margisk's review against another edition
4.0
Моим мыслям созвучна основная идея автора, что поиск работы мечты — вредная идея. Реалии работы, которая нам вначале кажется желанной, быстро разочаровывают, и человек скачет от дела к делу, ни в чем не преуспевая. Более перспективный подход — приобретать полезные навыки в той сфере, где ты уже работаешь, и использовать возможности для самосовершенствования, в том числе приобретая опыт в смежных областях. Книгу стоило написать хотя бы ради этой главной мысли. Некоторые детали, впрочем, автор проскакивает слишком быстро или опускает. За это минус 1 балл.
dunguyen's review against another edition
3.0
I am a bit conflicted by this book. One hand I do agree with it, on the other hand, I also disagree with it. In So Good They Can't Ignore You, Cal Newport takes on passion. He argues that passion and following passion is dangerous as it leaves people disillusioned and sets them up for failure. He introduces something called Career Capital which is actually just skills and experience and argues that building skills and experiences lead to a greater chance to eventually get you to work that you love.
So why am I so conflicted by this book? I think he makes valid points that acquiring skills will ultimately lead you to get to interesting work. But on the other hand, I think he dismisses passion too easily. For Newport passion always leads to failure evidenced by him cherry picking one example which goes to almost be definite proof. Perhaps the world isn't so simple to boil down to one path? The way I read this book was that it had a preference for going the same established way that everyone else has gone down. Newport seems to have a clear preference for education and working up career ladders which is perhaps not that surprising seeing as he's a professor at Georgetown University.
I think this book is excellent for those who don't quite know their passion or perhaps feel stuck in their current situation. The principles are great, build your skills, combine your skills into new combinations, ensure that the skills you have are the ones that are sought after. But don't pay too much attention to the parts about passion as it seems the passion part of the book is the least interesting part.
So why am I so conflicted by this book? I think he makes valid points that acquiring skills will ultimately lead you to get to interesting work. But on the other hand, I think he dismisses passion too easily. For Newport passion always leads to failure evidenced by him cherry picking one example which goes to almost be definite proof. Perhaps the world isn't so simple to boil down to one path? The way I read this book was that it had a preference for going the same established way that everyone else has gone down. Newport seems to have a clear preference for education and working up career ladders which is perhaps not that surprising seeing as he's a professor at Georgetown University.
I think this book is excellent for those who don't quite know their passion or perhaps feel stuck in their current situation. The principles are great, build your skills, combine your skills into new combinations, ensure that the skills you have are the ones that are sought after. But don't pay too much attention to the parts about passion as it seems the passion part of the book is the least interesting part.
geolatin's review against another edition
5.0
This is an excellent book on how to get to a life you love. There's nothing quick and easy, but he gives ways to recognize and avoid pitfalls. There are lots of real life examples, including himself.
ktcarlston's review against another edition
3.0
Because I really believe in Newport's thesis - I really, really liked this book. I have always been troubled when people give advice saying, "just follow your passion". What is my passion? Does being passionate about something mean you are supposed to be inherently the best at it? Newport instead says, "gain valuable skills, become so good at something that eventually passion will follow". I have found this to be much more descriptive of how things work for me. Anyway - yes, I liked this book, but if you are looking for something that is Malcolm Gladwell or Daniel Pink - you'll soon recognize that this book isn't as highly researched or well thought out as that - instead the evidence provided is much more anecdotal - which didn't bother me because of my own bias towards the thesis. But what did bother me? Recapping recapping and recapping. I got it. You don't need to tell me 1,000 times I just finished the chapter.
jess_segraves's review against another edition
4.0
Long time fan of Cal's and finally got around to reading this. Thoughtfully laid out and structured with some hard truths, and the thesis of this book is going to rub a lot of people the wrong way.
metaauria's review against another edition
2.0
I couldn't finish this. I love the premise as a woman who grew up in the 80s and 90s who was constantly told that if I followed my passion, the money would follow. That isn't true for 99% of us.
I find flaws with Cal's examples that he draws from. All of his examples of successes were white men from the Baby Boomer generation who were born into some means, whether middle class or higher. The first woman he profiles is his example of a failure.
I also take issue with his use of surveys of workplace satisfaction from around 2008 and after, where I think PAY is a defining factor in dissatisfaction, not lack of meaning or accomplishment. He fails to consider the lack of fair pay and benefits as a driver of dissatisfaction.
This book doesn't stand up in 2021. I would like Cal to revisit his theory using a MUCH MORE DIVERSE swath of people and interviews across race, gender, sexual orientation, economic standing, and location. Then see if it still holds up.
I find flaws with Cal's examples that he draws from. All of his examples of successes were white men from the Baby Boomer generation who were born into some means, whether middle class or higher. The first woman he profiles is his example of a failure.
I also take issue with his use of surveys of workplace satisfaction from around 2008 and after, where I think PAY is a defining factor in dissatisfaction, not lack of meaning or accomplishment. He fails to consider the lack of fair pay and benefits as a driver of dissatisfaction.
This book doesn't stand up in 2021. I would like Cal to revisit his theory using a MUCH MORE DIVERSE swath of people and interviews across race, gender, sexual orientation, economic standing, and location. Then see if it still holds up.