BookBabble #25: "So Good They Can't Ignore You" by Cal Newport

adambarratt (62)in #bookbabble • 6 years ago

"Why Skills Trump Passion in the Quest for Work You Love"

Cal's back… and what's Steve Martin got to do with it?

We covered Deep Work a few weeks back and here's another Cal classic. This was actually written before Deep Work and is another in-depth book, looking at things from a slightly different perspective.

Deep Work was going against the grain of collaboration and distraction, encouraging people to nurture higher valued skills cultivated in a focused environment. This book talks about the modern phenomenon of following your passion, and why that could actually be a bad idea (or why it should be adjusted).

The name of the book is a quote from the comedian Steve Martin. I believe he said it in an interview regarding his memoir and is the advice he gave aspiring performers. This line had a huge impact on Newport and makes a great title for the book!

The book is interesting to me, partly as I didn't really agree with it plus it's also something the 'dreamers' need to hear (yeah, that's me :P ). On first reading I felt he was just trying to be different ('click baity') and take a reverse angle to garner interest. Now I can say that I see where he's coming from and there is a balance that should be applied.

You cannot say that you shouldn't follow your passion at all, that's ridiculous. You need to do it to some degree, or what's the point? Having said that, you need a structured approach to pursue what you enjoy and can't just jump in feet first. This should be obvious, but there's a way to go about it all.

The point Newport makes is that you shouldn't blindly follow your passion (or what you think it to be) but get so good at something that you build up a 'bank' (collateral / value) and you become passionate about it in the process.

I think we're ultimately all saying the same thing but good to come at it from different angles and operate a sensible approach.

Some great quotes from the book followed by my additional thoughts…

When it comes to creating work you love, following your passion is not particularly useful advice

The central premise of the book and what we need to do instead.

the importance of ability. The things that make a great job great, I discovered, are rare and valuable. If you want them in your working life, you need something rare and valuable to offer in return. In other words, you need to be good at something before you can expect a good job.

Supply and demand. First things first.

RULE #1 Don’t Follow Your Passion / “Follow your passion” might just be terrible advice.

The main argument from Newport - not to follow your passion. At least not at the start. There's a certain order to things. The reason it may be bad advice is that it can all be a bit airy-fairy and pie in the sky. The point is to have some sort of plan and to act on it. No-one is suggesting not to enjoy your life but at the same time it may not be as simple as just frittering along with what you're 'passionate' about at a given time.

RULE #2 Be So Good They Can’t Ignore You (Or, the Importance of Skill)

The other side of the equation and what Cal suggests. Getting so good and increasing your value that you can go where you want with your career and write your own cheque. Nurture those skills and what you have to offer.

Steve Jobs took the podium at Stanford Stadium / Do What Steve Jobs Did, Not What He Said

Steve Jobs' famous commencement address. Here it is for reference (you may want to take a look/re-watch after this article):

Many have referenced, linked to and discussed this video (including me!) and it is generally cited as great advice and oft quoted. The author suggests that Jobs' path to success was a little different to what is painted in the speech. Not that he's lying but just that the reality of his journey actually followed a different route.

A lot comes down to interpretation. Jobs has said (in the speech and elsewhere) about the importance of passion and loving what you do. This is due to the fact that is takes so much time that you have to enjoy it to keep going. This is correct and blindingly obvious, otherwise you would just stop. The point here is that Jobs didn't necessarily have that passion at the outset but built it over time.

The Passion Hypothesis: The key to occupational happiness is to first figure out what you’re passionate about and then find a job that matches this passion.

This is a common path these days and one that I don't think there's anything wrong with. The author suggests a slightly different angle. It all comes down to balance and personal preference/circumstances. I think the aim is the same, just the method that differs slightly.

If a young Steve Jobs had taken his own advice and decided to only pursue work he loved, we would probably find him today as one of the Los Altos Zen Center’s most popular teachers. But he didn’t follow this simple advice. Apple Computer was decidedly not born out of passion, but instead was the result of a lucky break—a “small-time” scheme that unexpectedly took off.

