Yes, working in Europe in any capacity sounds more interesting that doing the same thing here, I agree. It's the same with South America. When people have a more relaxed lifestyle and are less materialistic...it's more relaxing and enjoyable. International banking in my case wasn't sexy but it was interesting. It wasn't sexy because I wasn't traveling (I did that on my own). It just involved different companies/people/products and that was interesting. There is always a trade-0ff between money/stress and time. It's frequently better to get an interesting enough but less stress kind of a job, make a decent amount of money and then do the really interesting stuff on your own dime/time. When you try to get a job where that is involved as well, the stress level generally goes up. It's the same with trying to make your hobbies a job. When I was in Hawaii scuba diving I got to know a guy who was living in Hawaii trying to make a living as a scuba instructor. He was broke all the time and ultimately moved back to Los Angeles to work in commercial diving where he could make enough money to go to Hawaii on his vacations where he could actually enjoy himself.
If you believe so. Of course. It has nothing to do with your stereotypes of management; it is all someone else's problem, or more likely, psychological problem on my part. I must be one of those management types, or perhaps one of those clueless ivory tower out of touch types - certainly not a regular guy with common sense. You could be writing this stuff for Trump rather than wasting it here.
Corollary to the Peter Principle: Once you have promoted all of your competents to their highest level of incompetence you must change your management philosophy from top down to bottom up, because the non corrupt people at the bottom are the only competent ones in your entire organisation.
My post was openly sympathetic to the good executives put into bad situations, paid no attention to the relative value of any blue vs the white collar work mentioned (except to imply that individual executive performance was significant, without mentioning such individual significance for line work), and referred to the executives being hard working - all of them mentioned or implied, good and bad. Your trope matched that in no way. My post was also written from an elitist point of view - favorably mentioning the benefits of scientific research and theory, of liberal academic contributions to getting real work done, of enlightened executive management incorporating such book knowledge in real time and daily practice; meanwhile disparaging the current trend of discarding those hard won benefits in following the mandates of a growing class of ignorant and absentee superrich owners, owners whose only expertise is in accumulating capital formerly taxed away from them under better government, owners whose newly amplified near-medieval aristocratic approach to the economic organization of a modern industrial economy has been in my opinion a malign influence on my family, neighborhood, town, State, and country. And illustrating both with an example from an actual job at an actual corporation observed in real time. You described that elitism, that disparagement of the ignorant and reactionary and science denying and Republican and so forth, as "populist". Seriously. You doubled down on that. Also, it has nothing to do with your stereotypes of management criticism, and it can't be bothsided by that approach. So if you want to bothside the thing - your only visible agenda in responding - you have to find a side that is mine, and one that is not. In an earlier post I had praised you as not "going with your gut" a la W and Reagan and Trump et al, but reasoning instead - even against your instincts. Nowhere have I disparaged the common sense of regular guys who know what they are doing, and never have I identified that regular common sense as "going with your gut" when lacking knowledge - just the opposite, always. The good managers and relevant ivory tower types were both favorably mentioned, and not identified as a source of problems. If you had been identified in that post as one of them, as in the other post, you would have been included in that favorable mention. My suggestion as the source of the recent bad trends I explicitly posted, right in front of you on the screen, and it was not executive or ivory tower - it was ignorant and absentee superrich owners, a layer of management on top of the executive, fueled by the Reaganomic tax cuts, rolling back important New Deal benefits that haven't had adequate attention imho. That we had forgotten the importance of. I did not include you among them, not even by hint or implication. It is almost a direct opposite of Trump's speaking on this matter. It pivots on praise of the practical benefits of booklearning and scientific research for executive management of industrial production, for chrissake. As far as these particular weird misreadings, specifically, it's some kind of problem on your end, entirely. I don't know what - you do tend to bothside political matters, regardless of the distribution of physical or historical fact, so some kind of vulnerability to rightwing propaganda is more than implied. Other than that - does it matter? Whatever it is, it can be fixed by more careful reading, less reflexive and flagrantly mistaken pigeonholing.
