Smart People Aren't Doing Important Work—Why Not?
I work in marketing, and like any job, there are days I love it and days I wonder if I should just start a vlog and become the next Casey Neistat. The thing that keeps me in it, though, is the people. Some of the smartest people I’ve ever met are my colleagues, and sometimes I find myself sitting in a meeting just admiring the sheer brainpower in the room.
But then, on a stressful day, someone will inevitably say, “Hey, it’s not like we’re curing cancer.” And I laugh along with everyone else, but then it hits me: Why aren’t we curing cancer? Why aren’t we doing work that could really change lives? Are we wasting our talents on work that, at the end of the day, doesn’t matter all that much?
Recently, I looked up Australia’s Top 100 Graduate Employers—a guide to where our best young minds want to work. Surprise, surprise, the top ten is dominated by the big tech, banking, and consulting names. But here’s the thing: if you ask a kid what they want to be when they grow up, it’s often something like teacher, doctor, or firefighter—jobs that help people and solve real problems. So, what happens between ages six and twenty? When did “making a difference” get replaced by “making money”?
It’s not just Australia. In the U.S., a recent survey showed that the most sought-after employers for new grads were Amazon, Google, and Microsoft.
This trend holds globally: the biggest, most profitable firms lure in top talent, and for good reason. But let’s be honest: how many of these roles actually tackle the world’s most urgent issues? Sure, Google has a climate plan and Microsoft invests in clean tech, but how many of their employees are truly working to address these issues head-on?
So, What Would it Take to Change This?
Imagine if even a fraction of the talent that currently optimizes our inboxes or helps us buy more coffee could be redirected toward problems that actually make the world better.
What if some of the most brilliant designers, marketers, and engineers decided to tackle inequality, social justice, climate change—or yes, even curing cancer?
What if we offered free university tuition—but with a catch? In exchange, graduates spend a year working on one of the world’s biggest problems. Think of it as “social service” for smart people.
For every year of free tuition, you’d work for a year at an institution dedicated to tackling something critical, from climate to healthcare.
Students could pick a problem to work on, they’d get housing and training, and they’d earn a modest wage. Some might even decide to stick with it, becoming “lifers” who help guide the next round of fresh talent. Over time, they’d get real-world experience that most universities don’t even come close to offering—plus, they’d end up way more employable than your average grad straight out of school.
Imagine the impact. What would it mean for society if some of our best and brightest got a taste of working on truly important stuff before heading off into the corporate world? They’d know, at least once in their lives, what it feels like to do work that could save lives or change the world.
Could It Actually Work?
The concept isn’t entirely new—some Nordic countries have a tradition of volunteer “gap years” focused on social work.
Why not a similar model for top graduates, with service options that target society’s most pressing needs? It would give students both hands-on experience and a sense of purpose before they dive into their careers.
Sure, it might sound ambitious, maybe even a little naïve. But here’s the challenge: What would it take for more of us to use our talents to make a real impact on the world? What would it take to keep alive those dreams we had as kids? Maybe it’s time we start asking these questions—and, who knows, maybe even start answering them.
Have all the thoughts round this and like many of the concepts you’ve suggested. Creating more tangible opportunities for bright minds to contribute is a great idea. The Nordic model is interesting. Also creating volunteering opportunities or apprenticeships for social enterprise could work:
I’ve had different experiences for pockets of time during my 25+ career.. launching a social enterprise for youth employability entrepreneurs in the Middle East in my 20s and now efforts in my 40s are more local community focused. And hope I get a chance to give more focus to this in the future when kids are older and have more capacity again.
Thanks for sharing, am enjoying your Substack writing and reflections.
I like what you have proposed. However, part of the problem in implementing such a model is identifying those who would serve as the bright or the talented. Your definition might be different than mine. Smart people is a relative term. It also depends on the task that a person is given.
As a former educator, I believe it’s important to identify and cultivate bright and creative talent from an early age. However, this is not a popular view. Americans live in an egalitarian society (for better or worse) both in principle and practice where everyone is seen as equally capable, equally bright, and equally creative. While letting any interested party have an opportunity to be part of a team or think tank might seem only fair, it’s not possible in practical terms when there are limited resources (for example: access to laboratory facilities or equipment or funding). Discernment and discrimination are necessary parts of the decision making process because otherwise you might be forced to contend with individuals ill suited to solve the problem they’ve been assigned. This is where universities might help in the identification process.
I can envision a lot of delusional, narcissistic types thrown in the mix with the humble geniuses in whatever working group is formed. (Maybe I’m projecting my own negative experiences here. 😂 )
A leader or charismatic figure, inevitably, emerges from any innovative team. So, there’s that to consider. Those who want to leave an indelible mark on the face of the planet (Elon Musk, anyone?) are not always the most morally upstanding and magnanimous of figures. Elisabeth Holmes succeeded in convincing others of her brilliant solution through ‘fake it till you make it ’ posturing with Theranos. Bill Gates has had some wild and crazy ideas related to water filtration systems. People can be bright with creative solutions even with a good heart. It doesn’t mean that they can pull it off. This is where it could be argued that Holmes was a brilliant marketer more than a brilliant social entrepreneur. She sold investors and the general public on the idea of simple, relatively pain free highly sophisticated way of doing blood testing. But, she never delivered the goods.
Elon Musk will solve the problem of an inhabitable planet by shooting us to Mars? Is that what we want? Is that the will of the people? Oppenheimer delivered the atomic bomb. It makes me wonder if the technological solutions that bright people come up with to solve huge problems are ever really very good solutions. Or are we rather sold on the idea of solutions to keep are minds at ease.
Bill Gates is also an interesting story. (If you haven’t watched the documentary, it’s worth a view.). Gates is obviously bright, but he also came from privilege, but also a mother who was a philanthropist. This gave Bill Gates an early socialization around the importance of giving back which is unusual among the wealthy and talented.
So, for me, it’s not only encouraging and providing incentives for young people to focus on solving important problems. It’s equally important to teach bright, talented, creative young people the right values. Children need to be taught virtues such as compassionate and humanitarianism. This can be difficult when your children are surrounded by wealth and conspicuous consumption. I’m a firm believer that volunteerism and humanitarianism are values that must be cultivated from within. You cannot force kindness or care or the desire to do good. Bright people need to believe in doing goodness for goodness sake alone. You can try to encourage this kind of behavior by offering programs or incentives, but if individuals are not highly motivated, intrinsically, by the desire to improve society, I’m not sure it can work. It’s how children are raised from a young age that makes a world of difference.