Contributing Through Your Career (Blog)

[Steve Pavlina]

Use this thread to discuss the following entry from Steve Pavlina's blog:

Contributing Through Your Career

[Dan.Linehan]

Nice post Steve.

//Totally agrees.

[Calculusaurus]

I'm very much enjoying the contribution/career theme in the past few posts. Do you still recommend Is Your Genius at Work? for contribution/career decisions?

[inter351]

I also think that your career is one of the best ways to contribute, but I don't think this has to be absolute.

The fact that for Steve both forms are aligned, doesn't *necessarily* means that it has to be in *every* case.

Using a posted example: maybe a great boxer earns millions boxing, but it has a particular like or synchronicity for a special cause, a very different cause (it may be helping some relative [uncle, parent, ...], helping blind people, or helping education). Yes, it may be argued that trough boxing he is creating value for others, he is entertaining them/me, inspiring them and creating adjacent jobs; but he *likes* these other causes in which he has no "competency".

What can he do? Resign himself to no help his loved cause just because it is not aligned with his competency for making money?

I think no. Maybe he wouldn't be as "efficient" making money or contributing teaching to read to a classroom full of people, than donating a substantial amount of money to people that do have the competency. I think this *would* be a form of positive alignment.

In the case of Steve, and in many others, the form of contribution is aligned or the same as the way of earning money. That's great, I a thank the post as a means of making me think if what I'm doing is the best I can do.

[jmvandehey]

Steve, Very interesting topic, one which I've struggled with. I work in high-tech, and make lives better by making faster computers. (sarcasm)

I use my photography "hobby" to earn money, and decided last year to donate 50% of hobby income to a specific charity. In 10 months, I've been able to donate about $300. It's amazing how far that much money goes to help some charities, where for me it would be "play money". The other 50% goes back into growing the "hobby", which in turn helps raise more charity giving. Sort-of like you said.

[silicon toad2000]

Totally agree here.

I have always related careers and salarys back to the simplistic, few people on an island economic model. By working I am contributing to the economy/society and my salary is the value that society places on my work. I take it back to the barter system.

[WilliWibald]

...and besides the individual pros this kind of career-choice has, it effects the society at large:
If less people find it fullfilling to work for "incongruent companies" their products become more expensive (higher salaries needed to motivate people to work there).

[mattmcc]

I'm following the program outlined in the book "Your Money or Your Life."

Currently I'm working as a software developer but am living frugally and investing 25% of my paycheque. I've calculated that I can retire in 5-10 years. Once I'm earning enough income from my investments I want to go to Africa and teach youth entrepreneurship and financial skills to promote sustainability among the upcoming generations.

The beauty I see in this model is that if I have enough income coming in from my investments I can choose to do whatever I want. I need not be concerned if it makes money or not. If I want to write for a year I'll be able to do that. If I want to take 6 months off to study Buddhism I can do that.

[Shamou]

I certainly think that we can provide a major contribution through our career… but I also believe that we can also contribute big time by being an example that others will be inclined to emulate…

Personally, I have been inspired and helped tremendously by role models… athlete (Muhammad Ali) by motivators (Tony Robbins) by business tycoons (Donald Trump) and the list goes on and on…

One man that that had a major impact on my life was a policeman-body-builder named Joffre L’Heureux… thanks to him… I have been an avid fan of physical exercises all my life which is in a great way responsible for the good health that I enjoy today…

In our own way… we all can be models… and contribute…
.

[kellyrued]

Hi Steve, I read your blog but never felt the need to join the forums or post until this topic came up. I first met you at one of your GDC talks and have been an indie game/web developer for about 4 years now. But long before that I worked in social services, at a youth crisis line and then later at the local United Way offices (also in a crisis line call center gig, but already moving into database/software support rather than the counseling part). I learned quite a bit about how charitable organizations work, and so I thought it might be helpful to share just how incredibly important monetary gifts are in this day and age.

