4 ms·

My frustrations with this behavior are less about not getting it, or not being able to participate, and more about finding the exercise distasteful, dishonest a

by courtf 6y ago

My frustrations with this behavior are less about not getting it, or not being able to participate, and more about finding the exercise distasteful, dishonest and ultimately destructive. The absolute worst aspect of this game is how clumsy and obvious these machinations can be. Employee trust in the entire organization is damaged when dimwitted ass-kissers with the subtlety of a brick are rewarded in lieu of any actual contributions and at the expense of decent people. Too often these environments are constructed in such a way that good people cannot succeed without serious comprises to their integrity. They get weeded out by their own moral disgust. The hierarchy then functions as a reverse sieve, allowing only the slime and detritus to remain. It's also really less about being socially outgoing and schmoozing, and more about vociferously agreeing with everything that comes down from on high, and sniping at others for not immediately falling in line. I'm an introvert who generally enjoys going out for drinks, telling absurd jokes and making a fool of myself in public for cheap laughs, but unless I start puckering up and tonguing more asses, it won't help me navigate the corporate world. For someone like me, rather than forcing myself to be more extroverted, I actually need to do a better job at keeping my jokes to myself and limiting my self expression, so as to not threaten the fragile egos of those cursed with small amounts of power. I think your comment seriously underestimates the levels of animosity and petty one-upmanship that permeate the corporate ladder.

dogman144 6y ago
Haha I guess you don't fall into the bucket of knowing how the game works can bring some measure of inner peace. A cool related read, https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/11/11/the-gervais-principle-ii-posturetalk-powertalk-babytalk-and-gametalk/ https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/11/11/the-gervais-principle-..., sounds like you're referring to "posture talk" in that context. That whole series might be interesting to you as well, especially in relation to organizational trust expectations. I think for me, if I really did care about expectations of org trust and morality as must-haves vs. nice to haves, beyond must-have legality standards, the civil service calls, right? I wish the corporate beast didn't call for such pragmatism, and I'd be a lot less at peace if I didn't see really good operators make it to the top using their own tolerable measure of this behavior (as in personally, ethically, and competently good). Anyway, I feel you! I guess I can only cycle back to my last point: > it's an interesting quirk because this is important stuff to pick up on for good, talented, non-A-Hole peopl who do want to find a way to do good in existing corporate structure. But it's naturally sort of a toxic underbelly of work culture, and many are opposed to learning it.
- courtf 6y ago
  > I'd be a lot less at peace if I didn't see really good operators make it to the top using their own tolerable measure of this behavior Fair points here, and I do think the amount of disgust generated by this environment varies considerably by individual. One thing that contributes to that feeling of disgust for me is that being authentic hasn't always come easily. If you are someone who has had to hide aspects of yourself for your own safety, or perhaps worked to overcome some mental illness, it can be a hard pill to swallow to go back in the metaphorical closest just to earn brownie points, but I digress :). I've read your link before as well, and unfortunately I must count myself among the losers, at least so far. I've been clueless and even attempted some minor stabs at sociopathy (as defined at the link), but without much success.
  - dogman144 6y ago
    That's a great point. There is a fair bit of encouragement leading towards behaving as one's authentic self.... but suddenly in the private sector arena, which really matters for life quality, it suddenly is the wrong advice. I've had some trouble navigating that turn as well, fwiw.
- klenwell 6y ago
  That Gervais Principle series, and the Company Hierarchy chart that opens it, was one of the first things that came to mind when I read this article. My takeaway from the Gervais Principle: the only way to win, if you're not a sociopath, is to be a loser. I've made my peace with that fact. Or, well, a little more positively: just try to avoid the whole corporate rat race all together. But it often has a way of finding you as this great HN comment, which was actually the first thing that came to mind, explains: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18003253 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18003253
  - dogman144 6y ago
    Great read, I've been digging into it the last two hours. It was analysis I figured was out there but had trouble finding. Perhaps I'm a Jim-like reluctant sociopath s/
alexryan 6y ago
Perception is a fascinating thing. I like Jordan Peterson's observation that "what we aim at determines what we see." So a person's perception of reality can be completely different depending on what they are aiming at. One might assume that all beings are wired with the aim of individual success, but there also seems to be a considerable variance in the amount of "affective empathy" in humans. Those who tend more towards "low affective empathy" might perceive that with "high affective empathy" "don't get it", when, in reality our aim for individual success conflicts with another aim: "care and concern" for the wellbeing of others. We are less willing to play the kinds of ruthless games they are willing to play because we are constrained by the amount of pain we will experience if we do so. I strongly suspect that ability to experience affective empathy is a competitive disadvantage in the zero sum game.

