So Good They Can't Ignore You: Why Skills Trump Passion in the Quest for Work You Love

In short, although I didn't agree with everything he said, especially in part four of the book, I found Cal Newport's ideas and conclusions to be extremely valuable advice for anyone, especially those starting or middling a career. Even though I disagree with part four, however, I think the rest of the advice is so valuable it trumps the one weaker section to make a solid 5-stars. I sort of hope my competition never reads this book. In length: So Good They Can't Ignore You is a fantastic little book that really surprised me on many levels. I had it highly recommended to me, but I have to admit I was a little skeptical--Cal seemed a little young and early in his career to be dispensing what friends told me was 'invaluable career advice'. Having read the book, it makes more sense--Cal has a lot of career capital already built up. (Read the book to find out more). Cal's central theme is that the idea that you can quit your job and follow your passions indiscriminately towards work you will personally love and find to be your calling in life is essentially bogus--good things don't come without hard work, and rare and valuable things are purchased in exchange for other rare and valuable things. After providing a series of examples of people who failed to live the 'work-passion-dream', and citing some interesting studies and articles, Cal launches into the real meat of the book--how to find work we will really love. The first step is something called career capital--making yourself valuable. The second step is understanding when and how to take control of your career--you *can* quit your dayjob and form a startup, eventually, if you play your cards right and work towards it in the right way. Finally, Cal dwells on the importance of having a mission in your career to provide focus and passion. I found the book mostly extremely well-written, with fair organization and solid logic throughout--you can see that he is a computer science professional at heart. His explanations, especially in the first sections of the book, match my own observations so well that it's hard to deny he has a good number of points well-made. I found, however, that the fourth section, about missions, was less compelling, less organized, and perhaps even less well thought through. Still, I recommend reading through that section to understand his viewpoints, even if I personally found them much less applicable than the other parts of the book. The conclusion made me love this book again, even after disagreeing with part 4. He outlines how he has used each of the sections of this book in his own career, and not only did I find it generally interesting, I actually found some of his specific recommendations to be valuable in my career. It isn't often that a book I read fundamentally changes how I look at anything, least of all my career--I'm a CPA, for heaven's sake. As a matter of habit, I dislike risk and change.

I waited with much anticipation for this book after recently finishing Newport's "How to be a High School Superstar." "So Good They Can't Ignore You" is a solid exploration of the specific components that make one a better performer and includes some examples of how to develop those areas. Newport's greatest strength is delivering on every question and anticipated skepticism his implied audience has about every step of his argument. Newport fleshes out each theory he provides in extremely clear detail, and then goes on to address every conceivable concern a reader might have about each area. The first obvious skepticism he has to answer for is "does passion matter" in the quest for meaningful work -- he does this by providing clear counter-examples from real-life statistics about how many successful people do not arrive at meaningful work by following a passion. I appreciate the lengths to which he explores the implications of both 1) pursuing passion and 2) arriving at a passion through hard work. The biggest and most profound takeaway I learned from the book is the notion of deliberate practice, and what exercises separate deliberate practice from "mindless" practice, of a skill you are trying to develop. This has already affected how I approach writing, and has given me insight into why learning a variety of languages (for which I was already employing this technique, but hadn't named it) have been so effective. Narrowing down deliberate practice and exploring how it applies to sciences, math, art is by far the most compelling point of the book. Admittedly, there is one area of the book that fell short for me, but not enough to take down the star-level of my review, which I believe the book has earned. This is the concept of mission statements. While I like the idea in theory, I think it's much more applicable to the sciences and technology than some pursuits like writing and liberal arts. I have 12+ years of skill-building in those areas, but don't see as many opportunities for the "purple cow" phenomenon of finding a remarkable idea that will innovate the field or the world. In this respect, I wish Newport had discussed in more detail how the "purple cow" and cutting edge innovations applies to the humanities, especially those which are as specific as medieval poetry, for example. The closest approximation I see is via the early example of the television screenwriter whose job is to do a better job writing tv scripts than most everyone else. But what would his mission statement be? His deliberate practice makes sense, but I have a difficult time connecting the mission statement concept to his work. More guidance in this area would be welcome. Overall an outstanding book and one I have already sent as gifts to some friends.

Cal Newport's books are a must-read, especially for young people. He reveals the character qualities that matter as one begins a career and helps young adults - maybe older ones too - get past making decisions solely based on emotion. Well-reasoned, engaging, and helpful.

