“Follow your passion” has become the go-to message in nearly every commencement speech and career guide. But social psychologists Paul A. O’Keefe and E. J. Horberg argue this advice is not a universal truth but a cultural artefact — one rooted in Western individualism and sustained by economic privilege. In cultures that prize interdependence and pragmatism, passion is treated with caution. Drawing on new cross-cultural psychological studies, this article reveals the dangers when we mistake the passion narrative – which is a culturally specific ideal – for a universal human need.

In 2005, Steve Jobs stood before a graduating class at Stanford University and delivered one of the most famous pieces of career advice in modern history. “Your work is going to fill a large part of your life,” he told them, “and the only way to be truly satisfied is to do what you believe is great work. And the only way to do great work is to love what you do. If you haven’t found it yet, keep looking. Don’t settle.”

This injunction to “follow your passion” is pervasive in Western culture. It appears in commencement speeches, self-help books, and career counselling offices across North America and Western Europe. It is also intuitively appealing, encapsulated by the old adage: “If you do what you love, you will never work a day in your life.” This logic implies that passion is a limitless fuel source, one that provides endless motivation, fulfilment, and perhaps even financial success.

But is this as widely believed as it appears? Or is it a specific cultural narrative that we have mistaken for a universal law of human nature?

In our psychological research, we have found that the emphasis on passion in career decisions is not a universal human priority. Instead, it is culturally constructed. While Western perspectives often view passion as an essential ingredient for a good life, other cultures—specifically those with less individualistic views of the self—construe passion differently. They see it not just as a source of motivation but as a potential problem.

The Western Ideal vs. The Pragmatic Reality

To understand why “follow your passion” is such a distinctly Western ideal, we first have to consider how people from different cultures construct the ‘self’.

In many Western cultures, like the United States, people tend to hold an independent model of the self. We view good actions as those that are self-focused, autonomy-driven, and aligned with individual preferences and intentions. Because passion is fundamentally about intense personal interest and identity, it fits perfectly into the independent worldview. For an American, choosing a career based on what they love is an important expression of agency.

However, in many Asian cultures, the model of self is less independent and more interdependent. Decisions are guided less by personal preference and more by obligations to others and pragmatic concerns. In this context, the indulgence of following one’s passions can seem at odds with the necessity of stability, family and job expectations, and practical concerns. As the matriarch, Eleanor Young, quips in the film Crazy Rich Asians, “Pursuing one’s passion... how American.”

Our team set out to test this cultural divide empirically. Having lived and worked in the U.S. and Singapore for many years, we were familiar with both cultures, and we recognised their fascinating differences (and similarities). The U.S. is a prototype of independent culture. Singapore, like the U.S., it is a wealthy, modern nation with a strong economy and high access to education. However, Singaporeans tend to put less emphasis on personal goals and preferences than Americans. So, we wondered, what does this mean for their beliefs about passion and its importance in career decisions?

___

Our research uncovered a less rosy view of passion that is more prevalent in Asian contexts. This is the belief that passions can be problematic at times.

___

In a series of experiments, we presented American and Singaporean citizens with scenarios of people making career choices. We found a consistent pattern: Americans evaluated pursuing a passion as a career significantly more favourably than did Singaporeans. When we described the protagonist as pursuing a career they were passionate about versus one they were not, Americans were significantly more likely to endorse the decision and expect positive outcomes—like future success and fulfilment—compared to their Singaporean counterparts.

Notably, this wasn’t because Americans and Singaporeans defined passion differently. Indeed, we found that both cultures define passion similarly, as something you love, enjoy, and find meaningful, and that is integrated into your identity. The difference lay in the consequences they anticipated.

The Double-Edged Sword of Passion

Why are Singaporeans more hesitant to embrace the Steve Jobs doctrine? The answer lies in what we call “lay beliefs” about the nature of passion.

In the West, we are acculturated to believe that passions are inherently motivating. We view passion as a magical resource that makes difficult work feel easy and ensures we will persist through challenges. Our studies confirmed this. That is, Americans held significantly stronger beliefs that passion provides motivation and inspiration compared to Singaporeans.

However, our research uncovered a less rosy view of passion that is more prevalent in Asian contexts. This is the belief that passions can be problematic at times.