by courtf 6y ago

dogman144 6y ago

Haha I guess you don't fall into the bucket of knowing how the game works can bring some measure of inner peace. A cool related read, https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/11/11/the-gervais-principle-ii-posturetalk-powertalk-babytalk-and-gametalk/ https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/11/11/the-gervais-principle-..., sounds like you're referring to "posture talk" in that context. That whole series might be interesting to you as well, especially in relation to organizational trust expectations. I think for me, if I really did care about expectations of org trust and morality as must-haves vs. nice to haves, beyond must-have legality standards, the civil service calls, right? I wish the corporate beast didn't call for such pragmatism, and I'd be a lot less at peace if I didn't see really good operators make it to the top using their own tolerable measure of this behavior (as in personally, ethically, and competently good). Anyway, I feel you! I guess I can only cycle back to my last point: > it's an interesting quirk because this is important stuff to pick up on for good, talented, non-A-Hole peopl who do want to find a way to do good in existing corporate structure. But it's naturally sort of a toxic underbelly of work culture, and many are opposed to learning it.

courtf 6y ago
> I'd be a lot less at peace if I didn't see really good operators make it to the top using their own tolerable measure of this behavior Fair points here, and I do think the amount of disgust generated by this environment varies considerably by individual. One thing that contributes to that feeling of disgust for me is that being authentic hasn't always come easily. If you are someone who has had to hide aspects of yourself for your own safety, or perhaps worked to overcome some mental illness, it can be a hard pill to swallow to go back in the metaphorical closest just to earn brownie points, but I digress :). I've read your link before as well, and unfortunately I must count myself among the losers, at least so far. I've been clueless and even attempted some minor stabs at sociopathy (as defined at the link), but without much success.
- dogman144 6y ago
  That's a great point. There is a fair bit of encouragement leading towards behaving as one's authentic self.... but suddenly in the private sector arena, which really matters for life quality, it suddenly is the wrong advice. I've had some trouble navigating that turn as well, fwiw.
klenwell 6y ago
That Gervais Principle series, and the Company Hierarchy chart that opens it, was one of the first things that came to mind when I read this article. My takeaway from the Gervais Principle: the only way to win, if you're not a sociopath, is to be a loser. I've made my peace with that fact. Or, well, a little more positively: just try to avoid the whole corporate rat race all together. But it often has a way of finding you as this great HN comment, which was actually the first thing that came to mind, explains: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18003253 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18003253
- dogman144 6y ago
  Great read, I've been digging into it the last two hours. It was analysis I figured was out there but had trouble finding. Perhaps I'm a Jim-like reluctant sociopath s/

alexryan 6y ago

Perception is a fascinating thing. I like Jordan Peterson's observation that "what we aim at determines what we see." So a person's perception of reality can be completely different depending on what they are aiming at. One might assume that all beings are wired with the aim of individual success, but there also seems to be a considerable variance in the amount of "affective empathy" in humans. Those who tend more towards "low affective empathy" might perceive that with "high affective empathy" "don't get it", when, in reality our aim for individual success conflicts with another aim: "care and concern" for the wellbeing of others. We are less willing to play the kinds of ruthless games they are willing to play because we are constrained by the amount of pain we will experience if we do so. I strongly suspect that ability to experience affective empathy is a competitive disadvantage in the zero sum game.