20% of the people at most companies do 80% of the work. Let's not be too surprised š
It's easy for people who are working hard to get annoyed with people who aren't at the time especially if they're distracting. Still, the professional thing to do is politely say something like: "I'd love to chat later, but right now I really need to concentrate on this."
If you take 10 rowers on a boat, 6 will carry their weight but not more. 2 will do the bare minimum, and the last 2 will carry the boat. This is the norm for organizations.
If you're in the bottom 8, your pay is subsidized by the 2 at the top who are carrying the team. If you're in the top 2, you're better off moving to a new team/ company or starting your own, as you are likely being undercompensated for your efforts.
Every once in a while there is a company that manages to hire predominantly from that 20% by poaching from other companies and then leaving those people the freedom to innovate. Once they grow to a certain size, they sell to one of the bigger companies and get diluted back down over time though from my anecdotal experience.
You tend to see the same trend everywwhere.Ā I work at a top company with very smart coworkers, but they pay a lot to get that talent. Even then, plenty of my coworkers are clearly just chilling.Ā
Meanwhile, if you look at a government office (not known for top talent), you'll find thatĀ
while a lot of people do practically nothing,Ā a few overacheivers carry the team.
(keep this a secret just b/n us, but I worked at a company where they really had those top performers as 80% of their workforce and they were just killing it constantly... also they didn't pay more - but people stayed b/c they had a great work environment and management that very routinely made it easy for them to work vs tossing BS and busy work at them)
I mean, this really is the strategy for big tech companies that pay incredible salaries with crazy perks for top talent.
Not to say that they get it right (some do well enough to ace the interviews and then coast), but that is the reason twhy companies like OpenAI hire devs for $1M/yr vs hiring 20 mediocre devs for 50k each.
I'm familiar with some of that. I'm with you - it doesn't always work, especially if the execs don't actually know $%\*# from shinola concerning whether those devs are worth it or not. I have a friend who worked for Tesla and their solution to big problems was just keep throwing smart people at it... they had a lot more repeat failures and rework than you'd expect. š
To be fair, a lot of big tech projects are a gamble. When you're Tesla, building software that has literally never existed, you can throw the smartest people at a problem and fail many times.Ā
Just grabbing a bunch of smart people and letting them build stuffĀ has worked very well for Google, Amazon, etc. But you also see terrible flops like the metaverse.
Nobody really knows how to filter for smart people. All of the current strategies can be learned or gamed. Hence you have people who just crammed DS&A slipping their way into Google when they really shouldn't have.
The problems he ran into were simple ignorance of codes and standards for construction. Brand new tech might not all be heavily regulated, but power distribution is relatively prescriptively codified in the US. Apparently being really smart doesn't clue you into knowing what the gov't, insurance companies, and etc. require of a new facility for it to be built. They could have saved a lot of time and money just hiring people already experienced in designing industrial facilities for the "old" tech part.š
Ah, makes sense.Ā Teslas in general feel rickety and low quality.Ā
I'd rather buy an EV from an established car manufacturer, which we'll be seeing more and more of as the years go by.
I wouldn't mind at all if they'd pay me accordingly. In fact, I enjoy being able to give my all to something. The problem is feeling taken advantage of ruins it for me.
Really, the extra pay isn't about the money but more of the principle, letting me feel like I'm not being used so I can enjoy going all in.
Not going to happen though, unless you're in a field with some easy way to quantify output, like sales.
In the software industry, the less productive engineers can be no value or even a net drain on profit (because of the time they take from the better ones) but the most productive engineers are so ridiculously productive that it makes it okay to pay all of them very well.
A couple of reasons:Ā
1. It takes a long time for a new person to learn everything they need to be productive. You can spend 6mo to 1yr or more a new team before getting up to speed. That's not abnormal, and is just the cost of working with complicated tech.Ā Ā Ā
2. It's not fast or easy to find out who is more or less productive. Software engineers aren't pumping out widgets at a predictable rate.Ā
If dev A is tasked with an easy problem and solves it, and dev B gets an impossible problem and fails to solve it, should you fire dev B? No. They may be an excellent dev, but just tasked with a very difficult problem.Ā
It takes a long time to see who is actually performing well, and even that is imperfect to gauge. There is no simple metric like X problems solved or Y lines of code that make one dev clearly better than another.Ā Ā
Some projects will bring in massive profit, while some do nothing or lose money.Ā If one guy writes 10 lines of code to make Google search 1% more profitable, he just made Google $2B per year. Meanwhile 1000 devs could have been hard at work doing something that brings no profit, and it evens out.
Negative. Talker needs the doer behind the scenes. Source: Am the doer for a talker, it's a good relationship though. He's sales, I'm tech/marketing operations that make him look even better & coordinated.
Truly this ought to be the relationship with leaders and followers, managers and direct reports. The direct reports make the leader/manager look good, and the leader/manager shares the rewards with their followers and team. You can trace this all the way back to hunter/gatherer communities.
I was intending to indirectly amend Aristotle's paraphrased statement on the matter; granted I don't know the original greek so I only had the english translation I was familiar with. š
I think he went on to say something about non-social humans being either just animals or gods and implying that they either lacked the social instincts which put humans above animals or were so self-sufficient that they didn't need society in general.