Jobs was in to Zen philosophy and the like. So following the 'passion hypothesis', in theory he would have gone off in to the mountains and studied it further and made that his career. That could have worked for him, who knows. He was passionate about Zen teachings and lifestyle… not so much computers and tech.

The story goes that it was chance encounters and a little test project which they went with… and the rest is history!

“The key thing is to force yourself through the work, force the skills to come; that’s the hardest phase”

You probably won't be passionate at first. That's partly because you're no good at the beginning. Over time the skills come, you enjoy it more, and perhaps even become passionate.

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

A good distinction of a job, career and a calling. We should all want a calling I would say, but the other 2 fit in along the way.

Dan Pink’s 2009 bestselling book Drive

A reminder to get this book. I've not read Drive yet but it's in amongst the list somewhere.

Self-Determination Theory (SDT)

A psychological theory of human motivation and personality. See what Wiki has to say.

Autonomy: the feeling that you have control over your day, and that your actions are important Competence: the feeling that you are good at what you do Relatedness: the feeling of connection to other people

What we are looking for in our work. We all want a certain level of autonomy, then there's the old confidence/competence loop that we enter into, and of course the relationship with others.

Talking of competence - we all go through 4 stages in any endeavour, as explained here.

Alexandra Robbins and Abby Wilner’s 2001 ode to youth disaffection, 'Quarterlife Crisis: The Unique Challenges of Life in Your Twenties'

A book perhaps worth checking out for those in a quarter or any other stage life crisis ;)

The passion hypothesis is not just wrong, it’s also dangerous

Things are getting serious now. The author suggests that not only is it a bit mis-directed but could actually be dangerous. I agree to a degree in the sense that you could find yourself down a path where it really isn't happening and that could have a disastrous affect on your life. You want to live a good, fun and enjoyable life but these decisions aren't to be taken lightly.

the craftsman mindset / the passion mindset

2 mindsets discussed in the book. The passion one we've covered a little, the craftsman's is more of the way to go according to Newport. Getting good at a particular craft, dedicating yourself to it and increasing your skills. I say do both - that's possible.

Whereas the craftsman mindset focuses on what you can offer the world, the passion mindset focuses instead on what the world can offer you

A distinction between the 2. Again, you can do both.

I am suggesting that you put aside the question of whether your job is your true passion, and instead turn your focus toward becoming so good they can’t ignore you. That is, regardless of what you do for a living, approach your work like a true performer

Don't jump around looking for unicorns. They may or may not exist. You might well be able to create a magical horse in time which passes for a unicorn anyway.

Most jobs don’t offer their employees great creativity, impact, or control over what they do and how they do it

Exactly. This is why people are looking for more. Perhaps they don't offer these things to start with but may do so at a later date when you have experience and more to offer the company. The key is knowing if and when these things are coming and acting accordingly.

creativity, impact, and control

That's what we want!

he was one of the world’s best logo men and had a waiting list of clients. Feuer started her company with only two hundred hours of training and an abundance of courage

A couple of case studies in the book. The first sentence refers to a guy who went the 'right' way and was very well off.

The second example was from a girl who quit her job to instruct yoga. This and other stories are definitely something to think about, so worth taking heed. She had a passion for yoga, quit her regular job, did a course, and went to work. It didn't work out so well, as she had moved into a completely different field with no 'carry over' from her last job, and was competing with all the other 'yogis' who had a passing interest and took a course.

The reference to 'courage' is Cal's gripe about the modern mantras of following your passion, and that all you need is courage and to take the leap etc. Cal suggests you need a little more than courage to make that leap. Courage is great to nurture but you may be left with very little if that's all you've got.

career capital

An important concept. This is building a bank of skills and value, and having more to offer as you proceed.

In the early 1990s, Anders Ericsson, a colleague of Neil Charness at Florida State University, coined the term “deliberate practice” to describe this style of serious study, defining it formally as an “activity designed, typically by a teacher, for the sole purpose of effectively improving specific aspects of an individual’s performance.”

