You Should Care About What You Do (Even Science Says It)
Written by Anne Gabrielle
Ducharme, UNODC, Bangkok
I was recently speaking with a friend about a
woman I admire strongly because of the intensity of her convictions. I was
telling this friend about how much I believed she was excelling at her job
precisely because she let emotions slip into work.
I then extrapolated and posited that passionate
people were more efficient workers.
He replied that this was probably not the case.
That people who were less emotionally involved could adopt a more pragmatic
vision of their work, and thus enjoyed better discernment. In other words,
these un- (or less) caring people are more prolific at what they do precisely
because of the distance they keep between themselves and their work: they can
make fairer decisions by forgetting about their own personal biases.
Of course a non-emotionally involved person can
run a regression, write emails and read reports. A non-passionate individual
can show up on time to work every morning and write concisely about a given
topic. Yet, could that person conduct whatever task she or he has to do with
the same verve, and energy than someone who cares?
Framed that way, the answer sounds obvious. And
this is for a simple reason: because it is.
People who love what they do are not only
happier at work and in all spheres of their lives, they are also better at it.
This is, without a doubt, something I will keep in mind when looking for a job
after this experience at the United Nations. By not giving up on what you are
passionate about, you are making yourself and your future employer a favour.
Reaching expertise can
only be done through feeling
Old and recent studies have been promoting the
use of emotions to learn more
efficiently and to conduct more
relevant research.
A model developed by Stuart E. Dreyfus in the
1980s on adult skill acquisition is indeed telling regarding the role of our
emotional involvement in making us progress. According to this framework, it is
only by feeling that one truly
learns. The beginner needs to fear failing and enjoy succeeding to do better.
But the
author goes even further when explaining what role feelings play in making us
capable. The learning process surpasses the worry of disappointing and the
apprehension of winning. As Dreyfus stipulates: “Proficiency seems to develop
if, and only if, experience is assimilated in this embodied, a theoretical way.”
The perpetrator of a task thus needs to learn through sensations and emotions.
Knowing this, we should all wonder when turning
to the job market about what makes us experience emotions. What task or job
will make me go through not only rational thinking, but also “emotional
diving”?
Instead of
answering these questions whose answers can only be idiosyncratic, I will
conclude with Dreyfus’ thought worthy words: “What matters is taking
responsibility for one’s successful and unsuccessful choices, even brooding
over them—not just feeling good or bad about winning or losing, but replaying
one’s performance in one’s mind step by step or move by move. The point,
however, is not to analyze one’s mistakes and insights but just to let them
sink in. Experience shows that only then will one become an expert.”
The Five-Stage Model of Adult Skill Acquisition
Stuart E. Dreyfus (1986) University of California, Berkeley
