The best way to control your emotional capital is to fine tune your internal monologue and replace your hunger for approval with a desire to grow.
In the passion economy, the real risk is that your job has to earn a living and meet the needs of your soul.
Six questions to consider if you’re thinking of leaving your job to pursue your passion.
A thread 👇🏽
The best way to control your emotional capital is to fine tune your internal monologue and replace your hunger for approval with a desire to grow.
Insecurity work doesn't move the ball forward, but you can do it multiple times a day without realizing.
Deep work requires being unencumbered by the day to day.
Your objective is to ride the waves of your business with serenity.
You have to fight the temptation to strip the future of its surprises.
Your business exists in the context of a marketplace, but also in the context of your life.
You have to be willing to overcome the defaults and orient your business around the things that define you.
Notice the difference between imagination and reality.
When you catch yourself saying “nobody likes my work”, witness your thoughts and replace it with “I am struggling”.
In the words of Dick Collins: “Decide before the race the conditions that will cause you to stop and drop out..."
https://t.co/iQpU3uAnFx
More from Life
"I lied about my basic beliefs in order to keep a prestigious job. Now that it will be zero-cost to me, I have a few things to say."
We know that elite institutions like the one Flier was in (partial) charge of rely on irrelevant status markers like private school education, whiteness, legacy, and ability to charm an old white guy at an interview.
Harvard's discriminatory policies are becoming increasingly well known, across the political spectrum (see, e.g., the recent lawsuit on discrimination against East Asian applications.)
It's refreshing to hear a senior administrator admits to personally opposing policies that attempt to remedy these basic flaws. These are flaws that harm his institution's ability to do cutting-edge research and to serve the public.
Harvard is being eclipsed by institutions that have different ideas about how to run a 21st Century institution. Stanford, for one; the UC system; the "public Ivys".
As a dean of a major academic institution, I could not have said this. But I will now. Requiring such statements in applications for appointments and promotions is an affront to academic freedom, and diminishes the true value of diversity, equity of inclusion by trivializing it. https://t.co/NfcI5VLODi
— Jeffrey Flier (@jflier) November 10, 2018
We know that elite institutions like the one Flier was in (partial) charge of rely on irrelevant status markers like private school education, whiteness, legacy, and ability to charm an old white guy at an interview.
Harvard's discriminatory policies are becoming increasingly well known, across the political spectrum (see, e.g., the recent lawsuit on discrimination against East Asian applications.)
It's refreshing to hear a senior administrator admits to personally opposing policies that attempt to remedy these basic flaws. These are flaws that harm his institution's ability to do cutting-edge research and to serve the public.
Harvard is being eclipsed by institutions that have different ideas about how to run a 21st Century institution. Stanford, for one; the UC system; the "public Ivys".