Deliberate practice. So not just practicing, but a more focused and in-depth approach, leading to greater and faster results.

if you just show up and work hard, you’ll soon hit a performance plateau beyond which you fail to get any better / Geoff Colvin, in the article cited above he gives the following warning about deliberate practice: Doing things we know how to do well is enjoyable, and that’s exactly the opposite of what deliberate practice demands…. Deliberate practice is above all an effort of focus and concentration. That is what makes it “deliberate,” as distinct from the mindless playing of scales or hitting of tennis balls that most people engage in

It's not about just working hard, there needs to be a focused structure and development of the process. To improve it's not going to be enjoyable. To be enjoyable we maintain at the same level.

the difference in strategy that separates average guitar players like me from stars like Tice and Casstevens is not confined to music

Cal likes a bit of guitar but is not in the same league as the people mentioned. He reckons he's put in similar hours over the years but the difference is in the type of practice. He just picks up the guitar and plays what he knows and enjoys for a bit of fun. These other guys expand and get feedback.

receiving immediate feedback

Getting that feedback straight away and then going about improving.

Previous studies had shown it takes around ten years, at minimum, to become a grand master.

About a decade to get truly great at anything.

This is the “ten-year rule,” sometimes called the “10,000-hour rule,” which has been bouncing around scientific circles since the 1970s, but was popularized more recently by Malcolm Gladwell’s bestselling 2008 book, 'Outliers'

The 10,000 hour rule has become famous, and is probably about right. You can get pretty good before then, but that's around where you achieve mastery. But it needs to be deliberate practice once again to make those strides and not plateau. I didn't think too much of Outliers (that's another story) but it's a good book for many people.

book, 'The Tipping Point'

Another Malcolm Gladwell book. One I still haven't read but I suspect useful in talking about the moment the momentum shifts.

companies embracing a radical new philosophy called Results-Only Work Environment (or, ROWE, for short). In a ROWE company, all that matters is your results

Makes sense. It's all about results really, so I would say this format is logical. Yes, there are situations where this would be altered but it should be the main method, that being - the value you produce being compensated accordingly.

Giving people more control over what they do and how they do it increases their happiness, engagement, and sense of fulfilment

Of course!

The First Control Trap: Control that’s acquired without career capital is not sustainable

Now we're getting in to control traps. If you do manage to get control without the value and skills having being built, then it won't be for long, or it will be sporadic. So you can quit your job and run around aimlessly for a bit… you'll have plenty of control in some ways, but it wasn't quite what you were after.

The Second Control Trap: The point at which you have acquired enough career capital to get meaningful control over your working life is exactly the point when you’ve become valuable enough to your current employer that they will try to prevent you from making the change.

You've got so good they can't ignore you. In this control trap, your employer now really wants to keep you bad so you may be tempted to stay. A paradox of getting great!

lifestyle-design

A term that gets 'dissed' by Mr Newport. Brought to fame by the likes of Tim Ferriss, this is the act of designing your life favourably. Nothing wrong with that of course, but unfortunately it can get misinterpreted or misused. In this day and age with all the tools and technology, we now have the option of adjusting our life and lifestyle to suit us a little better. This wasn't really possible (or socially acceptable) until relatively recently and has become a popular path (and much memed about). There is a certain responsibility to this path though, and not all roads lead to Rome.

If you embrace control without capital, you’re likely to end up like Jane, Lisa, or our poor frustrated lifestyle designer—enjoying all the autonomy you can handle but unable to afford your next meal

Referring to a couple of the not so successful case studies. Jumping ship without a real plan and sufficient value to the marketplace will leave you in the shit and scrambling back to what you left. You got that so sought after autonomy… but so does the tramp in the street.

That's only one half of the equation, so we do need to be careful. I do think there's a time and a place for making bold decisions and taking risky action (especially if you are really unhappy) but it could also be worth a more considered approach depending on your situation and personality. As ever, self-awareness along with general awareness is key.

Derek Sivers Is a Control Freak Not long into his 2010 TED talk on creativity and leadership, Derek Sivers plays a video clip of a crowd at an outdoor concert. A young man without a shirt starts dancing by himself

What, this one?

“Do what people are willing to pay for”

Advice from Derek Sivers. This should be the first consideration. Not because we are money grabbing a-holes, but because when operating a business venture, this is the most essential factor. By all means have hobbies and join/create NPOs and the like, but in this context you have to go where the money is, or at least a good balance of income vs enjoyment.

