It's taken me awhile to learn this but, generally speaking there are 2 types of people. Those who prefer results and those who prefer control.
Results People
These people want to measure everything, they want to make adjustments that are measurable and then readjust. With these people, change is inevitable and constant. There is no question that they move the ball forward because their outlook is that failure is just part of the learning curve and the more they learn, the more they succeed. In a team setting this type of participant is willing to try new things and gather information that can be used in the future to better then team or organization. The decisions are calculated so that success is achieved or a valuable lesson is learned at minimal cost. These are the people you want in leadership if you want growth.
Control People
The second type of person prefers control. Results are not even a consideration. Instead, the end goal is a completely controllable situation where there are no surprises and no risks. Any potential surprise, risk or uncertainty is neutralized. In a team setting, this type of participant seeks to keep the status quo and to use any means necessary to eliminate other players who may upset the status quo. They do this because any positive or negative progress will expose their lack of progress and challenge their authority and thus disrupt their control over the situation. These are the people you want in leadership if you want a standstill, or to hold the line. You do not want them in growth situations because they will purposely foil it and chase out the results people.
1.08.2018
12.10.2016
Why Avoiding Micromanagers is Best for Society
Just a heads up but I'm going to use the term difficult people to describe micromanagers, sociopaths, narcissists, psychopaths. It's just faster. :)
Studies show that difficult people contribute to lower productivity. Therefore, if workers quit their jobs and found new jobs with better people the world would be more productive with the same amount of resources. So, at a very high level, the proper course of action when you encounter a difficult person -- is to leave.
That's right, just leave. Quit your job, move away from difficult friends or family, break up. Do it gracefully and politely, but do it.
You see, difficult people are unlikely change. Spending resources trying to change them is a fruitless endeavor. Seeking strategies for dealing with difficult people is one step better, however, the time and resources spent learning these strategies could be spent on more productive activities.
Think of the countless hours people spend reading and writing articles titled "5 Ways to Manage a Micromanager" and "How to Get Along With Your Sociopath Boss." What if that time was spent trying to cure cancer or invent spaceships or volunteering with disabled kids? We waste millions of hours every year just trying to learn about getting along with difficult people. Does it help?
Think of difficult people like lids on your productivity. Remove that lid. The results would be massive. If the entire US workforce increased their productivity by 1% it would be like adding 1.5 million workers to the economy but with no additional cost. In my experience I am about 100% more productive without a difficult person in the way. That would be like adding 150 million workers to the economy at no additional cost.
So leave. Leave the difficult person. Yes they will call you immature and a quitter and a baby whatever else but the truth is they are stifling you, wasting your time, and imposing a time tax on everyone. Leaving is okay. It's hard but it is valuable, very valuable. So leave.
Studies show that difficult people contribute to lower productivity. Therefore, if workers quit their jobs and found new jobs with better people the world would be more productive with the same amount of resources. So, at a very high level, the proper course of action when you encounter a difficult person -- is to leave.
That's right, just leave. Quit your job, move away from difficult friends or family, break up. Do it gracefully and politely, but do it.
You see, difficult people are unlikely change. Spending resources trying to change them is a fruitless endeavor. Seeking strategies for dealing with difficult people is one step better, however, the time and resources spent learning these strategies could be spent on more productive activities.
Think of the countless hours people spend reading and writing articles titled "5 Ways to Manage a Micromanager" and "How to Get Along With Your Sociopath Boss." What if that time was spent trying to cure cancer or invent spaceships or volunteering with disabled kids? We waste millions of hours every year just trying to learn about getting along with difficult people. Does it help?
Think of difficult people like lids on your productivity. Remove that lid. The results would be massive. If the entire US workforce increased their productivity by 1% it would be like adding 1.5 million workers to the economy but with no additional cost. In my experience I am about 100% more productive without a difficult person in the way. That would be like adding 150 million workers to the economy at no additional cost.
So leave. Leave the difficult person. Yes they will call you immature and a quitter and a baby whatever else but the truth is they are stifling you, wasting your time, and imposing a time tax on everyone. Leaving is okay. It's hard but it is valuable, very valuable. So leave.
10.12.2016
Economic Change is Happening Yesterday
Data lag is a big problem.
Right now we have the following occurring:
1) Unemployment ticked up
2) Corporate profits continue to decline
3) Job postings are down
4) WIRP is down
5) The Gold Put/Call Ratio is down
6) The SPY Put/Call Ratio is up
7) Class 8 truck sales looks like 2009
And all of this is on a data lag because it takes a few weeks to gather the data. Then it takes a few weeks to write and publish the report.
That means that as of yesterday when I put that list together, we are even farther down this road than the data shows. Plus I noticed most of this stuff in July so we're talking a major data lag. By the time the data catches up it will be too late.
And a little FYI, the media sentiment lags the data lag by a few months so don't wait for them to report what's happening now. They'll be late by a few months and call it breaking news.
Right now we have the following occurring:
1) Unemployment ticked up
2) Corporate profits continue to decline
3) Job postings are down
4) WIRP is down
5) The Gold Put/Call Ratio is down
6) The SPY Put/Call Ratio is up
7) Class 8 truck sales looks like 2009
And all of this is on a data lag because it takes a few weeks to gather the data. Then it takes a few weeks to write and publish the report.
That means that as of yesterday when I put that list together, we are even farther down this road than the data shows. Plus I noticed most of this stuff in July so we're talking a major data lag. By the time the data catches up it will be too late.
And a little FYI, the media sentiment lags the data lag by a few months so don't wait for them to report what's happening now. They'll be late by a few months and call it breaking news.
Journalists Should Write and Not Speculate
Do you get car advice from your barber? Do you get spiritual advice from your banker? Do you get insurance advice from your grocer? No. Nobody does. But everybody gets financial advice from journalists.
Here's a little secret. Journalists almost never have enough depth of knowledge to be taken seriously. They report the news. They are incapable of interpreting it.
Case in point. The unemployment rate ticked up yesterday while companies simultaneously posted fewer jobs. I read a story where the writer actually argued that this is a good thing. But it's not. It never is. Ever.
You see. An expanding economy is a good thing and a shrinking economy is a good thing. However, for an economy to expand it needs employees to fill all the new jobs. Shrinking job openings and an increase in people hunting for jobs means the economy is shrinking, not expanding.
Now those data points (unemployment and job postings) are early indicators. So we should monitor them closely. We should not say the economy is shrinking. We should not say it is continuing to expand. We should say it looks like something might be happening. Let's verify.
When journalists are reckless we all lose. Journalists should report new from experts and stay out of speculation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)