7 ms·

You Don't Have to Be a Jerk to Succeed

43 points by goles 3y ago

darthrupert 3y ago
Succeeding as a nice person is much more probable. The general view is just skewed by the successful assholes, because they are the ones who we talk about. Then again, I don't define success as merely having a lot of money. Financial independence is one facet, but any money beyond that doesn't contribute to overall success.
dartos 3y ago
No, but it helps.
pdimitar 3y ago
Nobody said you HAVE to be. But it's fairly obvious to anyone with more than one full hour of life experience around people that aggressive pushy people go farther simply because most people instinctively make way.
- bakchodi 3y ago
  The article shows evidence for the opposite of this
  - derbOac 3y ago
    I'm not sure I like the way these types of articles frame things, because they tend to create strawmen arguments. I absolutely do not believe that "nice people finish last" as a rule, and I know people who have been very successful in part because they are good people. However, I have also absolutely seen many cases where people do get ahead because they are jerks, or corrupt. There are still third cases where I don't think the people are bad people, but I think the system rewards bad behavior, which they take advantage of without necessarily even being aware of the consequences. Or they benefit from a broken or random system, and then don't recognize how they got to where they did, or something. I guess as I've become older I've become more upset at systems that reward bad behavior than the persons doing it. It's not that I don't care about them, it's more so that I think a well-functioning system should have checks and balances and structures to prevent it, and in every case where a "jerk" got ahead, I've come to realize I was more upset with the people around them who condoned it, rewarded it, or took advantage of it. There's also cases like the third case, were I don't know anyone should be punished, and they're not meaning to do harm, but they do it anyway, and should be prevented from being in that situation. I think there's some corollary or something to "power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely" that's along the lines of "corruption seeks power". People who are corrupt, or who do corrupt things, don't do things that aren't in their self interest, or are self-sacrificing, almost by definition. They might fail, but they still move in the direction of power or money. So on average, even if there are good deeds that are rewarded, if the system isn't tight enough, corruption or unnecessary harm will slip in. It's like some gas or thermodynamic law or something: sure you can find enough of one moiety somewhere, but the flow goes one way and not the other.
yareal 3y ago
There is this idea I see from jerks all the time, that being a jerk is about "the survival of the fittest", that their jerkiness is a strength that helps them succeed. But humans didn't evolve to be the fittest organism through strength or individualism. We're in our position through social cohesion and cooperation. The most successful people I've seen got there through cooperation, coalition building, and community development. Some jerks also succeed, and are used as examples of why being a jerk is necessary or easier, but it's fallacious to think every local jerk is following the footsteps of bezos or musk. So the next time you find yourself thinking, "the best engineers are jerks, because it's a social Darwinian landscape", remember that the strategy that seems to be winning today is "strength through social cohesion".
- hasty_pudding 3y ago
  Cohesion is an old pre-industrial strategy in my opinion. With the advent of industrial scale tech and no limit to the amount of currency one can have..I think things are somewhat social darwinistic now.
  - yareal 3y ago
    I disagree. Or agree, perhaps. The Darwinism is there, but collective behavior and social bonds are still the winning strategy.
- figassis 3y ago
  Problem is we need that as a species, but success is individual, and the playbook is not the same.
  - yareal 3y ago
    It's really not. The successful individual is an illusion, literally no one succeeds alone. The best strategy for individuals to get ahead is still social cohesion.
    - figassis 3y ago
countWSS 3y ago
Taking the initiative and going against the hive-mind is often risky and jerks seems to be only type of people willing to risk it. Nice guys just meekly compromise with status quo and follow the paradigms.
- JohnFen 3y ago
  I disagree with this. I think this is confusing being a jerk vs being decent with being assertive vs being passive.
- psunavy03 3y ago
  Such a strange false dichotomy. There is the ability to use this thing called "tact."
dchuk 3y ago
You do generally need to be far more direct/candid than most people are comfortable with, and that oftentimes makes you seem like a jerk. Takes a lot of finesse to do it right.
- akkad33 3y ago
  In my job I notice the opposite: people who are successful dont hold back but are diplomatic and are never seen as jerks
  - justanotherjoe 3y ago
    blatantly diplomatic
- demondemidi 3y ago
  Assertive is not aggressive. But for some reason this statement angers a good many people, because I’ve made this statement multiple times on here in the last decade and seen that response repeatedly.
  - neom 3y ago
    For me, I'm not a particularly assertive person, so when I have to be or decide to be, it often becomes aggressive for some reason, it's like somehow I don't know how to be assertive without being aggressive...I'm not sure why... I'd like to learn how to learn this, tbh.
    - demondemidi 3y ago
      I think I know what you mean. For me personally: aggressive only happens when I start to go limbic; assertive is when I am calm. I can prevent the transition when I can feel myself getting defensive or scared, which turns to anger, and then aggression. But that takes patience and practice! Still working at it.
      - 3y ago
2devnull 3y ago
The world has givers and takers. Givers know they are givers.
- ajhurliman 3y ago
  Is this a welfare/ tax payer thing? Not sure what you’re going for.
  - derwiki 3y ago
    I assumed they meant in the “Ishmael” sense
neom 3y ago
I think about this a lot. So many people I know who have net worths over $100MM are kinda jerks, or at least have been/appear to be. However, knowing them really well, knowing how they are with their family, friends, how they treat support staff etc... I actually know they're not jerks, so what is it? imo: They're just really good at driving outcomes for themselves. That can be seen a selfish and often manifests as "that person is a jerk" - but if you follow along next to or behind them, you're in for a great ride with more often than not, good people.
- watwut 3y ago
  Basically, they are jerks but not to everyone and you can profit off it if you keep yourself in group of people they are not jerks to.
- spacecadet 3y ago
  Ive had this same thought. However, some (not sure me) would argue that this is still unethical as you should put other less fortunate strangers over ones self, or your immediate group. I think if you live in America, this is lost on many of us and many of us have drifted into hyper-selfish, "i got mine fuck you" worldviews, and our communities have suffered for it.
  - neom 3y ago
    My friend, you don't need to think about that second point at all, that is absolutely true, unfortunately. In America, it is lost on many of us and many of us have drifted into hyper-selfish, "i got mine fuck you" worldviews, and our communities are suffering for it.
pubby 3y ago
Even if you're nice, once you get rich enough you're going to hire jerks to do your dirty work for you. Everyone with money needs lawyers.
kmoser 3y ago
Ironic that the WSJ is saying that greed actually isn't good, while 37 years ago, Wall Street's (the movie) Gordon Gekko was saying the opposite.
- nothercastle 3y ago
  It was a movie but people took it to be gospel
bentt 3y ago
I've wondered this early in my adult life because I was unfortunate enough to come into contact with some predatory personalities early in my business career. It bothered me a lot because I was raised to be "good" by good people. However over the years, I did find good people who made it. In my experience, you can be a good decent person and become wealthy and successful, but even more importantly, when you adopt this style, you make friends along the way. The people that I know that have been predatory yet successful have found themselves alone at the top. As you get older, you realize that all the money in the world isn't worth sacrificing good relationships with good people. In many ways, one is heaven and the other hell.
eviks 3y ago
> The message sent by popular culture is clear: If you want to get ahead, you’d better be a jerk. Next article: You Don't Have to Take Popular Culture Messages Seriously to Succeed

