Uncategorized

How we think about ourselves depends…

How we think about ourselves depends…

Recently, during a discussion on “What criteria ought to be used to evaluate one’s job satisfaction versus the potential the position offers?”

The crust of the thinking came to this question; “What level of sacrifice is worth the potential gain?”

Defining “gain” brought many factors into focus.   Each carries an enormous number of personal preferences and needs that must to be fulfilled for a person to function well.

Demanding positions are most likely filled with high achievers.  By definition; they have high expectation of themselves.

The brain works in amazing ways: it can help you or it can also hurt you.

In the old western movies, there was a good guy with the white hat facing the bad guy with the black hat.  They walked toward each other in the climax with a gun fight.  They stare at each other with their hearts beat heavily, and then the bad guy starts to draw.  The good guy pulls his gun out and shoots him to win the match.  The bad guy hits the ground and the heroine runs to the good guy and hugs him in gratitude.  Fairy tale?

The reality, reaction time is approximately twice as fast as cognizant movement.  In other words, the good guy reacted faster than the voluntary movement of the bad guy.  In this case, the brain worked to help the good guy.

In a demanding position, the high achiever tends to have high expectation of themselves.  Those high expectation can create what I like to call here, “the good-guy” syndrome.

The good-guy syndrome starts long before the demanding position comes into play.  It may start as early as grade school.  Somewhere along the line we are either encourage to excel by someone, or we recognize that we are good at certain things.  It may be true or even imagined, it does not matter.  What matters is that we build a belief of what we think we can accomplish.

In the book, The Slight Edge, by Jeff Olsen, states that many of us overestimate what we can do in a year, but underestimate what we can do in 10 years.

The good-guy syndrome is the belief that one can learn fast.  Learning consists of a process of taking what you think you know and evaluating it to find what you do not know and then replacing it with a new understanding.  In short, learning, unlearning, and relearning.  This process is not spontaneous, it takes time.

In a demanding position, the rate of performance is out of sync with the brain’s ability to process leaving the person cognizant of the deficiency.  It is not the deficiency that is damaging, rather it is the concept that “I am not good enough” that starts the eroding process of self-worth.  Or put bluntly, “I am not a good-guy!”

Everyone knows that making mistakes carries a consequence that has been reinforced throughout one’s life.  However, making mistakes is very much a part of the learning process.

The irony is that difficulty is a stimulator for achievement.  It forces us to dig deep into our reservoir of talents to accomplish and overcome adversity.  This creates a paradox in that difficulty brings about stress and stress also inhibit creativity and clear thinking.

Our discussion eventually came to the point of the ultimate question: “Do I quit or stay in this position?”

The feelings that brings this question to mind is understandable, however, a few questions ought to be asked before any decision is made:

  1. Is the pressure I am under self-induced? Is it me that is causing my own frustration by not being able to perform like I expect?
  2. Is the pressure external, from someone besides yourself indicating unsatisfactory performance?
  3. Is the pressure exerted on your performance from someone else that precipitates the pressure you exert on yourself to perform better?

Most likely, the pressure you feel will be from number one.  This is the good-guy syndrome in that you are reacting, and thinking you feel like it is up to you.  Well, it is!  That is, after all, what you have been hired for.

One of the insidious effects of child abuse is that the child often feels that they are somehow at fault for the abuse.  This same mechanism occurs in high achievers, they start to think that their failures are because of them.

This is only partly true.  The environment, culture, and expectation in the demanding position may set a standard of performance but viewing them as a “standard” rather than a “goal” can make a big difference.  Standard of performance cannot be equally placed on all involved.  That is, the expertise obtained by someone over 10 years cannot be equated to a new hire.  The standard ought to be the bar to reach for not an expectation to meet.

One’s perspective of their capabilities as a standard of measurement will always fall short, especially for someone newly hired for a position.

Stepping into the way the brain functions, is important in these analyses.  Anders Ericsson came to discover that it takes 10,000 hours of dedicated practice to reach world-class expertise.  He did his research on playing violin.   He discovered that the difference from a good violinist and a world-class violinist was dedicated practice above and beyond lessons.  How much more time?  10,000 hours.  Put this into perspective, that is ten years of 20 hours per week of dedicated practice.

Relating this to demanding positions becomes complex because there are many aspects to a demanding position that cannot be practices, only lived.  The fact remains, that it takes time to become world-class.  In every position, there needs to be time given to assimilate the learning, unlearning, and relearning process.

Cutting this time short, is a recipe for early escape.  Adding the factor of giving up some of the needs that are necessary to function leaves one in a quandary.

The expression, “We all have to pay the fiddler” carries some legitimacy.  “No pain, no gain.”

The individuals that were discussing their dilemma, were frustrated at themselves.  Not just because of performance, but as importantly, the sacrifice that was needed for them to reach those standards.  Hence, the question; “Is it worth the sacrifice.”

When one sacrifices a need for work, there are consequences.  Just as someone who sacrifices a meal to finish a proposal or project, there is a consequence.  Physically, the person is weaker, and less able to function mentally.

The real issue came to, “Do I want to continue giving up those things that I need, for gaining advancements, development, or finances that I would like?”  This question becomes more prevalent at the fast pace that business has necessitated.

How much do I need to pay the fiddler?

“Know thyself,” Socrates stated, and knowing one’s self ought to include delineating those things that you need to function.  You are the master of your own fate, in that, those things you need to sacrifice do not necessarily need to be eliminated.

If your foundational structure is established and maintained, then you are more valuable in whatever your position you hold.  Hence, if you need to nap during the day and that nap makes you more efficient and productive, why would anyone object to it?   This is where culture could interfere.  However, culture is a fluid mechanism.  Order drives corporate culture and control is associated with order.  This is where the individual clashes with the culture.  When your individual needs can disrupt the culture, the culture will win.

“Do I quit?” This is a very personal question.  It ought not to be based on feelings alone that are not examined.  It is as simple as this: “If you are hungry, then eat.”

The conflict between your needs and the culture ought to be an answer to you the above question.  “My need to __________ must be met otherwise I cannot function for long.”

That statement must be true.  However, if every position that is available to you cannot accommodate to that need, something needs to change.  A demand that requires something outlandish will never happen.

Learning is hard!  You haven’t gotten to where you are by sitting eating donuts. Do not let “being hard” become a criterium for quitting.  Let, “not having your realistic needs being met,” be the criteria for what you can or cannot tolerate.  “Knowing Thyself,” is the key.

There is no conclusion aside from the fact that giving up on the wrong thing can be damaging to your self-image.  Likewise, staying in a position that compromises your well-being is not worth the sacrifice.

Life is complex.

 

Attila Horvath, author

attilahorvath.net

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *