It’s a job finding and recruitment season once again.
And among this year’s business schools’ debate topics is “talent versus passion”.
NYU’s Stern School of Business marketing professor, Scott Galloway argues that if you are in search of wealth, you should let go of passion in order to get ahead financially.
Three billionaires – Elon Musk, Warren Buffett, Bill Gates: it is said if they were to have followed their passions – they would have ended up as professional video gamer, an ukulele player, and bridge player - respectively.
But then there was J.K. Rowling who initially could not convinced publishers to see merits of a Harry Potter draft. It came down to her unwavering passion on her writing that persevered her through. Eventually, her determination paid off and the rest is history.
For the rest of us seeking jobs, talent would naturally be something that the employers would be looking for.
Undeniably, it’s ideal to have both as passion can stir drive and creativity.
 
And yet, “talent versus passion” as a corporate business mission has witnessed mixed results.
The most immediate telling one is the “European Super League” proposal. The 12 permanent members would have included Manchester United, Barcelona, Real Madrid, AC Milan, Liverpool, Arsenal, Atletico Madrid, Chelsea, Inter Milan, Juventus, Manchester City and Tottenham.
These are wealthy soccer elite teams which can bid for the most talented footballers. And the competition among these “best in the world” players will create more wealth for the Super League through a far-reaching global appeal.
But this talent game changing scenario was quickly shot down by the passionate fans. The core fans of these teams were mostly local with loyalty built up over the years through competitive success, and community heritage. Simply said, money can’t buy them off.
So, it’s 1:0 to passion against talent.
 
The case of passionate catastrophe is the acquisition of “Twitter”, the social networking service, which has since been renamed “X”.
Elon Musk made the acquisition at an unbelievable sum of US$44 billion because he was so passionate about wanting to realign the social networking highway toward a complete free speech.
The endeavour failed miserably. The best people left as drastic corporate revamp at X were anything but talent intrigue. Musk drove X into a whirlpool of passion and confusion which he could not explain or revitalize to any acceptable level of glory.
1:1 talent and passion.
 
Talent is often featured in the successes of giant tech companies – and Apple Inc is among them. Steve Jobs, its late founder, is acclaimed as a super human being with unique talent and passion.
And yet, the post-Jobs era has seen Apple’s management prowess swung towards talent (and arguably arrogance). The company has since faced criticisms of lacking passion for ground breaking innovation.
 
Then there are numerous examples of well-known global enterprises facing the dilemma managing talent and passion or in search of a balanced business strategy.
Formula-1 is one of them. Is the most talented driver in the world driving audiences away as the races become somewhat boring and passion waned, if the same person win all the time. F-1 is now working on striking a balance to light up passion into the races.
 
Then there is James Bond 007, one of the world’s most successful movie franchises. Are the audiences seduced by a more humane and passionate character in recent series, as compared to Bond’s previous overbearing talent as a spy. The promise of a success to the next James Bond movie hangs on a thread.
  
Talent versus passion is not a foregone conclusion by any means!