How many people are really vested in the mission versus what their name attached to it stands for? We all have egos and protecting our egos seems like a natural human reflex, especially in today’s personal horn tooting culture, through selfies and counting our Instagram likes and followers. But does it not seem paradoxical for someone to contribute or be the initiator of an organization that markets itself as doing good for others, when in actuality it ends up being all about the person who started it?
You can easily differentiate between someone who’s mission-focused and someone who’s fame-seeking. The mission-focused person or the change-maker speaks passionately and genuinely about their cause, loud or quietly. They accept to be in the backdrop or stand alone in the public eye to defend their cause. They actually care. And anyone with minimal EQ can perceive these qualities in these types of people. On the other hand, the fame-seeker is eager to be CEO, to be in the spotlight, to make public appearances and affiliate themselves with those who have already achieved star status because their inner motive is driven by the need for ego-boosting. Does the Instagram ‘like’ dopamine effect sound familiar?
It really begs the question: what drives our culture to seek attention, to be recognized, which is not to be confused with ambition? One can very well be ambitious and be ‘invisible’ in the social realm. So, what is the driver? Is it a desire for social acceptance? Is it the ultimate fear of dying without knowing why we were alive?
By Charlotte Haimes