I wrote the following to a client and thought it was worth sharing here. I’ve written similar things before, but it bears repeating. I think it speaks for itself, but let me know if it needs more explanation or context.
I find with passions you get out what you put in, so I think the advice to find your passion only gets half of it.
You need to find an area interesting enough to you to devote yourself to it, but no passion begins as a passion. It begins as in interest. It grows to a passion from what you put into it.
Resources like time, energy, money, attention, etc that you put into one area you can’t put into another, so we have to decide which interests to give to and build to passions and which not to. Those decisions are hard, but, as far as I can tell, the alternative is to have a bunch of lukewarm things instead of one or two fiery passions.
I don’t like when people talk about finding or falling in love with a passion as if it was a passive thing that just happens. I created my passions. This perspective is more active since it says you can create as much passion as you want, but it gives you a lot more responsibility, because it says it won’t happen unless you give to it, which can be hard. But it’s rewarding because it makes your life better.
This perspective says your greatest passion will be what you give the most to. It’s scary not to pursue other things, but those great historical people you model did it too. [he mentioned a few people whose success he wanted to model]
Read my weekly newsletter
On initiative, leadership, the environment, and burpees