4 ms·

Categorizing oneself into one of a number of discrete psychological categories has merits as a start. For example, one might discover unknown proclivities in be

by scrubs 3y ago

Categorizing oneself into one of a number of discrete psychological categories has merits as a start. For example, one might discover unknown proclivities in behavior. But ultimately it's counter-productive. Ultimately behavior arises in context of disagreement whenever interesting behavior is important. And therefore behavior is a matter of dynamics not the statics of a single identified category. It's best to think of interesting behavior pair-wise say in a team, family, and so on. Here [1] is far more useful, and far more practical. The salient analysis arises like this, say in the context, of a team: * teams fail because individuals fail * individuals fail because they refuse to change * individuals refuse to change because the change the environment desires conflicts with the self-esteem of the stubborn individual. To change the stubborn individual would have to admit that their sense of things is wrong. * Until the individual changes, the individual will often exhibit defensive behavior to delay or defray change e.g. play off the problem, criticize others, play the victim. All these behaviors have the same goal: as long as one is putting the focus elsewhere, it's not on me, and I don't have to change because I'm not wrong. Example: the boss wants a team member to have more control, competence in sorting out a task, which he/she doesn't see. This is a conflict over control. There are any number of realities underlying this, * the boss feels overworked and doesn't want more work. he/she feeds undervalued, under payed, disrespected. So the boss pushes harder. * the worker feels the work is unimportant, feels micro managed, or feels they are made to suck up crappy work that previous workers never did right. The worker refuses to change. Until and unless the feelings and contextualization of this conflict is engaged, it will not be resolved. As Human Element correctly notes, good teams have a valuable asset of adaptability. There need not for example be an alpha leader, common vision etc (more static idealogical constructs) to getting things done, if these other deeper ideas are pursued. [1] https://www.amazon.com/dp/1555426123/ref=sr_aod_dp_ttl https://www.amazon.com/dp/1555426123/ref=sr_aod_dp_ttl

scrubs 3y ago
I failed to plug @chrisweekly parent comment. He's right: ultimately what matters is change/adaptability, and refusing to fall for static, discrete, unchanging boundaries of some psychological categorization. Here's the Human Element's book's opening quote from Jung, "The greatest and most important problems of life are all in a certain sense insoluble…. They can never be solved, but only outgrown…. This ‘outgrowing’, as I formerly called it, on further experience was seen to consist in a new level of consciousness. Some higher or wider interest arose on the person’s horizon, and through this widening of view, the insoluble problem lost its urgency. It was not solved logically in its own terms, but faded out when confronted with a new and stronger life-tendency.” The key work in Human Element is, in a practical way as possible, getting that deeper realization in which problems that seemed impossible become doable. It rings true to me; there is no magic solution. There is no easy HBR article about the alpha guy with the right vision to make teamwork run well. It depends on the ability of individuals in a team to learn about themselves and co-workers and evolve.

by scrubs 3y ago

scrubs 3y ago

I failed to plug @chrisweekly parent comment. He's right: ultimately what matters is change/adaptability, and refusing to fall for static, discrete, unchanging boundaries of some psychological categorization. Here's the Human Element's book's opening quote from Jung, "The greatest and most important problems of life are all in a certain sense insoluble…. They can never be solved, but only outgrown…. This ‘outgrowing’, as I formerly called it, on further experience was seen to consist in a new level of consciousness. Some higher or wider interest arose on the person’s horizon, and through this widening of view, the insoluble problem lost its urgency. It was not solved logically in its own terms, but faded out when confronted with a new and stronger life-tendency.” The key work in Human Element is, in a practical way as possible, getting that deeper realization in which problems that seemed impossible become doable. It rings true to me; there is no magic solution. There is no easy HBR article about the alpha guy with the right vision to make teamwork run well. It depends on the ability of individuals in a team to learn about themselves and co-workers and evolve.