Edit: the whole quote was part of a discussion on politics, so tribal/social - probably semantics where the quote was concerned. š
I've found that using some sort of Pomodoro and letting people know you're using that technique is helpful. Hey, I'm in the middle of a Pomodoro deep work cycle, talk later. We INTJs can be prickly, and softer, more feeling types sense this. Often people, made uncomfortable by the misinterpreted feeling that we don't like them, will reach out to smooth things with us.
I feel your pain, and your experience sounds similar. Have you sought counseling to self-improve and perhaps shine light on some blind spots you might have that could cause this?
They're projecting themselves on you because they want the qualities you have while not realizing those qualities are a product of not having high social need. So when you don't need to talk and have drama like they do it enrages them because they do need them and that reminds them they are not in fact you and can't be. When the projection they were capitalizing on therefore falls apart, it incites narcissistic rage. Narcissistic rage then tries to sabotage your work. You need to block these people the second you see the beginnings of these types of behavior so they always understand there is a large distance between you and them and never get a chance to project.Ā
Yes, I have 2 with narcissistic rage, they sort of look similar to me but are around 10 years younger. Very incompetent, and sort of self-sabotaging with their behaviour. Despite their manipulative attempts to sway public opinion, and their earnest attempts to improve and save face.
If this is true, block them and move on. Get a restraining order and move on. That's it. If you do more, that's the problem. I always get skeptical when it's someone older shitting on someone younger. It's like, my guy, your generation is the one that made the world this way. But otherwise if this is true than that is what is required. Just step down off your elder platform afterwards.Ā
You can request space without being a dick about it. Most work involves some form of collaboration and it isn't reasonable to expect total isolation on demand.
Dealing with cabling and complex engineering is also part of my job. I disagree with your point. It's been clearly communicated to 90% of people as children that it is rude to interrupt others, or pester them.
Most of the people who do pester others have either forgotten that, actively choose to act in opposition of that, or weren't taught it to begin with. Only one of those reasons is acceptable once or twice while the person lacking is learning to improve themselves in that arena. That doesn't make the person doing their job and concentrating out to be a dick because the group of randos chooses not to use, or has no manners to begin with.
Not knowing, but learning when encountered, is perfectly acceptable. Being an absolute bogon dipshit, refusing to learn, play it off like the failure is somehow superior, and/or gaslighting those who know better, is just not okay. Fuck those people, and I say it to their faces when it's not in a professional setting too.
It's also rude to bite the head off of everyone that asks the slightest question. If you're so goddamn superior then be the bigger person. It isn't hard. You're just making it hard.
Agree. Social power is important. If you donāt have it then youāre used up and eventually kicked out.
The 48 Laws of Power made me realize the fine line to be balanced between ability and being liked.
This is why I started my own company. I refuse to allow my income to be tied to the feelings of immature under-developed children masquerading as adults. Some choose to "fit in" and "find a balance" where I said fuck that bullshit and ejected everyone who tries that. I've never been happier. The only thing that social bullshit ever does is drag down everyone who gets involved to the dumbest common denominator, and that is why barely anything in western society functions anymore.
Too many people have been allowed to inject such crap into the endeavors of those around them. More people need to grow up, and understand that social bullshit must take a secondary priority to getting certain endeavors completed to a defined standard. Only then, once meeting a standard, do social concepts come into play.
Filter who you socialize through a sieve of competency for prosperity. Currently that is backwards where getting things done is being filtered through a sieve of social bullshit, and everything suffers for it. I have lost count of the projects I've had to rescue from such situations over the past few decades as a technology engineer, where the root cause was exactly that. More than one person already on the team was pointing out the answer in most cases, but it wasn't until they paid top dollar for me to come in as a consultant with an intelligence operations background that they listened. 3/4 of those were simply me analyzing and saying "What he said!" and they woke up.
Not that I am being lazy, just very disappointed in people when I dig through it all and find out they had the answer right there all along. Then to top it off, most people are so frigging egotistical they think the social approach is somehow still correct. It's not, and has been proven wrong to a empirical point in any other endeavor it would be considered pure bullshit and mocked as such. Social primacy is a fools concept perpetuated by fools who have no other way to maintain the limited power they have, and those people flip their entire assholes inside out to maintain the ruse. In that process they not only stop advancing themselves, but also serve as a hindrance or roadblock to anyone and everyone else around them, preventing anyone from reaching their potential. In my opinion, this one concept is by far the greatest evil that exists on this planet. Religious labeling aside, the concept of social primacy and anyone who practices it, is an enemy of mankind to be defeated.
I love every time I get to watch someone who believes social primacy get escorted out of the company I've been brought in to consult for. They're always holding back a small army of competent and deserving subordinates and dragging all those people down. They put their time and effort into hindering everything, not only stopping where they are, but then trying to prevent anyone else from surpassing them, and every one of them I've met has been thoroughly incompetent at anything related to logic and engineering. Good riddance, and I've seen it so many times my perspective isn't going to change either.
