This reminds me of one of my favorite talks of all time[1].
Applied to careers, I take the talk as implying that trying things is the secret. After a certain level of experience in your career, you'll know whether you like it. Branching off of that, it might even be the right thing to do to find a new career.
One of the best pieces of advice I have ever received is "successful people do stuff. It doesn't matter what that stuff is, just do stuff and you'll eventually be successful". Some people will be luckier than others, and be successful at their stuff at a higher ratio, but overall, the ratio is about the same, and you just need to keep doing stuff.
Also, one of my favorite illustrations/cartoons of all time[2] speaks to this point. Basically, if you pursue the same career for your entire life, you're probably wasting your time. once you have your x,000 hours of work in, do something new where you can cross-apply that knowledge into domains that need it.
> Applied to careers, I take the talk as implying that trying things is the secret. After a certain level of experience in your career, you'll know whether you like it.
You'll know whether your like it, but it may be too late to change. And some careers require a long initial investment. Let say I graduate in CS/Math at 23 and that I work 3-4 years in a company, is it too late to become an MD? or start a PhD? some people manage to do it but it's difficult.
My wife's uncle had a successful if unassuming career as a civil engineer. Then one day, shortly after his 50th birthday, he decided that he never really wanted to be a civil engineer and that his real passion was social anthropology. By 62 he had a PhD in social anthropology, 3 or 4 published books in the field, was generally considered an authority in his niche and split his time between writing and lecturing part time at the university. He worked until he was 70 and enjoyed every minute of it far more than his previous career. Even at 50 it's not unreasonable to assume that you have anywhere from 25-50% of your working life ahead of you, don't let a decision you made as a kid get in the way of getting the most out of those years.
There was a grey haired PhD student in my department. He told me he had built and run an investment bank in Los Angeles for most of his life then moved to Cambridge (UK) to pursue a PhD in engineering and he was having a blast. It was probably easier for him than the young ones since his kids were grown up and he already had a career and money.
Post-scarsity, I can't help but be excited at the fact the people will work on what they really want, instead of what they are pushed towards for $$ reasons.
I interpret it like so: there are careers which require a very particular training path and careers which do not. Additionally, many training paths are widely applicable to several distinct industries.
If you graduate with a degree in math or computer science, you can work in just about any division of tech, you can work in just about any division of finance (maybe not traditional investment banking, but most analyst/trading/quant roles), you can work in certain applications of biology, chemistry, physics, astronomy, genetics or other sciences, you can work in many areas of advertising, you can work in many areas of marketing...you could start your own company, you could publish a novel...frankly you could do just about everything other than be a lawyer or a doctor.
Writing all this out, it actually sounds like the optimal career path is to get formal education and training in the most difficult or restricted fields, because you'll still have so many options anyway. Then you can cross-pollinate your knowledge in other fields.
I worked for 3 yrs (as a joint EE/CS engineer) after finishing my Bachelors degree in physics at age 21.
I went back to school at age 24, for PhD (in experimental condensed matter physics). On one hand it was hard going from earning a nice salary to very little stipend. But on the other hand I came in freshly determined, where some of my fellow incoming students just in from their undergrad days weren't as into it.
I was certainly above average age for the incoming student class, but there were a few other students in similar situation, and some had worked even longer before coming back to school.
I also changed fields again afterwards. Towards the end of my PhD I got a bit fed up with he daily realities of life as an experimental physicist, and almost by chance found my way into an internship as a quant in the financial sector. I enjoyed the internship greatly, and afterwards wrote up my thesis and then started working at the same company.
It's interesting because up until around 1-2 yrs before that internship, I never would have thought I'd work in finance. I had no interest from the little bit about finance that I knew. But one day in supplementary course notes during a many-body field theory class, there was a little aside where the prof derived the Black Scholes equation using a Feynman path integrals and it just blew my mind. I had no previous idea there was so much formalism underlying financial products.
"Trying things" is good advice for most of the major decisions in life.
For example, buying a home: if you've rented a bunch of places, it becomes clear what you want. You may notice that choosing a flat gets easier as you get older.
This also explains why so many people find relationships so difficult: most people only have a few (some only 1 or 2) serious relationships in their life. There's little opportunity to work out what you like.
I like the argument made in So Good They Can't Ignore You, which is in line with this article. Specifically, the author argues that based on studies, people most satisfied with their jobs are not those with a natural aptitudes for their work.
Rather, job satisfaction is well predicted by (1) expertise in the given field, (2) quality of coworkers, and (3) freedom to do what you think is right. For me, I'd say this is pretty accurate.
This goes back to mastery, autonomy, and purpose as key motivators / engagement of workers today. However, purpose and quality of coworkers are what's different from the two which means that motivation and job satisfaction are at least correlated and that the differences may be better explained with models based more around relationships - relationship with oneself is a big part of finding purpose in life or career, after all in the western world.
I don't know your specific situation, but I've seen others with the same mindset who are actually wrong, e.g. trying to optimise for a hypothetical scenario that is unlikely or whose costs outweigh the benefits...they just don't realize it because they don't have enough context or domain expertise.
