

82% aren’t passionate about their work - jsatok
http://blog.rypple.com/2010/10/82-arent-passionate-about-their-work/

======
simonsarris
This makes me consider:

1\. Being able (or expected) to enjoy your work is a relatively new thing in
human society.

2\. There's a set amount of people who will be passionate (or not) about their
work no matter what, and for these people it's more about personalities or
culture. I am thrilled to do software development, but I would also be
thrilled to work in a coffee store. I'd also be thrilled to make pizzas all
day, every day, or to push carts around a parking lot all day and help old
people load their groceries. I've loved every job I've ever had, from
landscaping to tutoring. How do the "Me's" factor in to this percent?

So I wonder two things:

How many people would say they are passionate about their work 100 years ago?
200? 300?

What are the bounds that it can reasonably be? In other words, whats the least
and most it could reasonably be in a population? Even if everyone were farming
serfs, whats the % going to look like? Will it be around 82%? More? Less?

I have a strong suspicion (cultural?) attitude and economic conditions (are
you being taken care of? good food/healthcare/places to go?) has a lot more to
do with it than anything else.

~~~
Homunculiheaded
>1\. Being able (or expected) to enjoy your work is a relatively new thing in
human society.

I don't know how true this is, one of Marx's key criticism of Capitalism was
the idea that, under capitalism, workers were alienated from their work,
because they were unable to find true autonomy and determinism in what they
did, nor reap the true value of what they produced. So I don't think the
concept that work should also be fulfilling is entirely new, if Marx was
lamenting its demise over 100 years ago.

~~~
zasz
100 years is very recent in human history. And enjoying your work seems to be
a very Western idea. My Chinese immigrant father is resigned to finding his
career as an electrical engineer boring and meaningless, for example.

------
mjfern
Sorry for the self promotion, but I wrote a blog post that is related to this
discussion about passion for work. The post is a reflection on my own thought
process, as I transitioned from academia to starting my own company (and
creating a custom career that I would be passionate about). For convenience,
here is some relevant text from my post:

"The way that we choose careers is strange. We often choose a career based on
opportunism (e.g., expected salary) or fear (e.g., what family may think). The
result is that we end up in a place that’s not fully satisfying. That we pick
careers in a haphazard manner is stunning given the fact that we spend nearly
100,000 hours working over our lifetimes.

So if opportunism or fear are not the best ways to choose a career, then
what’s a better approach? I believe three main factors should drive a choice
of career. The first factor is goals. What are your short-, medium- and long-
term goals in life? And it’s very important to think about goals beyond just
your career. The second factor is pleasure. What activities do you derive real
enjoyment from? The third and final factor is skill or expertise. Where do
your innate and learned skills and talents lie?

Consider a Venn diagram comprised of these three factors — goals, pleasures,
and skills — and a fulfilling career likely resides at the center.

Finding a career at the center of this Venn diagram is simple in theory, but
difficult in practice. The first challenge is to overcome inertia, moving
beyond opportunism or fear as your selection criteria. The second challenge is
managing and balancing other commitments in your life, such as financial or
family obligations. The third challenge is to know yourself deeply. It’s
surprising how few people take the time to truly understand their goals,
pleasures, and skills. The fourth challenge is to identify a career that
aligns to these three factors. Many careers will satisfy one factor, some two,
but few will satisfy all three. For some people there may be no established
career path that aligns to all three factors, which means you have to create a
“custom” career.

How does one learn about their goals, pleasures, and skills, and a matching
career? Through a process of contemplation, trial and error, and growth. You
must contemplate and be deliberate in your actions, but allow your perspective
to evolve over time, as you attain more experience in work and life. You must
try a lot of different things to learn about yourself and how you respond to
different activities and settings. As you hone your understanding of yourself,
you must undertake deliberate practice within a specific domain for an
extended period to advance your expertise and skill. Imagine starting your
working life at the top of a funnel, and as you contemplate, experiment, and
grow, you move down the funnel, and towards a better understanding of yourself
and an ideal career."

(<http://www.fernstrategy.com/2010/09/18/choosing-your-career/>)

~~~
colonelxc
You make an interesting implicit association between passion and satisfaction.

> The result is that we end up in a place that’s not fully satisfying.

For you, you've decided that you want to be passionate about your career, and
that would satisfy you. Does that always have to be the case though? Maybe
some people would be completely satisfied with their work if they work in a
nice and comfortable place, with people they enjoy being with, and not too
much stress. They have a pleasant day at work, then get to come home and do
whatever they are really passionate about.

I know that here, in the entrepreneur crowd, that someone will suggest that
those people need to "figure out how to monetize their passion." Yes,
sometimes that's true. Sometimes, I think people just want to enjoy their
hobby or whatever, not try to make money at it. If I love model plane building
and flying, that doesn't mean I would love to open a hobby shop, or run model
plane building classes or whatever.

I think there are a lot of cases where people can be satisfied in their work,
in that it is both enjoyable and that it provides for their other passions. I
think that's an ok state to reach too.

------
christopherslee
This article doesn't even come close to suggesting a solution to the problem.

As entrepreneurs, I think we overestimate the amount of people that look to
their jobs as a way to reach fulfillment in their lives. Many people just see
their job as a way to pay the mortgage, feed the family, or as a way to fund
their hobbies and passions.

I always struggle to believe that all jobs could find passionate people. For
businesses of a sizable scale, can you really find 10,000 passionate insurance
adjusters or tax auditors. They may be good at their jobs, and they make care
about the quality of work and their professionalism, but are they truly
passionate about it?

If the whole world wanted to be passionate about their jobs, most of the
mundane services we need to operate as a society would probably fall apart.