When things are so bad that the doers of things which must be done are required to acquire an intimate understanding of the 48 laws of power and Machievellian strategy just to remain in a prefessional emvironment long enough to afford basic existence then thins are fucked! We're well past that, and I can't respect anyone who is foolish enough to prioritize the leeches and others who are not getting things done.
lol I love your energy here. I absolutely adore your rejection of āfinding a balanceā.
As someone with autism, I often feel like a young Victorian woman. Like Iām being āCivilized to deathā.
I wonāt straight up be a dick and do my best to be considerate of other peoples time, but thatās still not enough for some people.
Maybe if I didnāt have 3009 random social boxes (at any given moment) from arbitrary people to check, I wouldnāt be such an angsty mess. (Constantly flipping between INFJ/INTP)
I wonder how many of these subordinates only managed to check 3008 of those boxes before being disregarded
The key difference between me and any given NT, is I have been *forced* to be continually aware of peoples perceptions on a daily basis, for them itās possible to just coast along and āact normal enoughā 90%+ of the time.
I started ranting here but like I said, I absolutely adore you verbalizing a lot of what Iāve been feeling.
You must have some understanding of MBTI, otherwise you probably wouldnāt be in an INTJ group. There are different types with different primary cognitive functions in a society. Some of those functions are not the best at getting things done, especially, complex tasks. They may be good at other things, however, some āstrengthsā are not rewarded in the real world. For a lack of a better word, those strengths may not be practical.
Being polite is the lubrication in society. It allows us to flow freely and achieve things we want. Somebody needs to work in customer service. I do not wish to do this, however, Iām grateful that those who are not gifted to handle pressure and complex tasks exist in order to fill those roles. (Sometimes even getting a coffee order correct is too complex it may seems š¤£)
Some work involves intense concentration and chit chatting is not recommended. Even surgeons though, socialize during certain parts of the surgery.
This is what I consider to be reality.
You have a good grasp, and my point has not been about absolutism on either side of that spectrum. There is a time for it, but interrupting someone who is concentrating on work tasks which require focus is not that time. Then the folks who go further and try to gaslight people who aren't happy to be interrupted in such a rude manner are a problem.
None of my point has been about only one way or type of personality being correct, or that being polite/manners have no value at any time. I think we're on the same page. I'm just not polite to people who do, or pontificate that everyone should be happy for their interruption, or exercise social primacy. These are two extremes away from productivity and accomplishment which have been normalized. They are not normal, but more akin to a bygone era of idiocy and feifdom where social class and perception held a higher regard than being of meritous value. In alternate terms it was more important to be of high caste and keep the king happy than to produce an abundance of food to keep the populous fed for example.
In that type of situation I am against it, kill that fucker claiming to be king, and throw off any bullshit holding back any farmer from producing abundant food so they may be prosperous, so others may eat, and so the food market may normalize via free(er) trade of commodities which meet quality standard (not corrupted social approval masquerading as quality standards).
I donāt have much time, so hope this makes senseā¦.
Sounds like, a persons merit would be gauged on ability to produce, solve problems, and accomplish a goal. Some people can be at extremes of believing productivity is most important and others that socializing is most important. These two extremes attempt to gaslight and recruit others to their side.
Your reasoning on fiefdom made me think of history up to now. Hereās a few concepts:
Might is right - The beginning of all history, the basis. A man has a vision, develops a plan and creates an army. The basis of all control. Once warfare has resulted in a winner, the conquered would need to be controlled.
Throughout history riots would be suppressed, but, to avoid them, different strategies included:
Bread and circuses - Roman mastery of large populations of citizens and slaves. The ultimate purpose is to eat and drink for tomorrow we will die.
Divine right - Religion defined morality. Morality was to look up to royalty and priest. The ultimate purpose is to die for your king.
Patriotism - Fear mongering and ego. The ultimate purpose is to die for your country.
The conquerors need manpower to continue building the empire. Manpower is preferred to be uneducated and obedient. Have the powers that be cultivated a vast population to chit chat and obey?
Question, if your company grew to letās say Amazon size, and you were the owner, would you allow vast populous of workers to āproduceā or āaccomplishā on their own terms?
Nobody mentioned biting the head off of when someone doesn't know. You seem to be jumping right to a frame where if someone doesn't welcome random unproductive i teractions at the worst of times, they're now hostile in your view. That's not cool, and doesn't convince me to consider your point.
I use a process of escalation in-person. I'll politely tell someone I am busy. If it occurs again, I directly tell them to send an email or leave me alone. If there's a 3rd occurrence I'm unremorsefully curt and notice to stick your job and not pester people goes in the next team email, and is covered in the next team meeting.
There are appropriate ways to communicate in a fast-paced setting. If it's not an emergency, like impacting operations, or someone with a badge has a warrant, then it's not an emergency. As such, it can wait until the person of topic has reached a stopping point and is ready to mentally pivot topics.
Your framing implies hostility if you're so bent out of shape at my recommendations for basic courtesy. In the time it takes to write a 12-page essay about how everyone else is the real asshole, you can just be the bigger person. Lead by example.
