In my observation, the causation usually runs the other way. People enjoy things that give them a good effort->reward loop. If something is too hard, it is frustrating and not fun. Too easy, and it is boring. I enjoy programming because it is constant puzzle solving at exactly the right level of challenge for my brain. But other people simply do not have the programming gene and thus they never enjoy it.
I also disagree that competition is a bad thing. Competition is often fun and exhilarating. It has stimulated humanity's greatest achievements. The bad kind of competition tends to be competition over artificial goals (such as grades). But competition over real goals - getting to the moon, setting a world record in sprinting, building the world's best search engine - can be a tremendous driving force.
Yes, some kinds of competition are good e.g. products competing for market share. However, even here, comparative advantage (specialising and creating a niche) seems to promote survival more reliably than competitive advantage.
The issue is over where one directs creativity. Asking "Am I the best astronaut in the world?", for example, is less fruitful than searching for the neatest way is ensure all space tools are returned to the space station.
An interesting example of this is my enjoyment of programming versus my lack of enjoyment for physical experiments. Physical experiments take (in my opinion) too much effort in controlling the variables for the reward of good observations.
I also disagree that competition is a bad thing. Competition is often fun and exhilarating. It has stimulated humanity's greatest achievements. The bad kind of competition tends to be competition over artificial goals (such as grades). But competition over real goals - getting to the moon, setting a world record in sprinting, building the world's best search engine - can be a tremendous driving force.