The Hamming Question @Work
Richard Hamming was an American mathematician who made significant contributions to the fields of computer engineering and telecommunications, including the Hamming code, the Hamming window, Hamming numbers and the Hamming distance. One of his lesser-known contributions, applicable to virtually all fields of work, was the Hamming question. During his time at Bell Labs, he asked his colleagues three pointed questions (I am paraphrasing him for the purpose of illustration):
1) What are the most important problems in your field of work?
2) What are you working on right now?
3) Why are you working on things that are NOT the most important problems in your field of work?
Arguably this should have been referred to as Hamming’s questions (plural), but you get the idea. In a world where we can essentially choose whatever line of work we want, why wouldn’t we choose to work on the most prominent challenges in our discipline or industry? I have to admit, I recently turned 50 and so I have been questioning a great many things about my life and my work. Hamming’s question(s) led me to formulate another inquiry: why don’t people choose to work on things they are passionate about?
Some very famous people think this is a terrible idea
Mark Cuban, a billionaire businessman famous for being a “shark” on the tv series Shark Tank and (now) a minority owner of the Dallas Mavericks of the NBA, is one of these people. He has suggested that following your passion is “the worst advice you could ever give or get”. Ben Horowitz, co-founder of Andreesen Horowitz, a prominent venture capital firm with assets of over $40B under management, whole-heartedly agrees with Mr. Cuban. In a commencement address at Columbia University, he advised graduates “don’t follow your passion.” Even Mike Rowe, best known for hosting Dirty Jobs on the Discovery Channel, advises students that “following your passion” can blind them to real-world demand in other fields.
Some other very famous people think this is a fantastic idea
Steve Jobs, co-founder of Apple and one of the most celebrated innovators of our time, gave a very different commencement address at Stanford in comparison with Mr. Horowitz, as he declared “the only way to do great work is to love what you do.” He also added, “if you haven’t found it yet, keep looking.” Oprah Winfrey, a renowned media mogul and philanthropist, urges individuals to “follow your passion… it will lead you to your purpose” and eventually to one’s “true calling.” And Richard Branson, founder of the Virgin Group and serial entrepreneur, has said, “if you care passionately enough, I believe you can improve on any facet of the human experience.”
So, who is right?
Like many complicated aspects of life, the short answer is “it depends”. When you take a more pragmatic approach to your career journey, your initial work might feel a bit uninspiring, but you avoid chasing fleeting enthusiasm and you are more adaptable to changing conditions (think AI). If you choose to pursue your passion, you tap into deep intrinsic motivation and are more likely to experiment boldly – but you also risk burnout and may overlook tangible career opportunities. I am personally of the opinion that life is too short not to pursue things we are passionate about, even if they fall outside the realm of work. But at work, the reality is that some people are well-suited for passionate pursuits, while others are content with steady, stable careers. Regardless of which path you choose, the Hamming question reminds us to occasionally question what we are working on, and to revisit our priorities at work.
analyst + strategic advisor | podcaster | #HCM #futureofwork #daydreamer
4dThe question does not have to be rigidly binary. We can choose the work that chooses us and learn and be grateful for what it is about it that we love. We can learn to do the things we don't love about the work we love. All careers involve yeoman's work to bring about the enjoyable work. I cannot think of an exception.
Those who say it can't be done are usually interrupted by others doing it. -James Baldwin
6dLove the question and the humanist/capitalist tension it brings into the light! You probably know better than most how I feel and approach this MM. Fostering a growth mindset early on and through life is an essential base for discerning the difference between passion, purpose or pitstops. On that base, investing in becoming more attuned to your own core values, and then practicing agility and creativity with seeing and creating opportunities to live them out in the world - hugely important. Learning to apply a reliable strategic framework to decision making at a micro and macro level, one which respects and balances external data and internal feedback, is so underrated. Acknowledging that service, community and gratitude are hardwired into humans no matter how hard we push to be self-aware, self-sufficient or self-centered - key! The big success stories-those you cited and more-found alignment or even harmony between individual gifts and those in the world who needed them. Sometimes people are fortunate and find that early and with a really huge community. GenX / Millennial data shows more often it takes a few decades of work and play to plug into your passion and power it on in the right spots. Keep that fire lit, Marcus!
Teacher of Geeks | Inc. Magazine contributor | Children's book author | Speaker | Podcaster | Engineer | Check out my Featured Section for Insights on Giving Technical Presentations
1wPassion is cool, but are people willing to pay for what you’re passionate about is the question. Developing something that you’re not passionate about to fund your passion is taking economic realities into account.
Focused on Human-Centered Strategy to Fix What’s Not Working | Partnering to Build Workplaces Where People Actually Thrive | Because great work happens when people feel like they belong and matter
1wMarcus Mossberger, you hit on something we wrestle with constantly - the gap between what people say motivates them and what actually creates sustainable engagement. The debate misses a crucial third option: finding momentum in work that matters, regardless of whether it started as a "passion." We've seen people become deeply engaged in roles they never would have called a "dream job," until 3 things align: understanding how the work contributed to something meaningful, having the autonomy to solve problems in their own way, and seeing their impact. Conversely, we've watched "follow your passion" lead to some spectacular burnouts when people confused loving an activity with loving it as a business or career. The Hamming questions are brilliant. They force us past the passion/pragmatism false choice. The better to question might be "am I working on something that creates real value AND allows me to grow?" Sometimes the most important problems aren't the ones that initially excite you. When you dig in and start making progress on them, that's often where genuine engagement, and yes, even passion develops. The key isn't starting with passion. It's creating the conditions where passion can emerge from meaningful work.