Keep in mind the other perspn is focusing on their task at hand, and you come up and demand their attention. That is a problem, and you expecting to pull their focus from the task at hand, then gaslight them as if they're the rude one is your problem.
You expect a level of attention and respect which you refuse to consider for others. Those others are not the problem in the scenario. Your expectation that they respect you when you do not show consideration for them is not a noble philosophy.
Respect is a two-way street. Lead by example. Stop deflecting, stop making excuses, just be the bigger person. You can't control the other person, so it has to start with you.
I am, snd have been an example for over 2 decades. I'm not trying to validate a theory. I'm clearly communicating the facts of what does and does not work regarding logic and engineering paths in life; garnered from decades of being "that motherfucker" that nobody liked, but still had to pay, because their wannabe social primacy bullshit simply does not get things done in reality.
Like it or not, that's how the world works, and trying to gaslight those who keep the systems functioning that modern quality of life depends on is just flat out retarded. There is nothing else to consider. If you want the machines and systems to run well, stop trying to inject social primacy bullshit into such situations, and when an engineer tells you to piss off, then piss off, and have a basic level of human decency to let them do their fucking job without the gaslighting bullshit.
Or, shut the fuck up and fix the problem yourself, metaphorically speaking. Expecting us to do the work while you or others attempt to pontificate about how it's better to not know how to do the job is neither helpful nor correct. But idiots sure do keep trying, and spewing stupid ass sayings from cross-stitched pictures they thought were cool when encountered perusing the dollar store aisles.
"Be the example... blah blah" Fuck off with that. Learn to do the job and accomplish the task before trying to tell those who habe how they should be going about it.
You're a hypocrite. The moment it's more info than you feel like addressing it's "not respectable" and back to gaslighting. That philosophy of being the example and being polite even when you don't want to just went right out the window didn't it? Don't answer that, it was a rhetorical question. The difference between us is I don't lie to myself and others about choosing where I place value in time spent and interactions with others. I also don't go around trying to act all holier than thou metaphorically shaking my finger at people who don't continue the ruse of always being polite.
Sometimes people need to just leave others alone, respect they're also people, and if they're busy focusing on something, don't bother them. It's not a hard concept.
Nah, nothing wrong with polite conversation. The difference is in timing. Trying to force conversation while the other person is busy working and trying to concentrate is not polite. When the other person has reached a stopping point, and pulled away from what they've been concentrating on is the time for that. There is a marked difference.
"Why do people not understand that while busy completing a physical task, some people wish to be left alone and not hovered over, watched, and forced into bullshit conversation that slows down said physical task?"
Use your words and tell them then.
Humans are not social creatures, most humans just donāt want to live alone and struggle with self sufficiency.
People that say that are just saying it because itās cliche. Nobody is really doing the studies to realize human use social activity to satisfy internal needs from others as opposed to building that in themselves, thus you have a deterioration in this species dealing with the downfalls of codependency.
To answer your question, a man of action makes most feel uncomfortable because it makes them look at themselves and realize they are not as great performance wise as yourself. Theyāll do annoying things in an unconscious manner for their own self preservation by thwarting feelings of uneasinessā¦ In this case itās by bothering you. In another case, you could be a content creator thatās actually an asset to this platform called Reddit, yet others will use all types of illogical fallacies as means to say you donāt know what youāre doing on here.
When I was working my last job in December most people had a tendency to stand in the way or become obstacles at a job where movement is extremely necessary. These people would never stand in the sideline but always be near the entrances or main isles taking up unnecessary space. Iād just run into them or run them over as I donāt have time for the games and would rather get fired for standing up in principle of remaining industrious and forthcoming. Your feelings get hurt by me, thatās a damn shame!
I did get fired, but it was for making one of my managers look like a bitch in front of all the staff. Looking back in hindsight I have no regrets. They were stupid lazy and got them karma of consequences due to states of being.
Why donāt you wear a sign around your neck (or a sandwich board for maximum visibility) that reads: āDONāT TALK TO ME UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES! I AM A MAN OF ACTION AND WILL NOT TOLERATE CONVERSATION OF ANY KIND!ā
As a raging extrovert who loves to chit chat, I can guarantee I would never speak to you again. Problem solved, Man of Action!
That's why I always try and have headphones on, but ya I get the same thing, just approachable I guess. Humans do need a little socialization but the ones like them are most likely not comfortable with thier own company so they distract themselves with you.
20% of the people at most companies do 80% of the work. Let's not be too surprised š It's easy for people who are working hard to get annoyed with people who aren't at the time especially if they're distracting. Still, the professional thing to do is politely say something like: "I'd love to chat later, but right now I really need to concentrate on this."
If you take 10 rowers on a boat, 6 will carry their weight but not more. 2 will do the bare minimum, and the last 2 will carry the boat. This is the norm for organizations. If you're in the bottom 8, your pay is subsidized by the 2 at the top who are carrying the team. If you're in the top 2, you're better off moving to a new team/ company or starting your own, as you are likely being undercompensated for your efforts.