43 points by goles 3y ago

Succeeding as a nice person is much more probable. The general view is just skewed by the successful assholes, because they are the ones who we talk about. Then again, I don't define success as merely having a lot of money. Financial independence is one facet, but any money beyond that doesn't contribute to overall success.

dartos 3y ago

No, but it helps.

pdimitar 3y ago

Nobody said you HAVE to be. But it's fairly obvious to anyone with more than one full hour of life experience around people that aggressive pushy people go farther simply because most people instinctively make way.

bakchodi 3y ago
The article shows evidence for the opposite of this
- derbOac 3y ago
  I'm not sure I like the way these types of articles frame things, because they tend to create strawmen arguments. I absolutely do not believe that "nice people finish last" as a rule, and I know people who have been very successful in part because they are good people. However, I have also absolutely seen many cases where people do get ahead because they are jerks, or corrupt. There are still third cases where I don't think the people are bad people, but I think the system rewards bad behavior, which they take advantage of without necessarily even being aware of the consequences. Or they benefit from a broken or random system, and then don't recognize how they got to where they did, or something. I guess as I've become older I've become more upset at systems that reward bad behavior than the persons doing it. It's not that I don't care about them, it's more so that I think a well-functioning system should have checks and balances and structures to prevent it, and in every case where a "jerk" got ahead, I've come to realize I was more upset with the people around them who condoned it, rewarded it, or took advantage of it. There's also cases like the third case, were I don't know anyone should be punished, and they're not meaning to do harm, but they do it anyway, and should be prevented from being in that situation. I think there's some corollary or something to "power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely" that's along the lines of "corruption seeks power". People who are corrupt, or who do corrupt things, don't do things that aren't in their self interest, or are self-sacrificing, almost by definition. They might fail, but they still move in the direction of power or money. So on average, even if there are good deeds that are rewarded, if the system isn't tight enough, corruption or unnecessary harm will slip in. It's like some gas or thermodynamic law or something: sure you can find enough of one moiety somewhere, but the flow goes one way and not the other.

yareal 3y ago

There is this idea I see from jerks all the time, that being a jerk is about "the survival of the fittest", that their jerkiness is a strength that helps them succeed. But humans didn't evolve to be the fittest organism through strength or individualism. We're in our position through social cohesion and cooperation. The most successful people I've seen got there through cooperation, coalition building, and community development. Some jerks also succeed, and are used as examples of why being a jerk is necessary or easier, but it's fallacious to think every local jerk is following the footsteps of bezos or musk. So the next time you find yourself thinking, "the best engineers are jerks, because it's a social Darwinian landscape", remember that the strategy that seems to be winning today is "strength through social cohesion".

