I think it also has a corollary in the statement (which I believe) that successful people are \"focused, not necessarily balanced\". Being passionate about the work you do such that \"work is play\" easily leads one to \"focus on work\" and \"focused work\".

Not to say that people shouldn\’t \"have a life\", but I think work is definitely a bigger part of having a life than most people seem willing to admit.

That\’s why I particularly like the examples from the natural world. We can plainly see from the animals just how much life and work are tied.

Gogo

I completely agree with you. Here is why I do.

I have been called a “workaholic”, “obsessed”, “nerd” and all sorts of weird things. My “work” is an expression of becoming completely immersed in what I am passionate about. It is so much fun that I cannot get enough of it, so it has nothing to do with being a “workaholic” or being “obsessed”. I have never worked, I play every day the whole day for a long time every day because I am passionate about what I do. I have a perhaps simplistic view that if someone believes that they are working at a hectic pace and rewarded with stress then they are perhaps doing what they are not passionate about.

Forcing yourself to forget what you are passionate about is justified when you believe that you have to do what you don’t like to do because you have to pay the bills and care for your family etc. But if anyone can afford to play all day, then whey don’t they? Well, I can only tell you what I think it might be, and being a psychologist you will know whether there is some truth in what I believe.

Just like money, marketing can be applied for good or for greed. Marketing applied for greed have conditioned us to believe that you need to make money, and once you have money then you can buy what you need which will then make you happy. It would be difficult or impossible to get you to spend your money on things you don’t need if the message was different. The sequence of events of this belief system is: make money first -> can afford to buy what you need -> will then be able to satisfy your emotional need. In short money -> instantly satisfies emotional need. Money is the motivation regardless of what you do.

Now imagine what happens when you do the exact opposite and reverse the order of events like this. Do what you love and you will be happy and fulfilled, even if you don’t have any money -> being passionate about what you are doing, you end up doing what you do better than anybody else, because they are mostly doing something they don’t like to do so they can never be as committed as you are -> money then comes to you as a result of what you are doing. So the inverse of most advertising conditioning is: Satisfy your emotional need first -> make money as a result. Passion is the motivation for what you do and money is just a consequence.

If you want to play all day, then conceive how to monetise your passion, put the outcome in your mind, believe it has already happened, and then live your passion. The money then comes by itself, and it really does. I can understand why that may perhaps sound unbelievable.

According to modern aeronautical principles and aerodynamics it is clearly proven that it is impossible for a bumble bee to fly, but fortunately the bumble bee does not know that so it goes ahead and flies anyway. Science clearly proved that it was impossibly to fly, but the Wright brothers were passionate, intensely committed and went ahead to fly anyway, despite the fact that everybody else believed it was impossible. They achieved what was “impossible” because they put it in their minds, and completely believed and visualised that they were flying before they actually did.

I have been living like the bumble bee for more than 40 years, so I can say that money does come as a result of what you do, and you can do anything that you want to do if you put your mind to it and believe that it has already happened. I can also say that money almost always eludes you when it is money itself that you are passionate about.

Did Bill Gates make money as a result of being passionate about software for microcomputers, or did he first make money doing what he did not want to do, so that he could afford to buy IBM to become the largest IT company in the world. Is Honda the largest motorcycle and internal combustion engine manufacturer in the world since 1963 as a result of Soichiro Honda living his passion, or did he make lots of money doing something he did not enjoy so that he would have enough money some day be able to buy Toyota. They both lived their passion. They both played all day. They were both driven by their passion and their money came as a result of what they did.

Play is when you are happy, living your passion, and having fun meaning that you never work, because work is when you are doing what you don’t like to do while forcing yourself to continue believing that making money will someday allow you to buy what will make you happy.

How anyone chooses to make their money is entirely their choice, and you can make money either way. But I think that if you do make make lots of money for the sake of money alone then the tendency is greed, and if it is as a result of being motivated by passion then the tendency is to share.

So I just want to thank you for being motivated by passion, which is why I believe you are giving by teaching me and countless other people to share in the fruits of what you know. I have recently started an Internet business, and applying what you teach is far more valuable than you may realise, as that is what enables me to continue living my passion and those fruits are shared as well.

Gys

It\’s posts like this which make your blog so enjoyable. No matter how uncomfortable some may get, just keep telling it like it is, Dr. Livingston!

You did well in all of your previous 17 market without any or much love. After that your partner penetrate markets using employees who most likely don\’t love the market.

And yet you\’re earning 6 figures per month from the above two ventures. How can this be if love is the ultimate value?

Ken Kurtz
LeadsGopher.com

There was a study done in the Canadian federal government some time ago that looked at the stress levels of all sorts of workers. The study concluded that the employees who feel the highest levels of stress are…secretaries. Surprising conclusion? Not really, when you think about it. Of all people in an organization, secretaries have the least amount of control over their work. Essentially, their job is to wait until others pile work on them. Not very empowering.

But we can choose how we perceive work (and play). Viktor Frankl said it best:

“Everything can be taken from a man but …the last of the human freedoms – to choose one’s attitude in any given set of circumstances, to choose one’s own way.”

Great post, as always, Glenn.