Conclusion #2: Passion Takes Time

Amy Wrzesniewski, a professor of organizational behavior at Yale University, has made a career studying how people think about their work. Her breakthrough paper, published in the Journal of Research in Personality while she was still a graduate student, explores the distinction between a job, a career, and a calling7. A job, in Wrzesniewski’s formulation, is a way to pay the bills, a career is a path toward increasingly better work, and a calling is work that’s an important part of your life and a vital part of your identity.

Wrzesniewski surveyed employees from a variety of occupations, from doctors to computer programmers to clerical workers, and found that most people strongly identify their work with one of these three categories. A possible explanation for these different classifications is that some occupations are better than others. The passion hypothesis, for example, predicts that occupations that match common passions, such as being a doctor or a teacher, should have a high proportion of people who experience the work as a true calling, while less flashy occupations—the type that no one daydreams about—should have almost no one experiencing the work as a calling. To test this explanation, Wrzesniewski looked at a group of employees who all had the same position and nearly identical work responsibilities: college administrative assistants. She found, to her admitted surprise, that these employees were roughly evenly split between seeing their position as a job, a career, or a calling. In other words, it seems that the type of work alone does not necessarily predict how much people enjoy it.

Supporters of the passion hypothesis, however, might reply that a position like a college administrative assistant will attract a wide variety of employees. Some might arrive at the position because they have a passion for higher education and will therefore love the work, while others might stumble into the job for other reasons, perhaps because it’s stable and has good benefits, and therefore will have a less exalted experience.

But Wrzesniewski wasn’t done. She surveyed the assistants to figure out why they saw their work so differently, and discovered that the strongest predictor of an assistant seeing her work as a calling was the number of years spent on the job. In other words, the more experience an assistant had, the more likely she was to love her work.

This result deals another blow to the passion hypothesis. In Wrzesniewski’s research, the happiest, most passionate employees are not those who followed their passion into a position, but instead those who have been around long enough to become good at what they do. On reflection, this makes sense. If you have many years’ experience, then you’ve had time to get better at what you do and develop a feeling of efficacy. It also gives you time to develop strong relationships with your coworkers and to see many examples of your work benefiting others. What’s important here, however, is that this explanation, though reasonable, contradicts the passion hypothesis, which instead emphasizes the immediate happiness that comes from matching your job to a true passion.

So Good They Can't Ignore You: Why Skills Trump Passion in the Quest for Work You Love
titlepage.xhtml
part0000.html
part0001.html
part0002.html
part0003_split_000.html
part0003_split_001.html
part0004_split_000.html
part0004_split_001.html
part0005_split_000.html
part0005_split_001.html
part0005_split_002.html
part0005_split_003.html
part0006_split_000.html
part0006_split_001.html
part0006_split_002.html
part0006_split_003.html
part0006_split_004.html
part0006_split_005.html
part0007_split_000.html
part0007_split_001.html
part0007_split_002.html
part0008_split_000.html
part0008_split_001.html
part0009_split_000.html
part0009_split_001.html
part0009_split_002.html
part0009_split_003.html
part0009_split_004.html
part0010_split_000.html
part0010_split_001.html
part0010_split_002.html
part0010_split_003.html
part0011_split_000.html
part0011_split_001.html
part0011_split_002.html
part0011_split_003.html
part0011_split_004.html
part0011_split_005.html
part0011_split_006.html
part0011_split_007.html
part0012_split_000.html
part0012_split_001.html
part0012_split_002.html
part0012_split_003.html
part0012_split_004.html
part0012_split_005.html
part0012_split_006.html
part0012_split_007.html
part0012_split_008.html
part0012_split_009.html
part0013.html
part0014_split_000.html
part0014_split_001.html
part0015_split_000.html
part0015_split_001.html
part0015_split_002.html
part0015_split_003.html
part0016_split_000.html
part0016_split_001.html
part0016_split_002.html
part0017_split_000.html
part0017_split_001.html
part0017_split_002.html
part0017_split_003.html
part0018_split_000.html
part0018_split_001.html
part0018_split_002.html
part0019.html
part0020_split_000.html
part0020_split_001.html
part0021_split_000.html
part0021_split_001.html
part0021_split_002.html
part0021_split_003.html
part0022_split_000.html
part0022_split_001.html
part0022_split_002.html
part0022_split_003.html
part0022_split_004.html
part0023_split_000.html
part0023_split_001.html
part0023_split_002.html
part0023_split_003.html
part0023_split_004.html
part0023_split_005.html
part0024_split_000.html
part0024_split_001.html
part0024_split_002.html
part0024_split_003.html
part0024_split_004.html
part0025.html
part0026_split_000.html
part0026_split_001.html
part0026_split_002.html
part0026_split_003.html
part0026_split_004.html
part0026_split_005.html
part0026_split_006.html
part0026_split_007.html
part0026_split_008.html
part0026_split_009.html
part0026_split_010.html
part0026_split_011.html
part0027.html
part0028.html
part0029.html
part0030.html
part0031.html
part0032.html
part0033.html
part0034.html
part0035.html