Although my comments below are mostly critical, let me first say that I enjoyed the read. I give the author credit for proposing a different take on how to achieve job satisfaction than has appeared in so many books in recent decades. 1. "Um... and for those of us who aren't Leonardo de Vinci?" a.) Who is the target audience: Ivy League grads (well, Stanford is in there too), music prodigies, people whose standardized test results put them in the top 1%, United States top-ranked debaters who use law school as a back-up plan for trying out Hollywood?!! In fairness, there are also studies cited. But is this really a guideline meant to be representative for a generalized population? Yes, these remarkable people worked hard, excelled, and appear to be content. It makes sense to look at that. But what about the rest of us? b.) An underlying assumption seems to be that career "success" is the same as career "satisfaction." (I'm not sure I would choose someone like Steve Jobs to illustrate how to be happy.) If the book were entitled, "How to be successful," I would probably quibble less. Snapshot assessments are provided of talented people who are for the moment extremely successful, and who appear content. How do we measure that these people are really happy in their jobs, or that they will be 30 years from now? Does one have to be "successful" to be happy? How many examples exist of people who have been successful who have lied (to themselves and others) about their happiness--only to later implode. c.) How do these examples support causality relative to the book's premise? There was no mention of the possibility that others might try the recommended approach and fail anyway. d.) The author's work with computers perhaps betrays him. This comes across as an intellectual construct based on the premise that job satisfaction is a deterministic puzzle. I don't agree: our lives are not linear, and this is NOT a science. There are just too many variables. Some write songs in 5 minutes, others labor for weeks or months. Some write books prolifically, some struggle for years. The template is not fixed. 2. "The Craftsman Mindset (Mastery)" a.) Of all the places to look for evidence that job satisfaction is the result of the merit of one's efforts, the decision to highlight people in the music and television industries as illustrative models is just stunning. These venues represent the most subjective examples of achievement I can imagine. Countless instances can be found to illustrate a lack of mastery, talent, and quality. How many contemporary singers sing off pitch, how many hit television shows are increasingly... garbage? Perhaps "the tape doesn't lie", but in too many cases it just doesn't matter. b.) The celebration of mastery, hard, smart work, craftsmanship, and excellence is valid, wonderful, and useful. But history is replete with examples of people who were masters at what they did, and yet they WERE ignored--or even vilified. The response based on the line of reasoning presented would likely be that these people failed to adequately handle their "career capital." Should they have assessed their marketability at the expense of their mission or their integrity? Would this have made them happy? On the other hand, maybe it's possible they were already happy--despite their lack of tangible success. c.) I find it difficult to believe that people who have the tenacity to pursue the craftsman mindset do so not from passion but because it's what the "industry requires", or because it's what they can "offer the world." The former rationale is too cynical (a la "Stepford" employees). The latter is too Pollyanna-ish. I doubt either covers the general case. d.) Ira Glass is quoted as asserting that "you have to force the skills to come." I can attest from decades of experience in diverse environments that some of the most capable people I have met were the biggest goof-offs... and when it came time to get down to brass tacks, it wasn't because they "forced it". (I suspect this is partially because their minds were relaxed enough to learn.) Would they fit the book's criteria to be considered masters? I don't know, but that's not the point: the question was whether they were happy in their work. 3. "Passion" a.) I think the book makes some good points regarding passion. It is sometimes difficult to understand passion in the absence of experience. But people have done amazing things because of passion--passion allows people to get beyond horrible circumstances through dedication to something they love. And while the book ridicules the passion mindset, Craftsman Mindset Disqualifier #2 allows for avoiding work that one considers "useless." Why? Probably because it's hard for anyone to have ANY passion for something they consider useless. (And later the development of a sense of mission is lauded to answer the related question "what should I do with my life.") b.) The argument that prior to deciding on a mission, one must first "get to the cutting edge" is just not realistic. How many people are ever able to attain that status? But even if they can, at what price? The opportunity cost of "10,000 hours" (particularly to find out one was mistaken) is enormous. Is this really a prescription for job satisfaction for the average person? c.) Perhaps the most poignant counter-examples to the premise that passion lacks value are provided by many who do excel at music as a profession. Accomplished musicians invariably note that they selected music as a career, because they in effect "had no choice," it is "part of who they are." As far as Jordan Tice, I cannot see how he would have practiced so much without passion. And to compare someone with average or even above-average musical skills to someone who is a musical "prodigy", and assert that the difference between the two can simply be attributed to how they practiced, seems to be pushing it a bit. For myself at least, I can tell you that I harbor no such illusions. :-) d.) The assertion is made that Steve Jobs wasted time during his younger days on the idea of passion. But how does one know that his "messy path" wasn't a prerequisite for his later success and happiness? How would he know he shouldn't become a Zen master, if he hadn't taken the time to explore the possibility? More to the point, maybe he would have never accomplished what he did if he hadn't attempted that path first. Indeed, the knowledge that our passions may not be clear cut may be the very reason for their pursuit. How will people obtain clarity, if they never investigate what they believe to be true? Passions may at times be illusory, and they may change, but that doesn't negate their validity--or their pursuit. 4. "The American Dream" a.) This book can be viewed as optimistic, in that it suggests that anyone can do anything. Implicit in the analysis is the cliché that if one just tries hard enough and in the right way, they'll make it, and they'll be happy. But it can also be viewed as convenient and elitist to argue from success, e.g. "I succeeded, I'm happy, why aren't you... just do what I did." Though not mentioned as such, this idea fits in well with of the longstanding concept of the American dream. The narrow and exclusive nature of the supplied anecdotes does not lead one to be persuaded regarding the general premise. The author suggests that passion is rare, but how rare are the exceptional stories that were described? How many follow the rules and aren't happy; how many don't follow the rules but are? I would be curious as to how Malcolm Gladwell might view this book. Some of the points made in "Outliers" are cited, but in my opinion this book misses some of the heart that comes through in Gladwell's book. But perhaps I'm mistaken. b.) The book notes the particularly low satisfaction level of young workers. Increasingly, Americans' expectations are too high, we have grown up believing that we deserve to be entertained. In some ways this feeds our obsession with passion--I agree. But beyond this, we live in a culture where money, power, winning, and success--not craftsmanship or mastery--are the holy grail. Are we really surprised that people feel empty? c.) If one Googles "resume tips", they'll come upon the recommendation for people to leave their personal information off their resume. This is practical advice that is understandable, but consider the rationale that is provided: "We don't care what kind of person you are." That, I suggest, may be closer to the root of why rank and file people are often miserable in the jobs.