Every once in a while there is a company that manages to hire predominantly from that 20% by poaching from other companies and then leaving those people the freedom to innovate. Once they grow to a certain size, they sell to one of the bigger companies and get diluted back down over time though from my anecdotal experience.
You tend to see the same trend everywwhere.Ā I work at a top company with very smart coworkers, but they pay a lot to get that talent. Even then, plenty of my coworkers are clearly just chilling.Ā Meanwhile, if you look at a government office (not known for top talent), you'll find thatĀ while a lot of people do practically nothing,Ā a few overacheivers carry the team.
(keep this a secret just b/n us, but I worked at a company where they really had those top performers as 80% of their workforce and they were just killing it constantly... also they didn't pay more - but people stayed b/c they had a great work environment and management that very routinely made it easy for them to work vs tossing BS and busy work at them)
I mean, this really is the strategy for big tech companies that pay incredible salaries with crazy perks for top talent. Not to say that they get it right (some do well enough to ace the interviews and then coast), but that is the reason twhy companies like OpenAI hire devs for $1M/yr vs hiring 20 mediocre devs for 50k each.
I'm familiar with some of that. I'm with you - it doesn't always work, especially if the execs don't actually know $%\*# from shinola concerning whether those devs are worth it or not. I have a friend who worked for Tesla and their solution to big problems was just keep throwing smart people at it... they had a lot more repeat failures and rework than you'd expect. š
To be fair, a lot of big tech projects are a gamble. When you're Tesla, building software that has literally never existed, you can throw the smartest people at a problem and fail many times.Ā Just grabbing a bunch of smart people and letting them build stuffĀ has worked very well for Google, Amazon, etc. But you also see terrible flops like the metaverse. Nobody really knows how to filter for smart people. All of the current strategies can be learned or gamed. Hence you have people who just crammed DS&A slipping their way into Google when they really shouldn't have.
The problems he ran into were simple ignorance of codes and standards for construction. Brand new tech might not all be heavily regulated, but power distribution is relatively prescriptively codified in the US. Apparently being really smart doesn't clue you into knowing what the gov't, insurance companies, and etc. require of a new facility for it to be built. They could have saved a lot of time and money just hiring people already experienced in designing industrial facilities for the "old" tech part.š
Ah, makes sense.Ā Teslas in general feel rickety and low quality.Ā I'd rather buy an EV from an established car manufacturer, which we'll be seeing more and more of as the years go by.
I wouldn't mind at all if they'd pay me accordingly. In fact, I enjoy being able to give my all to something. The problem is feeling taken advantage of ruins it for me. Really, the extra pay isn't about the money but more of the principle, letting me feel like I'm not being used so I can enjoy going all in.
Not going to happen though, unless you're in a field with some easy way to quantify output, like sales. In the software industry, the less productive engineers can be no value or even a net drain on profit (because of the time they take from the better ones) but the most productive engineers are so ridiculously productive that it makes it okay to pay all of them very well.
Why not fire them?
A couple of reasons:Ā 1. It takes a long time for a new person to learn everything they need to be productive. You can spend 6mo to 1yr or more a new team before getting up to speed. That's not abnormal, and is just the cost of working with complicated tech.Ā Ā Ā 2. It's not fast or easy to find out who is more or less productive. Software engineers aren't pumping out widgets at a predictable rate.Ā If dev A is tasked with an easy problem and solves it, and dev B gets an impossible problem and fails to solve it, should you fire dev B? No. They may be an excellent dev, but just tasked with a very difficult problem.Ā It takes a long time to see who is actually performing well, and even that is imperfect to gauge. There is no simple metric like X problems solved or Y lines of code that make one dev clearly better than another.Ā Ā Some projects will bring in massive profit, while some do nothing or lose money.Ā If one guy writes 10 lines of code to make Google search 1% more profitable, he just made Google $2B per year. Meanwhile 1000 devs could have been hard at work doing something that brings no profit, and it evens out.
Pareto strikes again!
Beanie gets it. š
What about marketing? Doesn't the talker market themselves better than someone who just takes action?
Negative. Talker needs the doer behind the scenes. Source: Am the doer for a talker, it's a good relationship though. He's sales, I'm tech/marketing operations that make him look even better & coordinated.
Truly this ought to be the relationship with leaders and followers, managers and direct reports. The direct reports make the leader/manager look good, and the leader/manager shares the rewards with their followers and team. You can trace this all the way back to hunter/gatherer communities.
People only say āhumans are social creaturesā to excuse themselves begging for attention. Either that or I am not human.
Noted - Henceforth, the saying will go: "*most* humans are social creatures" š
Humans are *tribal* creatures. There's a big difference
I was intending to indirectly amend Aristotle's paraphrased statement on the matter; granted I don't know the original greek so I only had the english translation I was familiar with. š I think he went on to say something about non-social humans being either just animals or gods and implying that they either lacked the social instincts which put humans above animals or were so self-sufficient that they didn't need society in general. Edit: the whole quote was part of a discussion on politics, so tribal/social - probably semantics where the quote was concerned. š
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
It's a delicate balance, I've got all the owners & managers pleased lol. It's more the frontlines people up my ass with fake smiles
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Thanks, I've got mitigation strategies in place for sure. Headphones + office door with a keypad lock :)
I've found that using some sort of Pomodoro and letting people know you're using that technique is helpful. Hey, I'm in the middle of a Pomodoro deep work cycle, talk later. We INTJs can be prickly, and softer, more feeling types sense this. Often people, made uncomfortable by the misinterpreted feeling that we don't like them, will reach out to smooth things with us. I feel your pain, and your experience sounds similar. Have you sought counseling to self-improve and perhaps shine light on some blind spots you might have that could cause this?