I agree with you that the most personally rewarding way to contribute to society will be your own actions and projects where you get to enjoy/see the fruits of your contribution (like in your examples). But charity, like any good gift, is not really about the needs of the giver. The problem with putting too much emphasis on your own happiness/satisfaction when you are weighing charitable options is that a lot of the most critical not-for-profit programs are fairly depressing or public understanding of their purpose is so weak that most people can't "relate to them" or get a big thrill out of contributing to them. Who can get excited about authorizing the mysterious disappearance of funds from your bank account? That's about the net "experience" most people get from donating money to charity... poof, it's gone. Why do that, especially when there are so many things we want/deserve for ourselves/families? Especially when some executive/administrator is just going to squander your gift money.. and how much of that gift even really helps people? Why do you need hundreds of thousands of dollars to do this or that when all the world needs is (insert your idea of how YOU'd handle social problem XYZ, here)?

AFAIK, some of the most effective charitable organizations are the biggest, the most expensive to operate, and the most dependent on financial gifts and grants. Those big charities obfuscate the warm fuzzy feelings of direct, personal contributions for most of their givers, BUT their operations are critical to give people a simplified way to "give" even if the givers don't really know how best to help the people they desire to help (for example, to an inexperienced giver, it might *seem* best to give a needy family groceries and a job offer but a trained social worker will be able to identify "root" barriers that family has which would render a quick fix of groceries or a job opportunity nearly worthless). Administering charitable work and following best practices/research is a career in itself, and the same level of education/executive experience is mandatory to run a not-for-profit organization as it is for anyone running a for-profit, but the catch is that the for-profit is self-funding in some way (or out of business pretty fast). Which leads to my defense of monetary giving as one of the BEST ways to help the world:

Most of the programs that help those people and projects which are truly needy (in the sense that without the charitable help, nothing will be accomplished and the people involved would never have access to resources and solutions without outside assistance)... these are the projects that don't generate any funds! So you have a mess where the only workers willing to do the work (with the skills to do it well) *require* payment, but the work itself generates no revenue. Now, that would be a totally unsustainable situation if it wasn't for the happy coincidence that many (most?) jobs people have are supporting organizations/systems that generate revenue in excess of what is needed to keep them running (profit- both at the corporate and individual worker levels). In other words, earning money so that you can contribute it to needy/profitless/underfunded programs is actually a vital, completely necessary form of contribution. So crucial is it that I wanted to stress how charitable work won't even be a career *option* for any of us if a lot of other people didn't step up and contribute the one thing that every not-for-profit needs the most: cold hard cash.

Some people think volunteering time is the best way to give, but what I learned from the United Way is that running a volunteer program costs a LOT of money. They need to hire people to help you volunteer and administering training for someone to be a "weekend social worker" or whatever is called for, actually still draws on the financial support pools (everything does) just like the training, recruitment, and supervision costs for paid workers (turn-over is turn-over). The money gifts really are the foundation of all the work that every charity can do. If you have a job where you come out ahead every month or a business that has a healthy surplus, count yourself VERY lucky relative to most non-profit organizations and the many low-income/no-income people depending on them. We don't want to think that money is more important than our time, attention, etc. but for some causes, money is the life blood itself that makes everything possible (and can you imagine the stress of having a main line of work that generates NO money at all, but relies entirely on asking other people to share theirs with you?).

So even though writing that check and wondering where it went/who it helped doesn't give you that warm fuzzy feeling, there is someone who's work can contribute to the world *only if* other people donate the funds to make their work possible. I know people send charity money out of some sense of obligation/guilt that their normal job doesn't involve personally administering AIDS vaccines but that's a messed up way to look at gifts of money. The much more motivating (and more accurate) view would be to think that if you didn't make that cash at your *profitable job* and donate it to these people doing critical but totally un-profitable work, that work would NEVER get done. Everyone in non-profits owes *everything* to the profit-able workers and organizations that provide the grants and gifts!

It's fact that most of the major charities could be doing so much more to help the world but they are always severely limited by funding. They have the skilled staff, the metrics and research to know what works, and they have the clearance, licensing, connections, etc. to do things that none of us could accomplish "on the side" of our for-profit jobs. When you siphon even a tiny bit of your personal profit over to the non-profits working to solve problems you care about, you are doing something tremendous for the world (choosing a truly selfless action over something that might be a more enjoyable experience for you). Writing a check/charging a card is never "fun" or anything to blog about/share at a party, but wow does it help non-profits!!