“Money is a neutral indicator of value. By aiming to make money, you’re aiming to be valuable”

Money is energy. It's an exchange of value - nothing more, nothing less. And whether you like it or not, it is an indicator of success. Not the be all and end all, but a way of keeping score.

The Law of Financial Viability When deciding whether to follow an appealing pursuit that will introduce more control into your work life, seek evidence of whether people are willing to pay for it. If you find this evidence, continue. If not, move on.

Simple advice, but missed by many people. Sometimes we are far more caught up in our vision to see the wood for the trees.

One of the classic examples of recent human evolution is lactose tolerance—the ability to digest milk into adulthood—a trait that didn’t start spreading through the human population until we domesticated milk-producing animals.

Honestly speaking, we shouldn't be consuming milk from animals. I do but there is something not quite right about it, as displayed by the modern phenomenon of 'lactose intolerance'. I saw a quote or meme somewhere recently saying something along the lines of, "you're not lactose intolerant, you're just not a baby cow". Good point.

'Little Bets', and it was written by a former venture capitalist named Peter Sims

Another book to check out. About testing small projects before pursuing grander visions.

“You’re either remarkable or invisible,” says Seth Godin in his 2002 bestseller, Purple Cow

Another one I haven't read. Did a little post on a Seth Godin TED Talk a while back and he's definitely right about being remarkable and standing out (like a purple cow).

The Law of Remarkability: For a mission-driven project to succeed, it should be remarkable in two different ways. First, it must compel people who encounter it to remark about it to others. Second, it must be launched in a venue that supports such remarking

It needs to be in the right environment, and have some sort of wow factor to cause people to discuss it.

True missions, it turns out, require two things. First you need career capital, which requires patience. Second, you need to be ceaselessly scanning your always-changing view of the adjacent possible in your field, looking for the next big idea

Interesting chit-chat about the 'adjacent possible'. As you're going along, building that career capital, new opportunities arise that are off to the side and simply wouldn't have appeared without continuing on that path.

Working right trumps finding the right work

A central premise of the book expressed in another way. We're back to first things first. Not putting the cart before the horse, and not being so entitled.

Don’t obsess over discovering your true calling. Instead, master rare and valuable skills. Once you build up the career capital that these skills generate, invest it wisely

Okey-dokey, we'll give it a go!

Cheers Cal! Anything else?

This book touches a nerve as he's absolutely right and I have at times gone along the road of what he's saying to avoid. I won't say the wrong route, but not using the best strategy. Either way, this book is a great accompaniment to the multitude of material out there to 'follow your passion and be damned with the rest'.

At first I thought Newport was just trying to be different to sell books and make a name for himself, but to be fair there needs to be credit where it's due. Ultimately, I don't think he's saying too much different if you dissect it all. We're all looking for the same thing, it's just a case of how we go about it. I suggest that we can enjoy a great life using a mixture of these methods (it's not all or nothing, black or white).

The case studies used in any book are obviously ones that make a point that the author is trying to make. They are very biased whichever side of the fence you're on. There are success and failure stories on both sides - anything can be found to support or refute a certain course of action.

I would say to read this book for some balance but do maintain those dreams and shoot for them when the time is right. Find what works for you, be patient, know yourself and your circumstances, and strike when you can! There is no 'right' way, but it is worth knowing the various paths and finding the best way for you.

He does write a good, in-depth, well thought out and researched book does Newport. Not hugely entertaining prose but an academic, structured and considered approach to his offerings. A great author for your BookBabble arsenal!

What do you think? Have you read this book and where do you stand on the passion vs practicality debate??

~ Adam

#books #purpose #review #steempress

6 years ago in #bookbabble by adambarratt (62)

$1.56

13 votes

STEEM 0.19

TRX 0.15

JST 0.029

BTC 62912.13

ETH 2544.21

USDT 1.00

SBD 2.84

BookBabble #25: "So Good They Can't Ignore You" by Cal Newport

Cal's back… and what's Steve Martin got to do with it?

Some great quotes from the book followed by my additional thoughts…

Cheers Cal! Anything else?

Coin Marketplace