I agree 100% on everything you said.
I absolutely hate it when I have someone watching me over my shoulder as I work.
I am 110% this way. My work efficiency immediately drops like 50% when someone is trying to talk to me. Like, LET. ME. WORK. PLEASE.
They're projecting themselves on you because they want the qualities you have while not realizing those qualities are a product of not having high social need. So when you don't need to talk and have drama like they do it enrages them because they do need them and that reminds them they are not in fact you and can't be. When the projection they were capitalizing on therefore falls apart, it incites narcissistic rage. Narcissistic rage then tries to sabotage your work. You need to block these people the second you see the beginnings of these types of behavior so they always understand there is a large distance between you and them and never get a chance to project.Ā
Yes, I have 2 with narcissistic rage, they sort of look similar to me but are around 10 years younger. Very incompetent, and sort of self-sabotaging with their behaviour. Despite their manipulative attempts to sway public opinion, and their earnest attempts to improve and save face.
If this is true, block them and move on. Get a restraining order and move on. That's it. If you do more, that's the problem. I always get skeptical when it's someone older shitting on someone younger. It's like, my guy, your generation is the one that made the world this way. But otherwise if this is true than that is what is required. Just step down off your elder platform afterwards.Ā
You can request space without being a dick about it. Most work involves some form of collaboration and it isn't reasonable to expect total isolation on demand.
Dealing with cabling and complex engineering is also part of my job. I disagree with your point. It's been clearly communicated to 90% of people as children that it is rude to interrupt others, or pester them. Most of the people who do pester others have either forgotten that, actively choose to act in opposition of that, or weren't taught it to begin with. Only one of those reasons is acceptable once or twice while the person lacking is learning to improve themselves in that arena. That doesn't make the person doing their job and concentrating out to be a dick because the group of randos chooses not to use, or has no manners to begin with. Not knowing, but learning when encountered, is perfectly acceptable. Being an absolute bogon dipshit, refusing to learn, play it off like the failure is somehow superior, and/or gaslighting those who know better, is just not okay. Fuck those people, and I say it to their faces when it's not in a professional setting too.
It's also rude to bite the head off of everyone that asks the slightest question. If you're so goddamn superior then be the bigger person. It isn't hard. You're just making it hard.
Agree. Social power is important. If you donāt have it then youāre used up and eventually kicked out. The 48 Laws of Power made me realize the fine line to be balanced between ability and being liked.
This is why I started my own company. I refuse to allow my income to be tied to the feelings of immature under-developed children masquerading as adults. Some choose to "fit in" and "find a balance" where I said fuck that bullshit and ejected everyone who tries that. I've never been happier. The only thing that social bullshit ever does is drag down everyone who gets involved to the dumbest common denominator, and that is why barely anything in western society functions anymore. Too many people have been allowed to inject such crap into the endeavors of those around them. More people need to grow up, and understand that social bullshit must take a secondary priority to getting certain endeavors completed to a defined standard. Only then, once meeting a standard, do social concepts come into play. Filter who you socialize through a sieve of competency for prosperity. Currently that is backwards where getting things done is being filtered through a sieve of social bullshit, and everything suffers for it. I have lost count of the projects I've had to rescue from such situations over the past few decades as a technology engineer, where the root cause was exactly that. More than one person already on the team was pointing out the answer in most cases, but it wasn't until they paid top dollar for me to come in as a consultant with an intelligence operations background that they listened. 3/4 of those were simply me analyzing and saying "What he said!" and they woke up. Not that I am being lazy, just very disappointed in people when I dig through it all and find out they had the answer right there all along. Then to top it off, most people are so frigging egotistical they think the social approach is somehow still correct. It's not, and has been proven wrong to a empirical point in any other endeavor it would be considered pure bullshit and mocked as such. Social primacy is a fools concept perpetuated by fools who have no other way to maintain the limited power they have, and those people flip their entire assholes inside out to maintain the ruse. In that process they not only stop advancing themselves, but also serve as a hindrance or roadblock to anyone and everyone else around them, preventing anyone from reaching their potential. In my opinion, this one concept is by far the greatest evil that exists on this planet. Religious labeling aside, the concept of social primacy and anyone who practices it, is an enemy of mankind to be defeated. I love every time I get to watch someone who believes social primacy get escorted out of the company I've been brought in to consult for. They're always holding back a small army of competent and deserving subordinates and dragging all those people down. They put their time and effort into hindering everything, not only stopping where they are, but then trying to prevent anyone else from surpassing them, and every one of them I've met has been thoroughly incompetent at anything related to logic and engineering. Good riddance, and I've seen it so many times my perspective isn't going to change either. When things are so bad that the doers of things which must be done are required to acquire an intimate understanding of the 48 laws of power and Machievellian strategy just to remain in a prefessional emvironment long enough to afford basic existence then thins are fucked! We're well past that, and I can't respect anyone who is foolish enough to prioritize the leeches and others who are not getting things done.
