Better self-knowledge. Becoming the best version of yourself. You thought you were reinventing yourself?

Most career transitions present themselves as liberating.
In reality, they often reproduce social expectations —
of gender, of status, of soft conformity.

A personal development tool, a psychological typology, or a career orientation test (DISC, RIASEC, MBTI...) is never neutral.
Even when it claims to be benevolent.
Even when it’s “co-constructed.”
Even when it “opens up possibilities.”

That’s precisely where the trap begins.

This isn’t about rejecting tools altogether, or discrediting those who use them with care.
But let’s be clear: even so-called "open," "innovative," or "human-centered" tools must be questioned.

What assumptions do they rely on?
What kind of person do they implicitly define?
Which paths do they illuminate —
and which do they quietly erase?

Many of these tools are designed for easy deployment, requiring no deep training, and made to fit institutional or corporate expectations.

They look neutral.
But they filter, rank, and assign.

And most of the time, without ever revealing what they’re actually doing to the person.

So to anyone defending their tool as an exception to these dynamics, we say:

What matters isn’t what the tool claims,
nor what it statistically shows,
nor even its scientific or historical pedigree —
but what it enables.
And what it silences.
For the person being guided.

This is not a matter of opinion.
It’s an ethical issue.
And more precisely, a matter of responsibility toward those being shaped and oriented by these tools.