Passion and Flow

As I dive deeper into passion, I’m frequently asked: “isn’t this just another term for Mihaly Csíkszentmihályi’s concept of “flow?” Indulge me with a brief detour before I answer this question more directly.

Leaving rules behind - exploring the edge in extreme sports

Since the 1980s, a feud has raged between skiers and snowboarders, resulting in apartheid on slopes all over the world. In the US, Alta Ski Area, Deer Valley and Mad River Glen in Vermont snowboarding has been banned altogether.

Douglas Rushkoff’s 2006 book Screenagers: Lessons in Chaos from Digital Kids boils the hostility down to etiquette:

They don’t even take lessons. They wear weird clothes, talk like surfers, and represent a complete break from the time-honored tradition of skiing. And if that weren’t enough, they seek out the bumps and avoid the smooth straightaways.

Rushkoff points out that “boarding” had become endemic in sporting subcultures in a digital age. He calls surfers “children of chaos,” as athletes whose chosen field is not subject to the measure, manicure and temperature control enjoyed by almost any other sport.  The ocean is complex and unpredictable (dynamical to use Rushkoff’s term), and the surfers who ride it do not have the pretence of “taming” it. They prefer the unpredictability of the edge.

Surfing may have started the trend, but young people everywhere have embraced its chaos-ethics, as with snowboarders who prefer the lawless mountains, and skateboarders who similarly challenge themselves to “make the most of a particular set of surfaces”—in this case the contours of the urban landscape. The key distinction between extreme and traditional sports involves the place of “rules.” For young athletes today, there are none. Their practices push them to the edges of a society who deems them “punks”—uncomprehending of the staggeringly high level of skill these so-called punks develop.

Because the ethics of board sports are so rooted in pushing limits and breaking rules, theirs is a culture of one-upmanship, where athletes attempt to outdo one another and set the bar ever higher for others. In skateboarding, there is a thriving culture of both underground and sponsored low-budget videos where kids film one another attempting perilous stunts in urban environments, spreading the footage virally through the skating community and establishing a DIY catalog of tricks for others to master and emulate. The 2002 video, “PJ Ladd’s Horrible Wonderful Life,” (today one of the most well-known skate videos in history), is a classic example of amateurs who can become underground cult heroes and innovators of technique: 

 

]

 

Ladd’s technique in this video has been considered by many to be “visionary.” One reviewer writes, “This video is essential viewing for anybody that wants to see where skating is going.” (Emphasis mine).

Now try to imagine a similar thing being said of traditional team sports. Though athletes of incredible talent and super-human skill may command a mythos within different sports cultures (Michael Jordan in basketball, Babe Ruth in baseball and Roger Federer in tennis, to name a few), they are considered more than anything masters of their craft—innovators within it perhaps—but they were all ultimately confined by the pre-made rules of their sport. Jordan, Ruth and Federer, unlike Ladd, didn’t exactly take their sport anywhere.

Similarities between passion and flow in the moment

Having made this detour, let me now more directly respond to the question about the similarities and differences between passion and Mihaly Csíkszentmihályi’s theory of “flow.” There are certainly many similarities between Csíkszentmihályi’s concept and my own.

Flow describes an “optimal experience,” which is frequently felt by those pursuing their passion. When someone is in flow, they concentrate deeply on “the moment,” caught up in the pleasure and challenge of an immediate task; they clear their minds of all else. Both flow and passion welcome this state because it offers intrinsic satisfaction and enjoyment in our everyday lives.  However, the differences become apparent as soon as one moves beyond the moment itself and attempts to identify the factors that lead up to “optimal experience.”

Differences between passion and flow - the context

Csíkszentmihályi emphasizes that in order to achieve flow, we must pick goals that have meaning (in either our personal or professional lives), determine the structure it sets out for us (the terms of both games and work), and then play by rules. In other words, Csíkszentmihályi prefers we stay in-bounds and are well-behaved on the courts, slopes and fields.

Csíkszentmihályi writes: 

One finds more occasions of [flow] on the job than in free time . . . this finding is not that surprising. What often passes unnoticed is that work is much more like a game than most other things we do during the day. It usually has clear goals and rules of performance. . . Thus, work tends to have the structure of other intrinsically rewarding activities that provide flow, such as games, sports, music, and art. (59, Finding Flow.)

And elsewhere he writes:

Flow tends to occur when a person faces a clear set of goals that require appropriate response. It is easy to enter flow in games such as chess, tennis, or poker, because they have goals and rules for action that make possible for the player to act without questioning what should be done, and how.   (29, Finding Flow) 

An example of this sporting mindset appears in Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience, where Csíkszentmihályi cites the example of a factory worker named Rico Medellin. Csíkszentmihályi explains, “The task he has to perform on each unit that passes in from of his station should take forty-three seconds to perform—the same exact operation almost six hundred times in a working day” (Flow, 39). Rico manages to enjoy this laborious and monotonous work 5 years into the job because he approaches it like a game—attempting daily to beat his own record. Playing by the rules of the game is cited time and again as a key access point for achieving flow—and Rico has certainly mastered this. 