Singaporeans were significantly more likely than Americans to agree with statements suggesting that pursuing a passion can be too idealistic, can cause “tunnel vision”, and—crucially—can conflict with obligations. In a culture that values pragmatism and social duty, hyper-focusing on what you love can be seen as selfish or shortsighted.

SUGGESTED READING My job, my self: how work defines us By Al Gini

When we analysed the data, these differing beliefs helped explain the cultural divide in valuing passion in career decisions. Americans endorsed passion-based careers more because they focused on the motivational upside. Singaporeans were more lukewarm about them because they were acutely aware of the pragmatic downsides to passion.

To be sure, Singaporeans are not anti-passion. In fact, they still preferred the “passion” career over the “non-passion” career. They just didn’t view it as the panacea to career contentment that Americans did. They recognised a trade-off that the Western worldview often overlooks: that doing what you love might mean neglecting what you ought to do.

The Stakes of Passion for Life Satisfaction

This cultural difference goes beyond theoretical preferences for careers. It bleeds into our actual lived experiences and our happiness. If Singaporeans place less emphasis on pursuing a passion in careers, is their life satisfaction less tied to how much passion they actually experience?

In our third study, we moved away from hypothetical scenarios and asked employed adults about their actual jobs. We asked them to what extent they were currently pursuing their passion as a career, and then we measured their overall life satisfaction.

The results were striking. For Americans, the link between career passion and life satisfaction was strong. If an American was not pursuing their passion, their life satisfaction was diminished. However, for Singaporeans, while the link was still positive, it was significantly weaker.

This suggests that the pressure to “follow your passion” in the West raises the stakes of our career choices. By tying our general well-being so tightly to our vocational passion, we may be setting ourselves up for despair if our job is merely a job. A Singaporean might view a boring but stable job as a successful fulfilment of duty, leading to a more satisfied life. An American in the same position, however, is more likely to view it as a soul-crushing failure.

The Danger of the Passion Mandate

Recognising that “follow your passion” is a cultural construct rather than a universal truth allows us to view Western career advice with a more critical eye.

For one, there is a potential dark side to the Western embrace of passion. When we believe that passion is among the most legitimate drivers of career choice and expect it to guarantee limitless motivation, we set ourselves up for disappointment. We expect work to be a source of constant self-fulfilment. So when reality inevitably intervenes—when the “dream job” involves administrative drudgery, office politics, or periods of boredom—the fall could be much harder.

___

Perhaps the healthiest approach is a balance of perspectives. We can value passion without viewing it as the primary metric of a successful career.

___

Those from cultures who view passion as potentially conflicting with other values may be better prepared in some circumstances. By not expecting their job to provide their sense of identity and motivation, they may be better protected against the existential crisis that occurs when work is unfulfilling.

And second, the injunction to follow your passion assumes a level of privilege that ignores economic reality. Even in wealthy nations, the ability to prioritise personal interest over pragmatic security is not evenly distributed. As we have seen in related research, the belief that passion is “found” (a fixed mindset) rather than developed (a growth mindset) can actually inhibit us from exploring new fields or persisting when things get difficult. If we combine a fixed mindset that we must “find” our passion with the cultural pressure that we must pursue it to be happy, we might create a recipe for disaster.

Toward a Balanced View

So, should you pursue your passion as a career? The answer is not a simple “yes” or “no”.

Our research challenges the idea that pursuing passion is a universally valued career philosophy. It is a culturally specific value system that prioritises individual autonomy and emotional primacy over pragmatism and obligation.

There is undeniable beauty in the Western ideal. The energy that comes from doing what you love has driven innovation, art, and scientific breakthroughs. Yet, there is also wisdom in the Eastern pragmatism that more so recognises the costs of such a pursuit.

Perhaps the healthiest approach is a balance of perspectives. We can value passion without viewing it as the primary metric of a successful career. We can acknowledge that passion is motivating while also respecting the insight that it can give us tunnel vision and conflict with other duties.

If you are currently in a job that isn’t your “one true love”, the Western narrative might tell you that you are settling for less. But looking through a global lens offers a different perspective. You might simply be prioritising other valid forms of value—security, family, or duty—and that is a valid path to a satisfied and happy life, too.

Steve Jobs was right that loving your work is a wonderful thing. But we must be careful not to turn a privilege into a prerequisite for a meaningful existence. Passion is a powerful engine, but it is not the only concern when driving a life.

This article is based on research published in the Journal of Organizational Behavior.