[Dan.Linehan]

Originally Posted by kellyrued

That's about the net "experience" most people get from donating money to charity... poof, it's gone. Why do that, especially when there are so many things we want/deserve for ourselves/families? Especially when some executive/administrator is just going to squander your gift money.. and how much of that gift even really helps people? Why do you need hundreds of thousands of dollars to do this or that when all the world needs is (insert your idea of how YOU'd handle social problem XYZ, here)?

Hey Kelly, welcome to the forum. And thanks for the great first post! I've been mauling over what you've said.

I had a similar experience this week, with a group called Seva. When I realized exactly how amazing their organization is I flipped out that I had never heard of them sooner. Then I felt guilty. I think some members of the forum may have witnessed me flipping out over it, heh.

Anyway, I bought a few web domains, and wondered it you might want to help me add some content on them?

• BestCharityEver.com
• BestCharityList.com
• BestCharitiesEver.com

There are a couple sites out there already that list charities, but not in a manner that I think is as useful as possible.

We can start a thread over at "Character & Contribution" and get feedback as we develop the sites. Might be fun..

Let me know,

[JamesV]

I totally agree. I also like to think that there is a "silent" contribution- simply doing what you do will have an influence on those around you because of how you do it. The proof is in the pudding... If you do something well because of an intrinsic motivation, even if it appears mundane - such as driving a bus or janitor - your influence will be felt.

By the way, I came to your site via lifehacker. There were a number of comments harshly critical of your work because of perceived "new agey" stuff. I decided to see for myself. Well, they are missing out! The idea that we have to all be on the same page with our beliefs is ridiculous. To each his own. We all have something to contribute. The intolerance displayed by certain "Lifehackers" is the same behaviour that many religious sects display against others who do not conform to their world view. If that's what "atheism" means, I want nothing of it!

[ogrekilleat]

This is an interesting point; so interesting, in fact, that it seems to warrant further consideration.

"If something is important enough to you that you feel the urge to donate your money or time to it, I think it’s best to try to express that form of giving through your career, not just as something you do on the side. If you enjoy your volunteering and charitable activities more than your career, it means your career is in serious need of an upgrade."

Those are two quite separate issues, and I think squashing them together in one paragraph as though they were more closely related than they are confuses the issue (and I see that confusion reflected in a couple of the replies here), which is why I'd like to take the time to separate them and look at them separately.

* * *

"If you enjoy your volunteering and charitable activities more than your career, it means your career is in serious need of an upgrade."

Have a career that is incongruent with one's values and/or results in no particular feeling of fulfillment certainly doesn't seem conducive to a person's happiness, no matter how much volunteering/donating they do in the evening.

* * *

"If something is important enough to you that you feel the urge to donate your money or time to it, I think it’s best to try to express that form of giving through your career, not just as something you do on the side."

This one I can't heartily agree with.

If I hated my career, and I had a hobby I loved, then it would make sense for me to try to make a career of the hobby I loved But if, on the other hand, I love/am fulfilled by my career, and I still have the hobby, there isn't necessarily any reason for me to change the situation. I love my career, I have a hobby, awesome! I don't see "contribution hobbies" (contributing one does "on the side") as any different.

Of course, it's also true that more than one kind of contribution can be made through a person's career, and it may be that the hobby and the career could be combined, which could be an interesting endeavor.

* * *

Since I'm anti-dichotomy, I have to propose a new model that seems to me just as worthy as the model Steve prefers:

"Do worthy work -> Earn money -> Reinvest money into increasing one’s capacity to do even more worthy work" and, if one desires, pursue one's contribution hobbies by "Give[ing] money/time to worthy causes"

* * *

Contributing through one's career is awesome, and I aspire to contribute through my entire life.

[Steve Pavlina]

@Kelly: Thanks for sharing. I'm aware of these details. The point of the article wasn't to tell people not to donate to charity -- I still do every month, and I receive the financial reports and weekly progress updates, so I can see what they're doing. Since the focus of this site is personal development, I wanted to address the personal side of giving and challenge people to use their careers as their primary outlet for contribution. I think it's more likely people will have even more cash to give to good causes if they're doing work that truly fulfills them rather than working for a paycheck.

Would Bill Gates or Warren Buffet be able to donate as much today if they just took a job and worked for a paycheck? By contributing through their careers, they have even more to contribute through their cash.

[kellyrued]

Since the focus of this site is personal development, I wanted to address the personal side of giving and challenge people to use their careers as their primary outlet for contribution.