hasty_pudding 3y ago
Cohesion is an old pre-industrial strategy in my opinion. With the advent of industrial scale tech and no limit to the amount of currency one can have..I think things are somewhat social darwinistic now.
- yareal 3y ago
  I disagree. Or agree, perhaps. The Darwinism is there, but collective behavior and social bonds are still the winning strategy.
figassis 3y ago
Problem is we need that as a species, but success is individual, and the playbook is not the same.
- yareal 3y ago
  It's really not. The successful individual is an illusion, literally no one succeeds alone. The best strategy for individuals to get ahead is still social cohesion.
  - figassis 3y ago

countWSS 3y ago

Taking the initiative and going against the hive-mind is often risky and jerks seems to be only type of people willing to risk it. Nice guys just meekly compromise with status quo and follow the paradigms.

JohnFen 3y ago
I disagree with this. I think this is confusing being a jerk vs being decent with being assertive vs being passive.
psunavy03 3y ago
Such a strange false dichotomy. There is the ability to use this thing called "tact."

dchuk 3y ago

You do generally need to be far more direct/candid than most people are comfortable with, and that oftentimes makes you seem like a jerk. Takes a lot of finesse to do it right.

akkad33 3y ago
In my job I notice the opposite: people who are successful dont hold back but are diplomatic and are never seen as jerks
- justanotherjoe 3y ago
  blatantly diplomatic
demondemidi 3y ago
Assertive is not aggressive. But for some reason this statement angers a good many people, because I’ve made this statement multiple times on here in the last decade and seen that response repeatedly.
- neom 3y ago
  For me, I'm not a particularly assertive person, so when I have to be or decide to be, it often becomes aggressive for some reason, it's like somehow I don't know how to be assertive without being aggressive...I'm not sure why... I'd like to learn how to learn this, tbh.
  - demondemidi 3y ago
    I think I know what you mean. For me personally: aggressive only happens when I start to go limbic; assertive is when I am calm. I can prevent the transition when I can feel myself getting defensive or scared, which turns to anger, and then aggression. But that takes patience and practice! Still working at it.
    - 3y ago

2devnull 3y ago

The world has givers and takers. Givers know they are givers.

ajhurliman 3y ago
Is this a welfare/ tax payer thing? Not sure what you’re going for.
- derwiki 3y ago
  I assumed they meant in the “Ishmael” sense

neom 3y ago

I think about this a lot. So many people I know who have net worths over $100MM are kinda jerks, or at least have been/appear to be. However, knowing them really well, knowing how they are with their family, friends, how they treat support staff etc... I actually know they're not jerks, so what is it? imo: They're just really good at driving outcomes for themselves. That can be seen a selfish and often manifests as "that person is a jerk" - but if you follow along next to or behind them, you're in for a great ride with more often than not, good people.

watwut 3y ago
Basically, they are jerks but not to everyone and you can profit off it if you keep yourself in group of people they are not jerks to.
spacecadet 3y ago
Ive had this same thought. However, some (not sure me) would argue that this is still unethical as you should put other less fortunate strangers over ones self, or your immediate group. I think if you live in America, this is lost on many of us and many of us have drifted into hyper-selfish, "i got mine fuck you" worldviews, and our communities have suffered for it.
- neom 3y ago
  My friend, you don't need to think about that second point at all, that is absolutely true, unfortunately. In America, it is lost on many of us and many of us have drifted into hyper-selfish, "i got mine fuck you" worldviews, and our communities are suffering for it.

pubby 3y ago

Even if you're nice, once you get rich enough you're going to hire jerks to do your dirty work for you. Everyone with money needs lawyers.

kmoser 3y ago

Ironic that the WSJ is saying that greed actually isn't good, while 37 years ago, Wall Street's (the movie) Gordon Gekko was saying the opposite.

nothercastle 3y ago
It was a movie but people took it to be gospel

bentt 3y ago

I've wondered this early in my adult life because I was unfortunate enough to come into contact with some predatory personalities early in my business career. It bothered me a lot because I was raised to be "good" by good people. However over the years, I did find good people who made it. In my experience, you can be a good decent person and become wealthy and successful, but even more importantly, when you adopt this style, you make friends along the way. The people that I know that have been predatory yet successful have found themselves alone at the top. As you get older, you realize that all the money in the world isn't worth sacrificing good relationships with good people. In many ways, one is heaven and the other hell.

eviks 3y ago

> The message sent by popular culture is clear: If you want to get ahead, you’d better be a jerk. Next article: You Don't Have to Take Popular Culture Messages Seriously to Succeed