Order So Good They Can't Ignore You today. Get it in hardback, get it in Kindle, it can change your life. Cal Newport is a computer scientist in his first year teaching at Georgetown. So what does he know? Well, he has already published three successful books on how to be a super-student--in college and high school--and he runs the enormously popular blog "Study Hacks." And now, in this newest book, he debunks the popular career advice "follow your passion." He doesn't just blow some self-help smoke about how to manipulate your own emotions, he actually tells you what steps to take to develop rare and valuable skills and achieve an interesting life, his "career craftsman" approach. Cal Newport argues that passion comes after you put in the hard work to become excellent at something valuable, not before. Just showing up at work or school is not enough. Just being good enough to get by is not enough. Nor is it enough to get to be good at something ho-hum. Cal tells you how to choose what you do carefully, and how to build your rare and valuable skills, always with a view, as well, to how to get your achievements known. Cal is a scientist. To develop his theories he talked with many people who are successful in their work, from organic farmers to venture capitalists, and he met with the brilliant young evolutionary biologist Pardis Sabeti at Harvard and analyzed her career-building choices and the effect on her career of her sense of mission. But he also applied his theories candidly to how he made his own decisions, good and less so. Now here's my experience. I have followed Cal Newport's blog for several years. I took it to heart when Cal first started talking about Steve Martin's advice to young comedians, "Get to be so good they can't ignore you"--now the title for the new book--and I recited that motto daily as I drove myself through the final painful months of producing my own latest book Perform Your Best on the Bar Exam Performance Test (MPT): Train to Finish the MPT in 90 Minutes, Like a Sport(TM) . Who knows how long the job might have taken without Cal's inspiration. But this review is about Cal's book, not mine. Let me tell you, Cal Newport's new book is terrific from the title page to the index. Buy it today. Get to be so good they can't ignore you. Get an interesting life.