I'm not saying that's you, but it might be. If you have this trait, you better be right a lot, or nobody will want to work with you.
I think we really need to have a conversation on what "right career" actually means.
Case in point. I'm a scientist, working on drug delivery technology. I absolutely love research as a career. What I hate though is the poor pay, non-existant job security, irregular work life balance and cult of self-sacrifice.
In retrospect, could I go back 20 years and start again I would have pursued a career with greater job security and pay, less stress and more flexible working conditions. Such jobs include regional train driving, trades-crafts or administration to name a few (in my region).
These days I value less my career and more my free time with which I can pursue my hobbies.
Subnote: With the advances in automation I think we should also consider whether spending x0,000 hours to become great at a career is really important anymore. Is it ethical to tell someone to sacrifice huge swathes of their time/life for a career that might not exist when they're ready?
2nd Subnote: I want to expand my comment again after finishing the article. I think we need to bear in mind that theres a lot of unspoken assumptions in this guide. For instance, the assumption that theres time to explore possible careers or that one can even trial different careers. A lot of people I know from more difficult backgrounds never had the luxury to try things. They had to make money to support their family so they took what they could get. Alternatively, they never had exposure to other fields so didn't know what was out there anyway. "Finding the right career" is in retrospect an extremely telling phrase about ones socioeconomic and political position.
I actually think automation makes it more important to gain strong skills rather than less, because it's increasing inequality. It's just you need to gain transferable skills that are resistant to automation. We go into much more detail here:
https://80000hours.org/career-guide/career-capital/
I also think it's possible for everyone to take an empirical approach to their career to some degree, but it's certainly true that it's more important if you have more options.
Hi Cup - yes you're right, what people are looking for in their career is complicated and varies by people.
This is part four of our career guide; the first article is all about what actually creates job satisfaction: http://80000hours.org/career-guide/job-satisfaction . I think we say everything you said on your comment, and a lot more.
While people are varied, there are a few factors identified in the psychological literature that are highly predictive of overall job satisfaction and fulfillment for most of us. :)
Do you think It's fair to push idealism over realism on (presumably) young people, where wasting time looking for a 'dream' job might distract from living a happy life with an ordinary/respectable job?
I like the intention and amount of work you've invested in this but I can't help but feel uneasy about something.
Hi Cup - our career guide is explicitly focussed on "talented young graduates." We would shift the focus a bit for different audiences (more on financial security for example). Though that's already implicit in our discussion of the point at which money stops increasing happiness.
But actually if you read on the career paths we recommend in the career guide involve developing highly practical and marketable skills. We just think that turning those valuable skills towards improving the world will provide people with fulfillment in the long term.
Speaking from personal experience, I would strongly recommend against seeing a job as income solely and pursuing your passion in your free time.
You spend a huge amount of time in your work. We are mostly privileged enough to choose the job we take. Don't stay where you're unhappy. Don't settle for a job you don't find fulfilling.
> could I go back 20 years and start again I would have pursued a career with greater job security and pay, less stress and more flexible working conditions
This post introduced me to a concept I had never seen before.
Not the content though. Instead I'm referring to some new web chicanery with the janky popup that appears when you mouse your mouse off the page in preparation for navigating back.
Normally these just invite you to join an email list or whatever.
But this one seems to be actually personalized based on referer - I saw "Sorry to do this to you HN.". I had instinctively closed it as always before it struck me this is the first time I've ever seen that.
I guess there's some kind of database somewhere of referers, with a groovy customized "sorry you're leaving" phrase for each one?
I struggle with this. Often, I find myself asking why should the primary purpose of my life be providing for the lives of others? I should spend my life living for myself to the fullest and in so doing, hopefully it enables me to provide for my family and if not, at least I have little regrets.
Of course, if I choose to have kids, then this course would alter. I would have to shoulder the responsibility of being my kids' sole provider til they are able to fend for themselves. If I'm married and have taken the vow, then I would abide by my spouse til death do us part. I would also without a doubt, see my aged old parents whom did not managed to save for retirement well into their golden years.
All that above is only when I have made the conscious effort to start a family. Otherwise, providing for one's family cannot be the motivator for starting a firm and letting all else - things pertaining to my self-interests and ambitions take a back seat don't seem logical to me at all.
I know reality is crushing. I also know I have the power to think and to change things. I will not succumb.
The evidence from postiive psychology is clear that pursuing a goal greater than yourself (that is, trying to help others) is associated with higher levels of happiness and fulfillment, so it's sensible to follow that path even if you are purely selfish: https://80000hours.org/career-guide/job-satisfaction
I guess everybody is different. Having anybody depend on me makes me feel depressed. The only thing that truly makes me happy is working on my own projects. Anything that seriously distracts me from doing this is my enemy.
I'm ok with spending a small percentage of my time with family but more than that and I will probably fall into deep a depression followed by a really angry backlash from me.
Which is why I will probably never have a family. I don't think I can dedicate them the time they deserve.
You could try finding a partner that feels the same, someone that also values their free time and persona space. You may find their support actually helps you focus even more.
