171–180 of 190 posts
To be read in conjunction with the Babbler hypothesis - The amount of time some people spend talking gets them into leadership positions. It doesn't matter what they say, just how much they rant on. I read that, and realised how insanely true it is
A related type is the Jargonist, who not only speaks endlessly but in a stream of acronyms, buzz words, and insider coded language.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The Losers are not social losers (as in the opposite of “cool”), but people who have struck bad bargains economically – giving up capitalist striving for steady paychecks. Both Michael and Dwight are excellent salesmen, but both struck bad (financial) deals for a steady paycheck. If you've been a loser in previous jobs you gave up much better money for the benefit of executive and shareholders.
> Both Michael and Dwight are excellent salesmen, but both struck bad (financial) deals for a steady paycheck. This model suggests that the only way you can strike a good financial deal is to be an executive (for which you need to be a sociopath). It's a circular proof by definition. > If you've been a loser in previous jobs you gave up much better money for the benefit of executive and shareholders. Did I? This mode…
In any case doesn't actually matter what the company actually does.
> Today, any time an organization grows too brittle, bureaucratic and disconnected from reality, it is simply killed, torn apart and cannibalized, rather than reformed. I actually think the overall argument of the essay makes more sense when you realize the above comment actually isn't true for the large majority of organizations. Universities, government agencies, big tech monopolies, public sector unions, complacen…
I foundationally disagree with your premise If you look at the composition and charters of these old “institutions” like governments, universities etc… the scope and function, the amount of resources put towards them etc… is very much not static. In fact, they are exceptionally different than they were at their founding, and this is specifically true for universities with how they were funded at the beginning versus…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you can't make any useful predictions with it then whatever MBTI measures (or it believes it measures) is... also useless?
I attempted to explain what it is useful for above, but will elaborate. The valuable result is the extreme opposite of your result- it is a therapy or personal development tool that directs you to explore and understand parts of yourself you reject or disapprove of (your “shadow”). It simply quantifies something obvious that you already know: how you consciously see yourself- in a way that guides you to explore aspec…
Look, I too have read Jung and agree with what you're saying here, but this is emphatically NOT how MBTI tends to be used in corporate settings, which is what everyone else in this thread is talking about.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I feel like we forgot (or deprioritized - or maybe never genuinely prioritized) how to NOT have to sync on everything all the time. not everyone needs to be in a group. not everyone in a group needs to be in sync with interests AND personalities AND needs AND beliefs AND... but I see the paradox here: we need to believe the above is true to live happier and more meaningfully
> not everyone needs to be in a group Not everyone is in a civilisation. Few people in a civilisation would rather be in e.g. Sudan or Ethiopia.
Lower the sizes of groups and increase async communication, and the burden/overhead of management goes down. Groups small enough can manage themselves, in fact.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I attempted to explain what it is useful for above, but will elaborate. The valuable result is the extreme opposite of your result- it is a therapy or personal development tool that directs you to explore and understand parts of yourself you reject or disapprove of (your “shadow”). It simply quantifies something obvious that you already know: how you consciously see yourself- in a way that guides you to explore aspec…
> The valuable result is the extreme opposite of your result- it is a therapy or personal development tool that directs you to explore and understand parts of yourself you reject or disapprove of (your “shadow”). Look, I too have read Jung and agree with what you're saying here, but this is emphatically NOT how MBTI tends to be used in corporate settings, which is what everyone else in this thread is talking about.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, different people have different idiolects, but I'm glad you can see that the constructions I gave as examples are common in spoken German. > Something that I am annoyed of. It's easier to see these things with more distance and objectivity in a foreign language. Eg think of all the English speakers who complain when people mix up its, it's, they're, their, there in writing and accuse them of 'muddled thinking' o…
> It's easier to see these things with more distance and objectivity in a foreign language. I have a similar opinion about such topics in foreign languages. It's just that I am much less knowledgeable concerning their subtle parts, so I as a non-native speaker can often not be sure whether I am right or I'm not aware of some subtle part of the respective language. Thus I am much more cautious concerning expressing su…
There's a difference between prescriptivism and descriptivism. Languages are something people, not what grammarians make up in their books.
Please do have a look at the Emonds paper. It's interesting, I promise.
Keep in mind that in practice this classification is not perfect, as in you cannot just bucketize people into three categories and declare perfect understanding. You should treat the roles described in the article as archetypes of human behavior.
This is true for any kind of generalization. Having said that, I can really see this at my company. At the beginning I was a high-perfoming loser. Then I realized how things work, and since then I do bare minimum. I wish I could be a sociopath, but I don't have the brains nor the lack of morals to do so. I passionately hate the clueless ones because they stand against everything I believe in. My dream is to save enou…
Dilbert! (I know that Scott Adams got chastised for some views/tweets/whatever and I don't care) Now, to the cartoons. I was introduced to them back in 2000 or 2001 by a colleague. We both loved the Monty Pythons, so we had that in common to begin with. Once I read the first few strips, I got hooked. I starting 'seeing' these chars to my colleagues (and to myself). Dilbert has taught me A LOT about psychology and ope…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree with the parent poster, the author sounds very bitter. Might not be true, they might be trying at humour and I haven't got it. But I think doing the minimum you can get away with is playing with fire. Your colleagues will resent you. You're also sending a signal to everyone that will be remembered. Maybe a colleague will start a business or move to another place one day. Are they going to employ the minimum e…
> Your colleagues will resent you Why would they? We're all adults and all more or less understand the rules of the game. And in rare cases in my career when the company culture was all about working long hours and living at work, I just tend not to stick in such places for long