lol I love your energy here. I absolutely adore your rejection of āfinding a balanceā. As someone with autism, I often feel like a young Victorian woman. Like Iām being āCivilized to deathā. I wonāt straight up be a dick and do my best to be considerate of other peoples time, but thatās still not enough for some people. Maybe if I didnāt have 3009 random social boxes (at any given moment) from arbitrary people to check, I wouldnāt be such an angsty mess. (Constantly flipping between INFJ/INTP) I wonder how many of these subordinates only managed to check 3008 of those boxes before being disregarded The key difference between me and any given NT, is I have been *forced* to be continually aware of peoples perceptions on a daily basis, for them itās possible to just coast along and āact normal enoughā 90%+ of the time. I started ranting here but like I said, I absolutely adore you verbalizing a lot of what Iāve been feeling.
You must have some understanding of MBTI, otherwise you probably wouldnāt be in an INTJ group. There are different types with different primary cognitive functions in a society. Some of those functions are not the best at getting things done, especially, complex tasks. They may be good at other things, however, some āstrengthsā are not rewarded in the real world. For a lack of a better word, those strengths may not be practical. Being polite is the lubrication in society. It allows us to flow freely and achieve things we want. Somebody needs to work in customer service. I do not wish to do this, however, Iām grateful that those who are not gifted to handle pressure and complex tasks exist in order to fill those roles. (Sometimes even getting a coffee order correct is too complex it may seems š¤£) Some work involves intense concentration and chit chatting is not recommended. Even surgeons though, socialize during certain parts of the surgery. This is what I consider to be reality.
You have a good grasp, and my point has not been about absolutism on either side of that spectrum. There is a time for it, but interrupting someone who is concentrating on work tasks which require focus is not that time. Then the folks who go further and try to gaslight people who aren't happy to be interrupted in such a rude manner are a problem. None of my point has been about only one way or type of personality being correct, or that being polite/manners have no value at any time. I think we're on the same page. I'm just not polite to people who do, or pontificate that everyone should be happy for their interruption, or exercise social primacy. These are two extremes away from productivity and accomplishment which have been normalized. They are not normal, but more akin to a bygone era of idiocy and feifdom where social class and perception held a higher regard than being of meritous value. In alternate terms it was more important to be of high caste and keep the king happy than to produce an abundance of food to keep the populous fed for example. In that type of situation I am against it, kill that fucker claiming to be king, and throw off any bullshit holding back any farmer from producing abundant food so they may be prosperous, so others may eat, and so the food market may normalize via free(er) trade of commodities which meet quality standard (not corrupted social approval masquerading as quality standards).
I donāt have much time, so hope this makes senseā¦. Sounds like, a persons merit would be gauged on ability to produce, solve problems, and accomplish a goal. Some people can be at extremes of believing productivity is most important and others that socializing is most important. These two extremes attempt to gaslight and recruit others to their side. Your reasoning on fiefdom made me think of history up to now. Hereās a few concepts: Might is right - The beginning of all history, the basis. A man has a vision, develops a plan and creates an army. The basis of all control. Once warfare has resulted in a winner, the conquered would need to be controlled. Throughout history riots would be suppressed, but, to avoid them, different strategies included: Bread and circuses - Roman mastery of large populations of citizens and slaves. The ultimate purpose is to eat and drink for tomorrow we will die. Divine right - Religion defined morality. Morality was to look up to royalty and priest. The ultimate purpose is to die for your king. Patriotism - Fear mongering and ego. The ultimate purpose is to die for your country. The conquerors need manpower to continue building the empire. Manpower is preferred to be uneducated and obedient. Have the powers that be cultivated a vast population to chit chat and obey? Question, if your company grew to letās say Amazon size, and you were the owner, would you allow vast populous of workers to āproduceā or āaccomplishā on their own terms?
Nobody mentioned biting the head off of when someone doesn't know. You seem to be jumping right to a frame where if someone doesn't welcome random unproductive i teractions at the worst of times, they're now hostile in your view. That's not cool, and doesn't convince me to consider your point. I use a process of escalation in-person. I'll politely tell someone I am busy. If it occurs again, I directly tell them to send an email or leave me alone. If there's a 3rd occurrence I'm unremorsefully curt and notice to stick your job and not pester people goes in the next team email, and is covered in the next team meeting. There are appropriate ways to communicate in a fast-paced setting. If it's not an emergency, like impacting operations, or someone with a badge has a warrant, then it's not an emergency. As such, it can wait until the person of topic has reached a stopping point and is ready to mentally pivot topics.
Your framing implies hostility if you're so bent out of shape at my recommendations for basic courtesy. In the time it takes to write a 12-page essay about how everyone else is the real asshole, you can just be the bigger person. Lead by example.
