1) http://calnewport.com/blog/2010/10/16/the-passion-trap-how-t...
2) The book : http://www.amazon.com/Good-They-Cant-Ignore-You/dp/145550912...
A decent take on the real issue: http://www.strikemag.org/bullshit-jobs/
And he was studying to be a real-estate agent after his first few acting gigs because he wanted a plan B if his acting career didn't work out.
Its interesting that HR would never permit him to be hired now a days.
Not being passionate about laying bricks doesn't mean you won't be hired for menial labor, not being passionate about a position in this industry might very well stop your from being hired for a programming job...
I'm curious because I've never really been "passionate" about any job. In fact I've dislike or downright hated every job I've ever had. I still think I perform well because I have to. Jobs are a means to an end.
I was just pointing out that a bricklayer won't be vetted for "passion" whereas a programmer very well could be.... Whether a programmer should be(especially given that "passion" is basically an impossible to measure metric) is an entirely different discussion.
My apologies for presenting my point in such a confusing manner.
Why? Other than the obvious appeal to authority "ZoF says so" and excluding the obvious passion oriented professions such as appearing to be passionate when being hired as an actor for a formulaic romantic comedy or appearing to be passionate when applying to become a prostitute / escort?
Assuming its sane and wise for HR to demand intense feelings of passion when solving fizzbuzz, why shouldn't an otherwise supposedly sane profession like bricklayers apprentice demand gooey steamy firey passion with respect to hauling five gallon buckets of premix thinset mortar around a jobsite? Apparently passion is more important at higher level jobs, so beyond apprentice work, if my journeyman plumber felt intense passion for copper tube compression fittings when he replaced my toilet, I would have a substantially improved bathroom experience every time I flush. And if this is an absolute laughingstock when applied to construction, why is such unprofessional behavior tolerated in the software development hiring process?
What it really is, is a test for lying. Can you lie to me well enough to convince me either I'm a really good liar, or so easily seen through that you're never going to pull the wool over my eyes? HR/mgmt assumes you'll by definition be a crook, after all, who claimed 25 years of Scala development on his resume to match the ridiculous job requirements and checkboxes, which were designed so only the guy we already selected could possibly be hired, how did this guy sneak past?
Its basically insulting, and seeing how you'll respond to being insulted. Pitifully this is how we select our coworkers.
All I was trying to say is that A bricklayer would not go through the same vetting process that a programmer would, whether that process is effective or moral is irrelevant to my point. I was just saying that the fields have completely different hiring processes and comparing the two objectively as if they are similar is nonsensical.
No,
He will likely be asked about and made to solve pointless problems related to the chemistry behind the chemicals somehow related to brick making.
"We can't always do what we are passionate about, but everything we do can move us closer to our passion. I was never passionate about construction. But I laid bricks and worked so I could support my passion when I was starting out in bodybuilding.
The most important thing is, you need to find your passion. And once you do, put everything into it. Everything."
http://www.reddit.com/r/Fitness/comments/19sjfo/this_inspire...