The ideal of the successful extrovert prevails in the Western world.

-


Who would you consider more competent: an extrovert who captivates other people’s attention and sets the tone, or an introvert who sits quietly in the corner and listens?
Western society has a very clear answer to such questions. Extroverts are not only considered more qualified and intelligent because of their sociability but also more interesting and cooperative.

Extroverts are often seen as being more physically attractive and nonchalant. The introvert prototype, on the other hand, is pale, nondescript and awkward – maybe even has bad skin or seems to be from a different planet.

Based on this way of seeing things, extroversion is considered favorable for success in the Western world.

This is highlighted by the author’s trip to a seminar by motivational speaker Tony Robbins. The event exalted extroversion above all else, calling it the key to standing out of the crowd in a competitive world.

This trend is why professors at the Harvard Business School make it their mission to turn every one of their students into an extrovert. The program entails rigorous participatory involvement in seminars and collaboration in study groups. Even going out at night with fellow students every evening is part of the obligatory program.

A glance at Japanese and Korean universities reveals a completely different ideal: average students there prefer poring over their books all day to bar-hopping with friends. In seminars, they pay attention and take diligent notes. Speaking without being asked is considered arrogant, inappropriate, big-mouthed and a sign of bad manners.

Different cultures value different temperaments. While extroverted behavior is generally preferred to introverted behavior in Europe and America, the exact opposite is the case in Asia.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

History unfolds in a cyclical pattern.

-
Image
Humankind is obsessed with time –⁠ measuring it, dividing it, observing it, and most recently, controlling it. Throughout the course of our species’s history, humans have developed three distinct ways of thinking about time. The first is chaotic time, which was the dominant theory during our primitive days. In this view, historical events occur randomly. There’s no point in trying to determine the causes of events or to try and improve society because history doesn’t follow a path and there’s nothing people can do to influence it. The second theory of time, which became prevalent during the classical period, was cyclical time. The idea was that events occurred in cycles, much like the rotation of the earth, the orbit of the moon, or the procession of the zodiac. Humans can participate in and shape history by performing the right actions at the right times, thus winning favor from the gods. As such, this theory gives people more agency than in chaotic time. Finally, the thir...
Read more

Usually, the largest share of the results (output) is produced by just a small part of the work (input).

-
Image
Have you ever looked back on a project you worked on and found that most of your work was done right before the final deadline? Perhaps in the few days when you were almost out of time you achieved more than in all the previous weeks put together. In fact, similar imbalances between effort and reward can be observed in a variety of different settings. For example, many businesses have found that 20 percent of their product range actually accounts for 80 percent of their profits. Similarly, 20 percent of motorists cause 80 percent of accidents. Most motorists drive carefully, while a small minority is careless and causes the majority of accidents. This phenomenon is better known as the 80/20 principle: roughly 80 percent of work results – or output – are produced by 20 percent of the work effort, or input. Why is this ratio not more balanced? Because not every cause has the same impact on results. In fact, causes can be roughly divided into two categories: a minority that ha...
Read more

Check your goal is feasible before moving forward.

-
Image
OK, you’ve got your first draft down. Bravo. Now it’s time to put your Worthy Goal through its paces.  Think of it as a stress test. How sturdy is it? Does it support the weight of your ambition, or does it look like it’s going to wobble? We’ll start with the spouse-ish test.  Here’s the idea. You’re going to run your idea past the person who knows you best. It’s spouse-ish because it doesn’t have to be an actual spouse. It could be your best friend, or your sister, or your partner. Point is, they’re someone who’s heard it all – your jokes, your dreams and ideals, your hang-ups. They have a sense of who you are, what you stand for, and where you are in life. They care.  Your sketch is still on paper. It sounds great, but it’s still abstract. It could easily stay there, tucked away in a drawer, but you’re about to change that. You’re going to both make yourself accountable and give yourself a reality check. Scary? Sure. Necessary? Absolutely. We all have our bl...
Read more