Although Cal deviates from his student-centric advice, this book is relevant to those amongst us wanting to use our time wisely in college as the foundation for a good life post-graduation. The most pertinent student-centric topics include how to deal with "passion" and how to build capital during college in skills that would put us light years ahead of our peers when we enter the working world. I, myself, am only a freshman in university but found the book highly useful. Some may find his suggestions extremely unorthodox, maybe slightly arrogant, perhaps most notably for tearing down the great Steve Jobs' advice on passion - but Cal is actually sublime in humility and humor, hardly shying away from sharing his own journey thus far. He attributed, without pomp, his achievements in Dartmouth to his reductionist approach toward acquiring the right type of study skills and not to some spontaneous combustion of platonic passion towards computer science. He self-deprecatingly writes about his mediocre guitar skills as a teenager, emphasizing the importance of deliberate practice. He shares, in the most human way, an incisive analysis of his method towards navigating his uncertain and ambiguous way into the job market as a professor - and it is ironically his personal approach that provides readers with the sharpest insight into the applicability of the advice he writes about in reality. The advice may be contrarian and the proclaimations bold but at its core, the aim of this book is humbly optimistic: how to create, and then integrate a fairly successful career into a content life that in turn, generates happiness. This is what I believe every reasonable person often grapples with and continue to long for - but not very many writers have been able to write coherently and intelligently about - which is why I highly recommend this book to anyone willing to cast aside selfish presuppositions about being entitled to a "passion" or an exhilirating career from the world without first putting in the work needed to earn it.

Love Cal! Super insightful

Overall, this was a good book with some provocative original ideas - but with some deep flaws. THE GOOD I think Newport made a great original contribution to understanding career development with his concept of Career Capital: "The traits that define great work are rare and valuable. Supply and demand says that if you want [this work] you need rare and valuable skills to offer in return. Think of these rare and valuable skills you can offer as your career capital. The craftsman mindset, with its relentless focus on becoming “so good they can’t ignore you,” is a strategy well suited for acquiring career capital. " Newport suggests a strategy of acquiring career capital - and then investing it in better roles. To develop career capital, * develop a craftsman attitude * start "deliberative practice" - "Deliberate practice is the key strategy for acquiring career capital then integrating it into your own working life." As per the 10,000 hours philosophy espoused by Anders Ericsson and then Malcolm Gladwell.. To get more career control, understand the two control traps: The First Control Trap "Control that’s acquired without career capital is not sustainable." 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." Then, develop your mission by getting to the cutting edge of your field and spotting what is possible in the adjacent future. THE (VERY) BAD: In spite of the good in the book, I think Newport made several major mistakes that radically reduced the forcefulness of his book's argument. I just want to tackle one of them here, which is his attack on the "passion hypothesis." The Passion Hypothesis is stated as: "The key to occupational happiness is to first figure out what you’re passionate about and then find a job that matches this passion." Then Newport proceeds to tell us why this hypothesis is wrong. Unfortunately, this "passion hypothesis" is a straw man, an artificial construction created by Newport. According to Newport, the poster child for the passion hypothesis is Richard Bolles and his book "What Color is Your Parachute." Newport however seems to have completely missed the point of Bolles' book - and the central point of similar books in this genre. "Passion" was not what was at the core of Bolles' book. In fact, the word "passion" was rarely mentioned in the book. Instead, Bolles advocated an alignment between Skills, "Knowledges," and (in different editions) either Values or Purpose, together with conceptualising an ideal work environment. ** Bolles' book placed skills at the very centre of his approach **. For Bolles, 'skills' were NOT ignored. They were the very foundation. To say Bolles' approach was just about "following your passion" - and doing so at the expense of skills - is either a deliberate mischaracterisation of Bolles' work, or shows an astonishingly low level of understanding of the point of view that Newport is attacking. And it's not just Bolles who took this skills-based approach to career and business development. Most of the common models in the 'find your career' or 'do work you love' or 'start your business' genres tend to follow something like the Jim Collins Hedgehog model - combine what you love (your interests or passions) with what you're good at (your skills and strengths) and a market need. ** For Newport to put passion VS skills as a dichotomy where you have to choose one or the other and can't have both is not representative of what people actually teach or what career seekers or business startups actually do. ** It is a false dichotomy. In the examples he used in the book, this was so ridiculous that at one point (Ch. 5) Newport even observed his example wasn't really all that representative, and that we should understand the case examples forming the foundation of the chapter as simply a good 'metaphor.' This isn't just a minor point. This is a gaping hole in the fundamental premise in the book - that other people tell you to just go and follow your passion, that that's wrong, and Newport alone has a different and better way. Well, Newport's way - to focus on skills development - is along the lines what everyone else does anyway. Newport makes some good contributions about the process of developing your skills and using them to advance your career. But his rhetorical positioning that everyone else is just about following your passion and only he can show us the 'true path' is plain wrong. I do recommend reading this book as it has some good ideas and for me it generated some good reflections. Just be aware that there is a gaping hole in his premise around the role that passion plays in career development. And that he uses the same rhetorical device of constructing and attacking a false 'straw man' in his next book, Deep Work - so this seems to be a deliberate strategy or preference on Newport's part.