Csíkszentmihályi tends to focus on the problem of psychic disorder, the chaos of psychic entropy and, in this context, views flow as an effective way to bring order to the natural state of psychic entropy – it is about imposing order to make progress. MC defines the autotelic personality as “the ability to create flow experience even in the most barren environment” (149, Flow), where, “In theory, any job could be changed as to make it more enjoyable by following the prescriptions of the flow model” (154, Flow).

To say, then, that Rico actually enjoys his job is misleading. Rico has merely managed to make his job bearable by ordering his consciousness through rule-making and goal-setting, which makes it possible for him to forget, in the moment, everything else (in Rico’s case, I imagine that would include working on an assembly line for 5+ years). Rico’s process may be an exemplar of Csíkszentmihályi’s “optimal experience,” but he as the antithesis of the passionate one. To mistake the two is to mistake “coping,” with “thriving.”

Passion is not about finding work bearable. It is the process by which people get in touch with their true loves in life and fearlessly pursue them, motivated by the opportunities and spaces for development, which often require that they ignore any rules that get in their way of achieving that potential. It is about love.

Like flow, increasing “complexity” and seeking challenge is typical of pursuing passion but the motivation behind these endeavors have crucial differences: where Csíkszentmihályi would have us tame chaos and uncertainty, passion energizes us to embrace dynamic systems and explore the unknown. How can we take ourselves where we are going?

Back to the edge

The emergent star of the 2010 Olympics was surely snowboarder Shaun White for his daring move, the “Double McTwist 1260.” What astonished viewers and boarders alike was the fact that no one had done this before (at least at the level of international exposure). White had already secured the gold before this drastic stunt—a fact that might have  prompted others to “play it safe.” But White dared to push the boundaries nevertheless. Accepting medals on podiums may be reward enough for some, but for a boarder as dedicated as White, the passionate drive to explore new possibilities was far too tempting. Watch the White’s great Olympic moment here. 

We shouldn’t be too surprised after this display that a number of snowboarders were already showing off their own versions of the Double McTwist 1260 at the U.S. Open Snowboarding Championships only about a month after White made set the bar. White, however, was conspicuously absent from the event. As the New York Times reports, he’s taking it to the streets—setting plans for a competitive skateboard season where he plans to develop some new tricks. Among them the 1080, “a maneuver that has never been landed in a skateboarding competition.”

Comments

[pio dalcin]

Passion is what has driven my life experience and also lately my G+(Google Plus) "journey". It may not be the right approach to business but
it surely helped me in creating a real interaction with a lot of intersting people on the Web

Great interesting Article indeed

[Hemant Puthli]

Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but are you suggesting that entrepreneurs and businessmen should be driven by the same kind of passion as extreme sports athletes (who seem to have a death-wish, perhaps) as opposed to athletes in traditional sports (such as Jordan / Ruth / Federer, to take your examples) who play games that are governed by a framework of rules?

Clearly, businesses must play within the legal and regulatory framework that governs their industry. Passion must manifest itself within the confines of this framework and not run away - unbridled and reckless, to seek the most extreme form of fulfillment possible. That could well result in another global economic meltdown, given the interconnectedness of everything.

From a business work-ethic perspective, it is one thing to be fascinated by extreme sports, or even to indulge in it as a hobby. It is a completely different thing to bring that mindset - described by the words "pushing limits and breaking rules" - into the enterprise. Pushing limits is one thing. Breaking rules is another. The wiser and more mature profesional will walk the fine line and hold of at the edge. But what about the younger, more impressionable maverick looking to make a mark in the business world? I hope your views do not encourage young professionals to adopt a death-defying / near-suicidal approach to their work.

[Monika Hardy]

brilliant.
a distinction i had never thought of before... but had subconsciously been wrestling with.

working in ed.. i always thought flow was the answer... but upon recent research - i have started having this nagging feeling that it was a super way to cope.

upon reading Godin's Linchpin and Robinson's The Element... i felt flow being less of a true element.

wow.. what a find. thank you for sharing.

[Marc Resnick]

Perhaps trying to either contrast or equate flow and passion is the wrong approach.

Your description of passion suggests that it is easier to engage in the deliberative practice (whether 10,000 hours or not) necessary for expertise for things we feel passionate about. And I think the experience of flow might make deliberation harder because of its somewhat unconscious nature.

So what I would like to suggest is that we can experience flow for the subtasks of our passions or the parts of it where we have already developed expertise. But then the passion kicks in during deliberative reflection when we innovate.

From this perspective, it is possible to experience flow without passion, but also possible to experience both for the same activity, just at different levels of experience.