~~~
TGJ
"This article doesn't even come close to suggesting a solution to the problem"

It's a two paragraph blog, what do you think it's going to do?

~~~
christopherslee
Totally agree, but what's the point of posting some statistic without some
discussion about the context, relevance, accuracy, etc? Just for sensational
linkbait?

------
lsc
see, when an employer starts talking about how they want an employee with
"passion" I assume they want a gullible employee who is willing to work more
for less pay.

Granted, I want employees who will work more for less pay, too; I mean, who
doesn't? but the problem, I think, with asking for and selecting for "passion"
is that most employers talk about dedication _to the company_ which, I think,
usually leads to getting employees who are willing to fake it. I mean, we all
know what the score is. The company is going to get rid of you as soon as you
are no longer useful (just like you are going to leave if you feel you can get
better working conditions elsewhere.)

I think that the sort of employee who tells you what you want to hear instead
of what they actually think is incredibly destructive, and I think quite often
that is what you get when you select for "passion" as in company loyalty.

I think you can even turn an honest employee into a yes man and vis-a-vis by
responding positively or negatively to criticism. (the hard part is when the
guy has a point, but it's not really a priority. yes you say "Good point and I
agree, but we don't have time to fix that right now" but you can only say that
so many times before it starts sounding like "shut up and get back to work,
kid.")

I think selecting for people who are passionate about the technology they work
with or about their skill with that technology is a fine thing; but I think
it's a very dangerous thing to tell business people to select for because they
will select for (apparent) loyalty/passion for the company, which I think is
usually a net negative.

------
julius_geezer
For another point of view:

<http://head-nurse.blogspot.com/2009/05/fuck-passion.html>

~~~
gaelian
That post sounds kind of bitter, maybe a bad day? In any case, it's possible
to be passionate while not being flaky or unreliable. In my world at least,
passion is what keeps me paying attention to the details, coming in to work on
time and interested in what I'm doing.

I guess my definition of "passion" is quite different to that used by this
person.

------
baddox
Is this really an issue? Why not just try to benchmark job _performance_
instead of citing this ill-defined (and worse—self-reported) survey? If two
people both do the exact same job and the same level of performance, and one
claims to be more passionate than the other, does that really matter? This is
essentially the philosophical zombie argument.

~~~
msbarnett
I'm not sure how realistic your counter-example is. If I have two workers, one
passionate about her job, the other disinterested and bored by it, is it
really realistic to expect that the latter's output will never suffer because
of their attitude compared to the former?

That would seem to fly in the face of our basic understanding of human
psychology and intrinsic motivational factors. It's like the old canard about
the "goodness" of a man who spends his life doing only good deeds while
thinking only evil thoughts. Humans don't work like that.

~~~
reinhardt
There are quite a few factors that affect productivity besides passion:
education, experience, concentration, deep thinking intelligence, quick
thinking intelligence, and so on. All else being equal, it would be plausible
to suggest that the passionate beats the disinterested one but in practice
things are rarely equal.

------
awakeasleep
I bet 70+ percent of people aren't passionate about anything, period.

~~~
aniket_ray
That's probably because they haven't experienced enough things in life. This
world is huge with so many different opportunities.

People who appear dispassionate, are not always so. There are people who are
passionate about serving their family. Or maybe some sport say football. They
have to find a way to channel their passion to their careers. I admit passion
is not enough, you need talents but that's again about channeling passion in
the right way.

Of course, there would always be some people who would be physically
(biologically?) incapable of feeling passion. But I don't think that is the
norm.

~~~
awakeasleep
I guess I never considered people passionate about TV sports/shows. Shouldn't
write people off just because they don't have my preferences.

------
kbatten
140 pages reduced to a six word headline, impressive. Can someone clue me in
on where to look for this 82% stat? My keyword search mostly turned up 1982.

edit: I see for 2008 we have a 20% passionate stat overall. 18% firm employed,
but 43% self employed are passionate. But I guess maybe that doesn't make a
good headline.

------
known
I think Microsoft could ignite the passion among employees by delegating the
_ownership_ of product development. And Google by allowing employees to work
on 20% of their time on _personal_ projects.

~~~
TeHCrAzY
Spending the 20% time on personal projects would essentially just be letting
your employees take an extra day a week off, with the same pay.

------
known
I think <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intrapreneur> type of work culture may
help.