Found that person. We can both be working on our own things in the same room, no problems. And spending time with her keeps me more on task and less distracted by all the shiny things on the internet.
You are being very rational and there is little to flaw without argument in that context.
Unfortunately (or maybe not), the world (and the organic chemistry that you are made of) is not a collection of rational entities. It is extremely hard to stay rational in that context. Good luck with trying to do that. (meant non-sarcastically)
Family != Self. It's akin to saying I can be my own spouse or my own kid. Is the Christian tripartite, God being the father, son and holy spirit a simple enough idea to you or any layman? Can God be God and also be man at the same time? I can be independent enough and but may still have family depending on me. You may want to define 'independent', surely it's not simple enough yet.
Can we not whimsically redefine words that are already well-defined or at least explicitly state how you want to use it if you're going to make a generic statement with it else stick to it's common meaning.
This strikes me as a somewhat anti-social view of life.
In my experience, people are social creatures. We like to find a tribe, we like to help others, and we like social networks that stretch beyond a single partner and children.
Farming for yourself is a very inefficient way to live.
Not trying to convince you to change, each to his own, but just pointing out that you may be missing out on some good things in life.
Well of course exploration would help, but it's often very, very hard to get an opportunity to try something to any depth. Who's going to write a better job application, someone who already knows what the job is about, or a tourist?
The advice about keeping your options open is IMO basically advice to do a STEM degree. It is plausible that someone who studied science could read a lot and become a political consultant. It's a lot less plausible that someone who studied politics is going to pick up a book on fluid dynamics and work on formula one cars. Neither should logically be impossible (it's just books after all) but what will most employers' intuition be? Both are small industries where opportunities are limited.
What's needed is more transparency. Nothing throughout school or university showed me anything relevant about work. For instance, what salary can you get from various careers? I was left with some leaflets with rough estimates for finance and consultancy. And I had an offer in Engineering. But apart from that, no clue.
What would make sense would be if firms got some kind of incentive to let young people come in and have a look. And young people would be sent to do various things, not just the ones they (or their parents) think will be best. I remember one 18 year old intern who somehow knew she wanted to work in investment banking (what she was doing in quantitative finance is a good question).
This advice was similar to what I got from my therapist when I was 19 in pre-med at college. I liked physics most, but everyone in my family was in medicine. So my therapist said, go job shadow people who have jobs in each of the fields that you are considering. So I shadowed a respirologist for a day I shadowed and electrical engineering firm that did wiring for department stores and big box stores and I shadowed a satellite engineering and manufacturing company. The respirologist, so very highly paid, was absolutely the worst job I could possibly imagine for myself. The patience that he saw that day, all had elements from manufacturing sector jobs, where their lungs were basically shot. He prescribed a whole bunch of steroids on schedules that the patients didn't understand (most of them did not speak English). It was so depressing. The electrical engineering firm that designed the big box stores, that was super boring to. AutoCAD and sitting at your desk all day long. The one that I like the most was the satellite engineering and Manufacturing Company. So I went into aerospace engineering. Then eventually changed to electrical engineering, but the passion for Aerospace remains. What I wish this article addressed, I was how to refund your career when you're now in your mid-thirties.
I agree with this article 100%, and it makes me sad because that belief comes way too late to be of much use. I'm too damn old and established in various aspects of my life to try a lot of new things (things that are fundamentally and profoundly new to me, I mean) without blowing everything up. And I'm not willing to blow up my life.
The simulated annealing that's possible with youth is astounding. I wish I hadn't been so stupid at the time.
I'm committed to my job for about the next six years, having already been in it about five years already. The people are great, the mission is pretty good, and the culture has some strong aspects.
Having said that, I'm squirreling away most of my earnings so that I can make a careful step to my next career without needing to rush. It should be another one with pretty good earnings; tack those savings up with the ones from my current job, and the next job, when it comes, can be almost anything, with little regard for level of income.
I guess what I'm saying is that I'm staying very conservative in my finances so I can stretch further in other dimensions of life without risk of over extending.
Mix things up all you want but finding a good fit early and doubling down on making a career out of it will get you farther down that path.
Bouncing around between grad school and different fields (or specializations within a field) is an expensive (mostly in terms of opportunity cost) luxury many cannot afford and many that can afford cannot justify.
Applied to careers, I take the talk as implying that trying things is the secret. After a certain level of experience in your career, you'll know whether you like it. Branching off of that, it might even be the right thing to do to find a new career.
One of the best pieces of advice I have ever received is "successful people do stuff. It doesn't matter what that stuff is, just do stuff and you'll eventually be successful". Some people will be luckier than others, and be successful at their stuff at a higher ratio, but overall, the ratio is about the same, and you just need to keep doing stuff.
Also, one of my favorite illustrations/cartoons of all time[2] speaks to this point. Basically, if you pursue the same career for your entire life, you're probably wasting your time. once you have your x,000 hours of work in, do something new where you can cross-apply that knowledge into domains that need it.
[1]https://youtu.be/l_F9jxsfGCw
[2]http://www.smbc-comics.com/?id=2722
Edit: sloppy link formatting