not fare well even in hot industries. In fact, due to the faster pace in hot industries (where everyone wants to make a quick buck), support functions may face even tougher times.

Other positions have their own histories and logics, but the general direction is similar. Even core positions (such as sales and R&D) may not escape the curse of the times.

Do you understand? In a specific historical cycle, from a worker's perspective, professional opinions and deep thinking are secondary. The key is whether you can navigate the power dynamics effectively.

What if you lack the ability or refuse to engage in this game? Does that mean you have to suffer in silence and be trampled upon?

Absolutely not.

As long as a person finds themselves in a certain situation, whether at the peak of their career or in a downturn, they all have vulnerabilities. If we can mentally and cognitively step out of that situation and view it from a detached perspective, we have the opportunity to use these vulnerabilities to our advantage.

How? I believe the first step is to clarify your core interests and goals.

Why do most honest and straightforward people get persecuted by power-hungry and two-faced individuals? Because the former tend to go with the flow and avoid trouble, while the latter have very clear goals (seizing power, using others as scapegoats, etc.). Whoever hinders them (intentionally or unintentionally) must be eliminated.

So, when a reader came to me in tears, saying she had been diligently working and always considering the team's interests, why did her leader suddenly marginalize her?

I said it was because she had unintentionally crossed the leader's power boundary.

You are too proactive and charismatic, and people naturally gravitate toward you. A power-hungry leader will feel uncomfortable, worrying that you have ulterior motives, fearing that you will disrupt his management order, and that you might one day seize power.

Ambitious people always assume that others are ambitious too.

So, he will marginalize you: have other colleagues invite you to meetings but not let you lead projects, withhold important information from you, exclude you from high-profile tasks, and stop discussing plans with you...

If you get desperate and lose your temper, the leader will further reprimand you: "Look at you, why are you so bad-tempered? How does that affect team unity?"

The company was going to promote you, but seeing your temper, you need more seasoning. The planned promotion will be postponed, and a more steady (reliable and composed) colleague will take your place!

Thus, the cunning colleague instantly replaces you, and your former subordinates and colleagues from other departments scatter like frightened animals, even turning against you. Your previously "affectionate" female colleagues suddenly adopt an "official" tone...

Overnight, you become invisible and despised.

What's even more repugnant is that some companies will even set traps to frame you...

At this point, you must figure out your current situation and what you truly need.

For example, do you need a stable salary to make ends meet? Or have you already earned more from your side hustle than your salary? After thinking it through, the second step is to design strategies based on your goals.

Continuing with the above example: If it's the former, being marginalized is actually a good thing. You can do the minimum at work and focus on your own affairs. If it's the latter, you can even slam the table and quit, as you can still survive without this job!

The fundamental weakness of those in power is their fear that you don't care!

If you still care about this job or have a strong sense of professional ethics, you will still be manipulated by them. The opposite is true if you don't.

The hardest part is the third step.

We have already understood that there is no direct relationship between "industry popularity" and "career ceiling." We have also seen through the various faces of those in power games and found preliminary countermeasures. Then what? Start your own business? Change careers? Switch companies? The difficulty of the third step lies in the fact that individuals find it hard to shake structural oppression.

A designer who switches to real estate brokerage is still struggling in a declining industry. A journalist or editor who switches to tech PR moves from a "boiling frog" environment to a powerless executive field. An engineer who jumps from an internet giant to a large model company may be personally ending the future of their own function...

These changes do not shake structural oppression. But many people have no choice but to prioritize transitions related to their work experience. Of course, some will fare well, and not all such changes will have bad outcomes. But what if you find that you really can't shake it?

I cannot say I have the ultimate answer to this question, but I believe that by following your heart and getting to know yourself better, you can gradually find your own answer.

For example, if you and your parents are not good at scheming, don't learn it. You won't be able to, and even if you learn it through immense pain, it will backfire on you later.

For example, if you have a bad temper, it's okay to rein it in a bit, but more importantly, study the root cause of your bad temper instead of blindly imitating others' fake smiles and flattery. Because as soon as you open your mouth, it will sound insincere.

For example, if you have no hobbies or talents besides watching movies, then redefine what hobbies and talents mean!

Many things are not set in stone; they are defined by convention and those who control the agenda-setting power. But those definitions are not necessarily the truth of the world, nor are they necessarily suitable for us.

The tech sector is a hot industry, but your career path may not be. But who says we have to rely on a career defined by others for a lifetime?