My explanation: Key question raised in the book is the following one: How people end up loving what they do (i.e. how to find the work you’ll love)? Having changed of job and working fields several times in few years, this is exactly the question I was having for myself when I started the book. To answer this, the author first demystifies the famous and common "passion hypothesis" saying that the key to loving your work is to match a job to pre-existing passion. Then instead the author proposes the following strategy: Step 1 - Choose a job with the following features: a) offering opportunities to develop skills being rare & valuables; b) that focuses on something useful for the world; c) in which you can work with people you like. In parallel, choose to work either in a "winner-take-all” field, which offers one main specialty to master to become the most competent in the area. Or in an "auction" working field, which offers various specialties in which you can distinguish yourself by becoming the best in these specialties. Step 2 - Identify the rare & valuable skills (= named “career capital”) you want to pursue. Step 3 - Define clear goals regarding these skills. Step 4 - Work hard, stretch and destroy to become “so good they can’t ignore you” regardless of whether or not you believe it’s your true calling. Step 5 - Be patient Step 6 – At this step you have adopted what the author names "deliberate practice" in a knowledge work setting, and you have also adopted the "craftsman mindset". Step 7 – At this step you have acquired Career Capital. Thus you are able to offer rare & valuable skills. Step 8 - You get a great work you love containing rare & valuable traits (e.g. control, autonomy, impact...). Step 9 - You identify a realistic mission for your career. A mission is the answer to the question "what shall I do with my life?" Step 10 - You deploy small and concrete experiments that return concrete feedback. Author names these experiments "little-bets". Step 11 - You select one avenue having the highest likelihood of leading to outstanding results, and satisfying the following law (named "law of remarkability"): a) It must compel people to remark about it; b) It must be launched in a venue that supports such remarking. With this strategy, you normally get a work you love at step 8. Steps 9 to 11 are more to realize yourself via the job. However I see two problems: 1) The author assumes that at step 1 you are able to get the necessary picture enabling you to select the right job (e.g. identification of opportunities to develop skills being rare & valuables, identification that you can work with people and colleagues you like…). However in reality it is impossible to get such a picture before concretely starting and living the job. 2) All examples given in the book to demonstrate this strategy are taken from people who already love what they do for a living. In my view the method proposed is apt but valid when and only when you have found a job/field you enjoy and like. Unfortunately this is the key question readers may have in mind when buying the book: which job should I choose to end up loving this one? The book does not answer this baseline question thus misses the point. My conclusion: Author explains that in order to love your work, you must not follow your passion but instead you have to find a job and a field in which you can invest yourself in order to get rare and valuable skills. Then you can sell these skills to get a rare and valuable job.  Nothing new, this explains why e.g. doctors (having rare & valuable skills) are passionate about their rare job and why cleaning woman’s (not having rare & valuable skills) are not passionate about their common job. Pure logic: the lower valuable skills you have the lowest valuable jobs you get. What the book misses to answer is how to find the right job you will like enough to invest yourself and get rare & valuable skills. I think the most common doors taken by experienced people to achieve this is simply to follow their inspiration and passion. I feel this concept has not been understood by the author.

As a recent graduate searching for a job, I find that the book offers a lot ot insights. Would definitely recommend reading it to my friends.

Um livro que todos os que procuram um vocação profissional deveriam ler. É um livro revolucionário porque tira o foco da paixão para o esforço.

An incredible book. Cal Newport answers the questions that so many of us ask at some point of our lives. And with good examples he elaborates an alternative for those who maybe don’t feel passionate about a specific job when starting your career. I recommend it 100% specially if you’re in your 20s and entering to the job market.

This is one of the best career/lifestyle books I have ever read. It is well researched, and uses countless examples to show the way to a successful career and an interesting life. Above all, it brilliantly debunks the "follow your passion" mantra by showing that not even Steve Jobs followed it, despite what he said. Cal Newport gives numerous bits of evidence to show why it is such bad advice, including that students tend to be interesetd in things (sport, dancing) that can only rarely be the basis of careers and lifestyles. He also includes the horror story of the person who "followed her passion" into running a yoga school, and ended up on food stamps. Having disposed of the myth, Cal Newport goes on the replace it with more solid advice, showing how you can become "... so good they can't ignore you". Also, very helpfully, he explains how he has applied the concept of "deliberate practice" to his own learning, with impressive results. Overall, this is a really excellent book, and quite remarkable from one so near the beginning of his own career. On occasion, I thought the writing style was clumsy, but that is a minor issue. Much more important is the content, and that is superb. It ought to be compulsory reading for anyone involved in offering careers advice.