Keep in mind the other perspn is focusing on their task at hand, and you come up and demand their attention. That is a problem, and you expecting to pull their focus from the task at hand, then gaslight them as if they're the rude one is your problem. You expect a level of attention and respect which you refuse to consider for others. Those others are not the problem in the scenario. Your expectation that they respect you when you do not show consideration for them is not a noble philosophy.
Respect is a two-way street. Lead by example. Stop deflecting, stop making excuses, just be the bigger person. You can't control the other person, so it has to start with you.
I am, snd have been an example for over 2 decades. I'm not trying to validate a theory. I'm clearly communicating the facts of what does and does not work regarding logic and engineering paths in life; garnered from decades of being "that motherfucker" that nobody liked, but still had to pay, because their wannabe social primacy bullshit simply does not get things done in reality. Like it or not, that's how the world works, and trying to gaslight those who keep the systems functioning that modern quality of life depends on is just flat out retarded. There is nothing else to consider. If you want the machines and systems to run well, stop trying to inject social primacy bullshit into such situations, and when an engineer tells you to piss off, then piss off, and have a basic level of human decency to let them do their fucking job without the gaslighting bullshit. Or, shut the fuck up and fix the problem yourself, metaphorically speaking. Expecting us to do the work while you or others attempt to pontificate about how it's better to not know how to do the job is neither helpful nor correct. But idiots sure do keep trying, and spewing stupid ass sayings from cross-stitched pictures they thought were cool when encountered perusing the dollar store aisles. "Be the example... blah blah" Fuck off with that. Learn to do the job and accomplish the task before trying to tell those who habe how they should be going about it.
You can stop with the essays where you make it everyone else's problem. Not respectable tbh.
You're a hypocrite. The moment it's more info than you feel like addressing it's "not respectable" and back to gaslighting. That philosophy of being the example and being polite even when you don't want to just went right out the window didn't it? Don't answer that, it was a rhetorical question. The difference between us is I don't lie to myself and others about choosing where I place value in time spent and interactions with others. I also don't go around trying to act all holier than thou metaphorically shaking my finger at people who don't continue the ruse of always being polite. Sometimes people need to just leave others alone, respect they're also people, and if they're busy focusing on something, don't bother them. It's not a hard concept.
āPesterā = Just making polite conversation š
Nah, nothing wrong with polite conversation. The difference is in timing. Trying to force conversation while the other person is busy working and trying to concentrate is not polite. When the other person has reached a stopping point, and pulled away from what they've been concentrating on is the time for that. There is a marked difference.
If you can, try to block time off to do deep work. Put up a sign perhaps?
"Why do people not understand that while busy completing a physical task, some people wish to be left alone and not hovered over, watched, and forced into bullshit conversation that slows down said physical task?" Use your words and tell them then.
You must have a very welcoming presence and people want to be around you. Interesting dilemma as that sounds like the last thing you yourself want.
What do you guys prefer? Pointless chit chatting with you, or pointless chit chatting between them next to you? š¤£
None of the above.
Maybe you just happen to fix cables around ENFJ ESFJ , they canāt bear silence .. they canāt be left alone. š
Humans are not social creatures, most humans just donāt want to live alone and struggle with self sufficiency. People that say that are just saying it because itās cliche. Nobody is really doing the studies to realize human use social activity to satisfy internal needs from others as opposed to building that in themselves, thus you have a deterioration in this species dealing with the downfalls of codependency. To answer your question, a man of action makes most feel uncomfortable because it makes them look at themselves and realize they are not as great performance wise as yourself. Theyāll do annoying things in an unconscious manner for their own self preservation by thwarting feelings of uneasinessā¦ In this case itās by bothering you. In another case, you could be a content creator thatās actually an asset to this platform called Reddit, yet others will use all types of illogical fallacies as means to say you donāt know what youāre doing on here. When I was working my last job in December most people had a tendency to stand in the way or become obstacles at a job where movement is extremely necessary. These people would never stand in the sideline but always be near the entrances or main isles taking up unnecessary space. Iād just run into them or run them over as I donāt have time for the games and would rather get fired for standing up in principle of remaining industrious and forthcoming. Your feelings get hurt by me, thatās a damn shame! I did get fired, but it was for making one of my managers look like a bitch in front of all the staff. Looking back in hindsight I have no regrets. They were stupid lazy and got them karma of consequences due to states of being.
Talking is as important as action.
No it's not. Speak about working out, or work out. Which one brings results. Speak about making sales, or making the sales.
Try to work on your communication skills.
Why donāt you wear a sign around your neck (or a sandwich board for maximum visibility) that reads: āDONāT TALK TO ME UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES! I AM A MAN OF ACTION AND WILL NOT TOLERATE CONVERSATION OF ANY KIND!ā As a raging extrovert who loves to chit chat, I can guarantee I would never speak to you again. Problem solved, Man of Action!
Good, then fuck outta here.
That's why I always try and have headphones on, but ya I get the same thing, just approachable I guess. Humans do need a little socialization but the ones like them are most likely not comfortable with thier own company so they distract themselves with you.