5
posts
Articles like this are trending lately. Reading one about how there are more SPs in the boardroom then in prison is how I got linked to this place.
I'm interested in this topic but I don't really buy it. I think SPs have been glamourized in movies/tv, but In reality they are typical to the disorder and live primarily parasitic lifestyles. They can't typically form strong or lasting relationships and this (anti-social behaviour) is not conducive to great career success. When I think of the non-criminal SP, I think of used car salesmen.
by Silkthread
1. these type mindsets or personalities may well be more suited for "boardroom" / top down mgmt where decisions are given by a chain of command based on the bottom line.
but what about people who work empathetically by building consensus and thus work from the grassroots up, and give input to the leaders at the top but don't play the part of making decisions FOR other people to follow. what if they contribute by supplying the data?
Who is to say that the decisions made at the top are more or less important to success than the work done behind the scenes at the bottom of the ladder, or at middle mgmt?
2. what about other jobs or roles where success is defined by other means?
If we are judging people's success by "who gets paid more" does that mean we would judge women as "more successful" for "getting paid more" to dance in clubs than the women who teach kids in school and don't make as much money? if mothers don't get paid to raise and school kids at home, are they not as successful in their work as other people?
this is clearly only ONE way to measure success, where certain ways of thinking clearly come in handier. I agree with that part. but don't agree with equating this with being "more wired for success" than other people with different skills needed to interact in other ways.
maybe the title 'wired for success' was worded this way mainly to grab more attention?
5
posts