Just came across this: https://melmagazine.com/en-us/story/deprogramming-the-cult-of-the-workplace-personality-test DEPROGRAMMING THE CULT OF THE WORKPLACE PERSONALITY TEST Introverted, extroverted, thinking or feeling? There’s really only one trait the personality-test industry is ever assigning to you: Gullible AF. "Quick personality quiz just for fun: Which character from nightmare dystopian fiction are you? Mostly ‘A’s: You’re Winston Smith from George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty-Four — emotionally led, impulsive, prone to harboring romantic notions of freedom. Mostly ‘B’s: You’re Josef K. from Franz Kafka’s The Trial — methodical, vain, terminally untrustworthy. Mostly ‘C’s: You’re Offred from Margaret Atwood’s The Handmaid’s Tale — relying on intuition, you’re an ideal people-person (or, at least, you’re fertile). Mostly ‘D’s: You’re Vincent from the 1997 movie Gattaca — you’re genetically deficient and predestined to fail in all that you do. Wait, did we forget to actually ask you any questions? That doesn’t matter. Your responses wouldn’t have affected the accuracy of your results, and the $4 billion personality-assessment industry has already decided the outcome for you in any case: As far as it’s concerned, you’re all of the above, your path in life has been determined and there’s not a damn thing you can do to change that."
i really should not respond this thread is about introverts and extroverts as a nature of personal identity i am waiting and hoping wegs will make a thread about her job hunting and resume and suchlike. that would be quite interesting. we could critique the interviewers.
...(tongue in cheek sarcasm) im such a type A personality, i am only comfortable when i am leading and inspiring others. im a natural leader people look to me for advice. i am always the one initiating things and don't like losing when it comes to team work i always find myself being assertive and taking the lead even if there is opposition, i take it in my stride and hold on to what i think is best. and when i feel like people are not paying attention to me enough... i drop my pants and slap my dick on the table and scream "i have a penis" its so great being a natural born penis... i mean leader... mean type A personality. penises .. i mean men... i mean type A personalities are born not made. you have to just do it and don't be a coward don't let political correctness get in your way, people don't respect that. extroverts do it on the outside TO others introverts get it done to them on the inside BY others
Kinda reminds me of my wife... Many years ago when i was laid off from a good payin job... the unemploument office told me to apply for city work... i did an it was mowin an pickin up trash... all in all a perty fun job but low payin... after 6 mounths of workin thar... when i got off work one thursday my wife told me that she had called a company (that pays good) an that she had got me an interview on friday after i got off work... i showed up... had the interview... took a work related test... an then was told i coud start work on Monday... the next day i gave my city job notice that i took anuther job... an i was at that job my wife got for me for 19 years Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! After i had worked at that job for a few years my wife got a part time job... after 2 years she was full time an runnin the day to day bidness needs... an a couple of years after that we bout the bidness Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Prolly not type A's... for both of us... bein retired is our favorite way to make a livin Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
lol I should give future employers the MB test before accepting any potential positions...what's good for the goose. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
you remind me of a conversation i was having with someone unfamiliar with western democratic voting systems as i was trying to explain that there was no IQ/intelligence or competency or experience test for someone to be elected the leader of a country. my ability to draw those comments directly from peoples real beliefs is what you may be reading. that was 1990s office psychology the type-what-ever-personality bullshit makes me cringe. imagine making a office lunch & dinner menu for the same day based on interpretations of Type A,B,C,D personality's.(no sharing no swapping no taking food away from the table, yes i know how many work) suddenly everyone would be denouncing their attachments & crying about how unique and individual everyone is.
Funny you should say that as the pre 1990's DISC Personal Profile System (Dominance, Influence, Steadiness, and Conscientiousness) had 2 extra classifications that the Myers Briggs (personality) Type Indicator did not have. These classifications were Overperform and Underperform and they identified when the person sitting the test had selected all of the 'good' answers (Saint) or all of the 'bad' answers (Demon), either by misunderstanding the instructions or through deliberate actions. All DISC classifications, apart from these 2, would then be represented in 3 ways, 1/how you perceive yourself, 2/how you perceive how others perceive you and 3/the difference between the first 2. It's not surprising that we are being overrun by corporate narcissists these days as no current personality test identifies when people are lying through their teeth. BTW, I was assessed as an ENTJ in MBTI and Achiever, Developer, Developer in DISC.
After reading a few articles on MB tests, and some of our views here, it would seem the best method to really get to know someone, is by spending time with him/her, talking things out, and having heartfelt discussions. While the MB test could provide a glimpse into someone's core personality, it's not enough to in my opinion, to hinge a job offer upon it. Sometimes, employers need to take a leap of faith, after conducting a thorough interview process. I'd like to see the tables turned on employers, honestly. Why is it that the employment ''courtship'' only seems to run one way_the employee having to do all the woo'ing?
No leap of faith(except in themselves) is required. degrees credentials work history MB are just tools for the mentally lazy so that they are not forced to engage in critical thinking and assume some personal responsibility.
True to a degree, no pun. There needs to be some semblance of a paper trail though per candidate, to show his/her credentials thereby creating a sense of credibility. But maybe there is too much emphasis on the paper trail and not enough on simply communicating with said candidates. What do you think?