[tartle]

Thank goodness I misinterpreted Chick-send-me-high as I used the flow experince as being highly skilled and task (goal)oriented; combining the skills-learning with achieving a goal certainly helped my team and I to achieve flow. As it was a personal goal (connected to the overall goal) we also broke the rules, took the flak and achieved impressive outcomes that the rule-based approach could not achieve. We also thought in terms of OODA loops that major Boyd put forward as a way of achieving combat superiority but useful to express what we were doing in the context of ourselves and our collaborators (both meanings apply: working with the enemy [not the expected people we normally worked with] and working together to achieve the outcome [not what the business routinely expected so it felt a bit naughty]). Certainly we felt flow, OODA and passionate rule and game-changing activity meant constant goal shifting with the aim of delivering radical effects. It isn't worth getting out of bed to achieve 5%, 50% makes it all worthwhile!

[John Sviokla]

Great post. I agree John there is a qualitative difference between passion and flow (as least as Csikeszentmihalyi defines flow).

I also think there's a difference in the quality of mind which people bring to truly new endeavors, not just riffs on old ideas and forms of work -- what I call, blue water thinking.

It's difficult to really start from the blank page.

[Richard Cross]

Agree with the comments that the '10,000 hours rule (how easy too remember too) seems to have been extrapolated from certain fields and sports. It's rather like Gladwell's work on ice hockey players and the headstart impact of when they were born.

Well it doesn't apply to all sports. We checked out the data yesterday at the Leander in Henley-on Thames (a hotbed of rowing talent) and it doesn't apply to rowing success there.

The distinction you draw between flow and passion makes sense in the way you expound it at least. As JSB will know from his previous life at Xerox from his time wit the ethnographers in an organisation context practice triumphs over process.

As for following the rules as part of research with a Professor Peter Saville I've been profiling World Champion athletes and comparing them to 'successful' CEO's,(younger generation mainly) entrepreneurs, and politicians and those in the Performing Arts.

What's intriguing is the similarities in that many World Champions are natural entrepreneurs. They dislike 'the rules' and have a natural questioning disposition. Many of these people personify the Olymian value of being the best they can be. And that doesn't apply to the athletes only. A female CEO talked about how being 'true to herself' was what enabled her to come through the ranks and deal with the hierarchy.

Others seem to be prepared to 'create at the point of their self destruction' They will suffer for their art. One arts entrepreneur Australian Rebecca Hossack who introduced Aboriginal art to the UK changed from following a law degree when a fellow student simply asked 'what do you really want to do?' From then she pursued and achieved her dream....and it wasn't easy. She wasn't afraid to go against the mainstream.

Of those who live at and love the edge the skiers, aerobatic pilot, world champ MX'er, special forces operatives, whilst a breed apart seem to recognise and value those who bring passion to what they do. In taking their passion to the extreme they have ultra composure too yet all can do the basics brilliantly.

To me that defines great people. They have found something they are passionate about and good at. It often go's with humility and modesty. En route to success they have had their fair share of 'humility inducing experiences.'

[Christian]

John - here's passion in the world's most passionate game:

http://www.soccerblog.com/2006/05/video-kerlon-moura-souzas-seal.htm

And yes, they still have rules and goals!

[Joe McCarthy]

Interesting analysis. At first, I found myself resistant to your distinction, but by the end, I'm willing to agree.

I'm reminded of the book, Finite and Infinite Games, by James Carse: players of finite games play within rules, while players of infinite games play with rules.

http://www.amazon.com/Finite-Infinite-Games-Vision-Possibility/dp/0345341848

I'm also reminded of a session I proposed at an unconference a few years ago on the scalability of passion, with the following abstract:

What if everyone followed their passions, liked what they did and did what they liked? I suspect Foo Camp represents an unusually high proportion of people who are following this trajectory. Are we a privileged class? How generalizable is this formula? How would the world change if everyone acted this way? Could the world move in this direction?

During the session, the conversation unfolded in unanticipated directions (more the norm than the exception at such events). I'll mention two items that I think may be relevant here: another person during the session compared passion to the flow state, and after being reminded that the root of "passion" is "to suffer" I started questioning the Goodness of passion. At the end, another person wryly noted "it really doesn't matter whether it [passion] is good or bad, that since having a passion for something means you can't not do it, I (we?) don't really have a choice".

I posted more notes from the session here:

http://gumption.typepad.com/blog/2007/06/passion-privelg.html

[Brandsplusmusic.blogspot.com]

I've been interested in Csíkszentmihályi since I first learned of his work. Since we can find examples of flow in a variety of endeavors, having research about it is welcome.

However, I wasn't aware of Csikszentmihalyi's emphasis on learning the rules until I did some recent research on the "10,000 hours" concept and found his thoughts on creativity.

Although recent books citing the "10,000 hours" concept suggest that its application is universal (i.e., you can't be an expert without at least 10,000 hours or ten years of deliberate practice), in reality the "10,000 hours" concept has only been researched in certain fields, where there are specific, measurable ways to compare one person's output to another's.

So when you are comparing passion to flow, you might also note the "10,000 hours" discussions because they are more rules-based than most people realize.

Here's what I found and it includes a quote from Csíkszentmihályi.

http://tinyurl.com/2bejncf