The Introvert as Employee
Mar. 21st, 2012 12:55 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
ysabetwordsmithI came across this imaginary description calling for an introverted employee. I like the concept but think it needs work to rephrase everything in positive terms:
I suggest something like:
Must be a self-motivated worker
Must work well in a quiet environment
Must be comfortable with internal processes and "doing the work in your head"
Must be capable of concentrating on one task at a time
Must like to work in solitude
Must be self-sufficient socially in the absence of coworkers
There used to be a fair number of jobs like this, where the working conditions created isolation. Lighthouse keeper, fire tower watcher, winter warden in national parks, etc. Many of those jobs are gone, or at least rarer now. But we've created other jobs that don't really require a "team" work environment. In particular, work-at-home jobs are ideal for introverts and lousy for extroverts. You don't have to be a pure introvert to work at home, any more than you must be a pure extrovert to work in an office; you just need to have that mode accessible.
The problem is that employers rarely understand how to frame their needs for such positions, because -- aside from the technical skills of the job itself -- the workplace and interpersonal skills are opposite what has been the norm. Look at the complaints against work-at-home models, and you'll see a classic description of what goes wrong putting extroverts in isolation. They wind down, get lonely, and have trouble doing the job. Meanwhile introverts are thriving. So it's vitally important that employers understand and describe clearly the working conditions for a job and the kind of personality that best suits it.
Feel free to share this with anyone who might be interested, especially folks who write out the "help wanted" ads.
"If an employer were to post a job opening requiring an introverted personality, it might read something like this:
Must not be a team player
Must work best in a quiet environment
Must live in their head for the majority of time
Must not be a multi-tasker
Must like to work in solitude
Must not co-mingle with other staff members"
I suggest something like:
Must be a self-motivated worker
Must work well in a quiet environment
Must be comfortable with internal processes and "doing the work in your head"
Must be capable of concentrating on one task at a time
Must like to work in solitude
Must be self-sufficient socially in the absence of coworkers
There used to be a fair number of jobs like this, where the working conditions created isolation. Lighthouse keeper, fire tower watcher, winter warden in national parks, etc. Many of those jobs are gone, or at least rarer now. But we've created other jobs that don't really require a "team" work environment. In particular, work-at-home jobs are ideal for introverts and lousy for extroverts. You don't have to be a pure introvert to work at home, any more than you must be a pure extrovert to work in an office; you just need to have that mode accessible.
The problem is that employers rarely understand how to frame their needs for such positions, because -- aside from the technical skills of the job itself -- the workplace and interpersonal skills are opposite what has been the norm. Look at the complaints against work-at-home models, and you'll see a classic description of what goes wrong putting extroverts in isolation. They wind down, get lonely, and have trouble doing the job. Meanwhile introverts are thriving. So it's vitally important that employers understand and describe clearly the working conditions for a job and the kind of personality that best suits it.
Feel free to share this with anyone who might be interested, especially folks who write out the "help wanted" ads.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2012-03-21 06:38 pm (UTC)Yes...
Date: 2012-03-21 08:07 pm (UTC)I'm somewhat flexible. I can work on a team, if they're responsible people, but most of my teamwork experiences have devolved to me doing all the work, so I avoid it if possible. I can work alone and usually get a ton of stuff done, in circumstances where many people would run out of steam. And those are things I know about myself, so I can plan accordingly.
Re: Yes...
Date: 2012-03-29 04:15 am (UTC)In grade school, my teachers decided I was a "leader"- which I am NOT- and so put me into group projects.
I resented the HELL out of the fact that- since I cared about my grade- I had to do ALL the work- AND make the other members of the "team" feel important even though they were doing less than nothing.
HOW is that fair??? especially since THEY all got the grade that only *I* had earned.
As is obvious here, I am not a fan of "teamwork" when imposed.
Re: Yes...
Date: 2012-03-29 04:24 am (UTC)Drove the teachers bugfuck when, in some classes, I'd simply refuse to do more than my share of the project. I could afford to lose the points; the other students couldn't. Usually after I'd destroyed one group that way, at least some others would pony up their share of the effort.
Yes...
Date: 2012-03-21 11:10 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-03-21 06:48 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-03-21 07:06 pm (UTC)The irony is that most programmers and sysadmins are introverts, yet managers insist on these stupid "open plan offices" that are nothing more than a bunch of desks packed cheek-to-jowl, without any privacy, interruption prevention, or even a place for a personal bookshelf!
I found out that I can't work without at least a cubicle around me, to keep the visual distraction down and the interruptions reduced. If I really want to put my head down and work, I need to either stay late (the place mostly clears out by 6 pm) or work from home.
On multitasking, I can do it, but at a significant performance penalty. I can only have one primary task at a time, and the more disparate the concurrent tasks are, the greater the penalty for each and every context switch.
Thoughts
Date: 2012-03-21 11:09 pm (UTC)An open plan makes sense if people need to consult with each other frequently, and have personalities conducive to that. Otherwise it's just a distraction farm.
>>On multitasking, I can do it, but at a significant performance penalty. <<
Few people are really good at multitasking. Mostly what it means is one person trying to do the work of two or three because management is too cheap to hire enough workers.
(no subject)
Date: 2012-03-22 04:29 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-03-21 07:52 pm (UTC)I'm reasonably extroverted, as are all the programmers on my team (but we're also all consultants; we HAVE to be extroverts).
Hmm...
Date: 2012-03-21 11:06 pm (UTC)In my observation, far more jobs are closely supervised than loosely supervised. Obedience tends to be valued above self-motivation.
(no subject)
Date: 2012-03-21 09:55 pm (UTC)Yay!
Date: 2012-03-21 10:12 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-03-22 02:08 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-03-24 12:02 am (UTC)Well...
Date: 2012-03-24 01:43 am (UTC)