For some reason it just sounded to me like a bit of justification for *not giving as much money* because, afterall, we are all contributing to the world through our career and being a role model. I didn't think you were telling people NOT to give cash to charities, but it did emphasize other activities which are a lot less helpful to charitable causes (unless you're donating services that literally reduce cash expenses for a charity- like pro bono legal work or graphic design, etc.).

I think it depends which causes someone hopes to help. If you want to be a mentor or role model or affect local change (things within the scope of your personal power), then I do agree that anyone's career contribution may be a primary way to contribute.

But for most of the big picture causes people like to support (eradicating disease or poverty, reducing carbon footprints, increasing education and health resources, etc.) there is precious little most of us can do from a singular career, no matter how fulfilling it is (hence people work together and form broader scoped initiatives).

In your particular article the irony was that the less cash giving there is in the world, the less opportunity there is to do fulfilling work in not-for-profit careers. Sex education is a great example of the paradox here: most people who go to college and specifically train for/desire to work in sex education or related services can NOT find jobs/work in those careers. Why? Nobody funds it. You're lucky if you find a volunteer opportunity related to sex ed/sexual health but there really are scant few opportunities to make that work your life's work no matter how committed you are (sadly a lot of things that people want to devote themselves to are things that society doesn't value with a direct financial reward).

So, it depends what people want to affect in the world- sometimes you will be able to make great impact through your primary career (the one that feeds/clothes/shelters your family) and other times there is so much effectiveness/efficiency to be gained if you contribute to a charity that addresses something you personally can't affect (for whatever reason).

I look at charity as "who do I want to help? what do I want to change in the world?" versus "what is in this for me? what am I already doing that helps the world?" since the former is more congruent with my understanding of charity. The latter perspective doesn't invalidate the former or vice versa, so it's not a "this way is better for everyone" thing, but looking at charity as a self-centered activity doesn't work for me, personally. It's too easy for me to feel like I already do enough and become complacent rather than proactive to find more ways to give something back.

[Steve Pavlina]

Many times when people claim there are no funds available for a particular line of work and that it must be funded through charity, IMO they just aren't being creative enough. "There's just no funding available" becomes the excuse for naive career choices and a lack of basic common sense. Not always... but quite often. A lot of recent graduates are just out of touch with market realities -- and hideously bad at marketing themselves.

For example, there may not be much funding for sex ed careers in schools, but there's ample opportunity for skilled teachers to provide this service online, which is probably a better venue for it anyway. It's easy to blame "the system" when you can't find a job. But meanwhile smart people who know how to market and sell such knowledge intelligently are getting rich from it online, and there are plenty of people providing this info for free too. Naive job hunters complain about the unfairness of it all while being totally ignorant of the fact that the students are already learning what they need to know online.

You can also create a wonderful non-profit w/o having to rely on charity. One example is Toastmasters International, a non-profit that relies on member dues, product sales, and a few other sources of income.

I agree that charities are a positive way to fill some gaps, but I think we'll fill far more of those gaps by making more conscious career choices.

Again, charitable giving is fine, but we'd be better off if more people focused on giving through their careers vs. simply giving money to charities. If you devote your life to a cause, your cash goes along for the ride, and you'll probably have a lot more cash to give. Many charities, in fact, merely treat the symptoms created by people who live and work without much consciousness or awareness.

[seeker5]

Originally Posted by Steve Pavlina

Many charities, in fact, merely treat the symptoms created by people who live and work without much consciousness or awareness.

I'm curious, what charities do you donate to that do not simply treat the symptoms but address the root cause?

[ghassan]

First I want to thank you Steve for this post.
I find myself agree with many opinions in this discussion
I agree with Iner351 than it will be great for us to have our career aligned with what we want to do, and with our essence
But if they are not 100% in alignment, then we can bring our soul to our work and try our best to provide our essence in what we do.
As well we can expend and express our true self in other area than work, by volunteering.
I agree with Kelly as well that those charity and NGO are depending on volunteer work and donations to continue and survive.
So by keeping our work and volunteering on the side we can provide a service to the universe.

[Mike DeWitt]

Steve,

I'm beginning to think you were Wallace Wattles in a previous life...

Great article, as always!

Mike