Before you chase another project

In many workplaces today, a subtle pattern is becoming easier to spot. People do not only want to do great work. They want to choose the work they do, even when priorities and ownership have already been defined.

On the surface, that desire can be healthy. It can reflect ambition and a real hunger to grow. But if it turns into constant comparison, it can quietly damage performance.

It often begins with an innocent mental shortcut. We look around, notice what others are working on, and assume we are seeing the full story. One project appears bigger, another sounds more exciting, and a third gets more attention. Without context, the mind concludes that the visible project must be the better project.

Meanwhile, the assigned project starts to feel less important, even if it is strategically valuable and highly feasible.

What many people underestimate is how projects are actually assigned. Allocation is rarely a ranking of who is “better.” Most of the time, it is a fit and capacity decision. Someone may be placed on a project because their leader sees a strong match between their capabilities and what the work needs. Others may be assigned elsewhere because their skill set fits that scope better, or because they are more available at that time. Allocation is a balancing act between competence, workload, timing, and development, not a public ranking of value.

Yet many people value perceived prestige over the probability of success. They chase the project that looks impressive rather than the one that can be finished and recognized. They fall in love with the “label” of a project before they understand its reality, and they underestimate how much career capital is built through delivery, not selection.

The next shift is the one that causes real damage. When someone stops believing in their project, behavior changes before results change. Energy drops. Decisions get delayed. Initiative slows down. Attention becomes fragmented because the person is mentally investing in an imagined alternative while still responsible for the current work. Since execution depends on consistency more than excitement, quality suffers, timelines stretch, and a feasible project becomes heavier than it needed to be. That person starts living mentally in a different project while physically staying in the current one. He becomes half-present. He does the minimum. He waits for a change instead of creating progress. And, over time, the project begins to reflect that internal disengagement.

The irony is that many people do this in the name of recognition, yet the behavior makes recognition less likely. In real environments, leaders notice patterns. They notice who delivers even when the work is not glamorous, who stays committed after the initial excitement fades, and who turns feasible work into real impact. A person who loses commitment when the work does not look impressive from a distance may gain a short-term sense of control, but they lose the long-term advantage of being known as someone who finishes.

At the heart of this issue is a misunderstanding about where project value comes from. Early in a career, it is easy to believe that value comes from the project’s title. In reality, value often comes from the outcome and the story you build around it. A “simple” project delivered well can create more credibility than a “big” project that stays stuck in ambiguity.

Execution turns ordinary work into visible impact. Leadership potential is not proven by choosing the most attractive work. It is proven by elevating the work you are given and making it matter.

Visibility also plays tricks. When a colleague is presenting frequently or getting attention, it is easy to assume their project is superior. But visibility is often shaped by timing, sponsorship, or communication habits, not just importance. Some of the most valuable work happens quietly, especially the work that reduces risk, stabilizes operations, or enables others to scale.

From a leadership perspective, the goal is not to silence ambition. The goal is to shape it. Wanting to grow is healthy. Wanting high-impact work is healthy. The problem begins when preference becomes entitlement, and comparison becomes a habit that steals attention from execution.

The healthiest response starts with clarity, not assumptions. If someone feels mismatched with a project, the most productive move is to raise it early and professionally and ask for context. What does success look like? Why does this work matter now? What skills will be built through delivering it? Many times, the project looks different once the full picture is visible, and commitment becomes easier when purpose becomes clear.

Leaders also carry responsibility, because disengagement is often a context problem. When leaders connect tasks to outcomes and explain why someone was chosen, they reduce unnecessary comparison. When they clarify that distribution is based on fit and capacity, they reduce the belief that assignments are rankings.

Still, personal accountability matters. You do not always get to choose the work, but you always get to choose how you show up for it. Your reputation is built less by the projects you request and more by the results you produce. Often, the fastest way to earn the right to choose future projects is to deliver the current one with excellence.

I often think of it this way. The early stage of a career is not only about collecting exciting experiences. It is about collecting evidence. Evidence that you can execute. Evidence that you can handle ownership. Evidence that you can communicate and collaborate. Evidence that you can finish. When someone repeatedly tries to escape feasible work because it doesn’t look exciting enough, they delay building that evidence. They might feel they are protecting their potential, but they are actually postponing their credibility.

The most reliable path is simple. Do the work in front of you well. Ask for context when you don’t see the value. Replace assumptions with conversations. Build your credibility through delivery, then negotiate your next opportunity from a position of strength. Because the projects that look “better” from a distance are not always better. Often, the best project is the one you can deliver, own, and turn into a win.

• Firas Abussaud is a petroleum engineering systems specialist with more than 23 years’ experience in the industry. He holds a BSc in chemical engineering and an MSc in construction engineering and management from King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals.