In one of my moments of web watching, i came across this article published at Dumb Little Man entitled " Should Work Be Fun? Not if you Want to be Successful."
The author expounds on the idea that what differentiates the A players from the B players is the willingness to do work that is not fun. That for you to be successful and at the top of your field, you should be discipline enough to do those gruelling, hateful tasks that your colleagues are unwilling to do in addition to the hard, smart , work that is normally required of everyone. He maintains that the most successful is reaping the most financial benefit because, he is the person that persists to do hateful tasks. His example was that of two economists of the same brilliance, one earns more, has a bestseller and is more widely known because he took the time to network and market himself, a task clearly un-fun to both academics. But the successful one persisted even though he doesn't like networking and marketing himself, he does it anyway because it is necessary.
Hubby totally understands this concept even though he is not fun of reading self-help books and articles. Sometimes, i think that he learns intuitively and follow-through on ideas and tasks needed to be done in order for him to be top of his field. Which is probably one of the reason why he is successful.
I, on the other hand, has some measure of success but not really what you would call at the top of my game. Precisely because there are some activities that needs to be done and traits needed to be out there. I am not fiercely competitive and a bit shy of my abilities and achievement. Really..
But success means differently to different people. And if there is onething new that I learned about myself, it is the fact that I could go out of my comfort zone if it means preserving those that are of value to me, like family. Right now, it is enough that i have work which allows me to have fun...sometimes.