The hard work equals success myth

Post Reply New Topic

I wonder if we're talking past each other to an extent. I think hard work is important but other things are important too. I don't think you can hard work your way to anything. Like I said before for instance that a rock can't become a diamond. Some things are just impossible. We all have our limitations. But hard work is still a big factor in what you are saying, working hard to acquire skills, working hard to make plans. And yes there always things you can't control, but that's no reason to cast aside a good work ethic.

Alright, let's talk about the contacts. Because if someone recommends someone and then that someone is professionally lazy, then they lose respect and connections themselves. Why would you use your social standing to help someone climb the ladder if it was going to hurt you? On the other hand if you knew they were a good worker you'd know you were safe to put in a word for someone and they would perform and your own standing would rise with the trust your successful recommendation would have earned you.

If you're going to have connections, you need to be able to be of some value to the person that can elevate you. So wouldn't being a hard worker be a great thing to have for when they come to call in a favour from you?

Hard work is a big factor when you get it right. It's like when successful people look back on their trajectories with the benefit of hindsight and exclude all the "noise", I've heard people describe their pasts as if the gears all rolled smoothly and don't take into consideration factors external to them. It was all them, all the way. It's a naive view, or a dishonest one. Anyways, I'm just rambling.

No, it isn't a reason to cast aside a good work ethic, if you are expected to work hard or are paid to do so then it's definitely something you should do, but it doesn't necessarily mean you'll be successful, depending on what you consider to be success.

Okay.

Meanwhile, look what you people have made show up in my recommendations:





At 0:40, what's the question, hard work or what?

notice the weak link though: you're assuming that people who hire and fire and recommend employees truly understand the essence of the work those employees undertake. but that's generally not the case, which is not surprising. you can't expect a manager to understand the real nature of the work every single one of the employees in the team is supposed to do. it's not their job, it's the job of someone else that they manage or supervise. they see what goes in and what comes out, but they don't really see the inner workings inside their employees' heads

if you're actually really good at your job (regardless if it's thanks to hard work or outstanding talent, though hard work certainly does help in many cases), it's certainly a bonus in most cases (complex workplace politics aside, because your high performance may sometimes mean a threat to someone else above you). but ultimately that's only one of the pieces of the puzzle of convincing your managers and prospective employers that you're better than your competitors at your job. so if you want to advance in your career (or sometimes even just get a frickin job... ), understanding your managers is more important even than understanding your own job

if you're good at you do, it certainly makes it easier to convince them that you are, in fact, good at what you do. but if you're actually not, but you're good at fooling them into thinking that you are, then the end result is the same. and it's pretty damn hard to convince someone who doesn't really understand the intricacies of your job that you're really good at it if you can't show them all the easy and visible signs that they're looking for and that you may not be aware of (because they have little or no actual connection to the job itself. "are you a go-getter?" and stuff like that... ) or may not be able to show even if you try (like displaying confidence in a situation where pretty much anyone would be nervous, or knowing when to not sound too smart around a superior). so when general social ability and job-specific ability are imbalanced, the advantage generally goes to general social ability

unless we're talking about manual labor, in which case none of this matters. everybody (both managers and employees) knows what manual labor means and what they can expect from it, because it's visible and concrete. i don't think many sane people expect that working hard doing manual labor will get them anything other than the money they're paid, and the pain or joy of doing the work itself. they may dream of someday becoming ceo of the company, and, who knows, it might even happen someday. but that's an entirely different thing, because i doubt they'll be disappointed if it doesn't happen

I can't tell... I think it's "stick-to-itevness" or something like that.

"Are there any real questions?"

should we be concerned that skynet is getting too good at it?

It is a little creepy.

Okay so I've never had any desire to be a manager, but wouldn't it be your job to convince your supervisor you were good, not your manager / boss, because the supervisor would report to the manager if you weren't? So maybe you could blag your way into a job, but you wouldn't keep it for long if you weren't any good at it, especially a prestigious position. And so it would eventually get back to your boss you'd made an awful recommendation?

It is not even a question of grades, there has to be some sort of edge. Not everyone who gets C grade is going to be successful nor A grader. If it was as simple as C graders working harder than A graders than anybody could do it.

The reason why some entrepreneurs don't necessarily do well in school is more likely to do with this isn't an environment that suits them or interests them. however other do in fact do well in school, or did well until they dropped out. It depends.

Work is merely the application of effort. There has to be something substantive behind the work. There is something to be said of perseverance, but again there need to be some substance and strategy behind it.

sure, all of these things have their limits, and they're generally not nearly as extreme as the extreme cases i'm describing. but in the end it all still does tip the scales in favor of social persuasion, at least somewhat to the detriment of whatever matters to the actual job itself (being liked or disliked by the people whose job is to judge you will always be a significant factor, for one thing, especially when all else is equal or nearly equal between competitors. and while most people don't "speak job-specific language", most do "speak and understand social language". it's the common denominator). and that means that it's generally a big mistake to simply focus on doing your job and working hard, if you don't actually like to do it but do it just because you expect that it will "lead you to success"

but i think there are two main problems with the "hard work / persistence equals success" kind of thought. one is that, if you define success as achieving a more prestigious or well-paid or pleasant/comfortable job, then "hard work" is probably not a good principle to base your life strategy on. that's essentially what we've been talking about so far. but i think that, more important than that, is the fact that defining success by one type of widely recognized thing (prestigious job and such) is self-defeating and downright unnecessary for a large portion of the population. for many people, they'll enjoy overall much more quality of life throughout their lives (which in my opinion is the only real type of "success" that matters) if they don't "aspire to be successful", but, instead, realize that they already have enough to enjoy certain things that they're forgoing in the name of "achieving success"

so, before considering what will or won't likely lead someone to success, the question has to be asked: "what does success even mean to them? what can success mean to them? are they possibly not recognizing actual success that they've already achieved?". a focus on hard work on its own isn't going to reveal to you what is good for you or even what you're ultimately "supposed to achieve". it's more likely to cause tunnel vision instead. also, working hard/harder may or may not help someone achieve satisfying levels of quality of life in the long run, but it most definitely does contribute to lower quality of life in the short term for most people. and the stress itself may (and i'm sure often does) prevent further progress in life. so it's really not a straightforward thing

practicing some level of frugality, on the other hand, now that's something i believe everyone can benefit from. it's "not good for the economy" though, so obviously it's just not going to be encouraged on a culture-wide level

Other things in the hard work equation.

A. Initiative
B. Rocking the boat
C. Not rocking the boat
D. Are you matched with the right job.
1. A fish can't work hard on flying, even if it is a so called "flying fish".

What is your experience versus opinion on this thread in your present work and it's history.

Early in my work history I had a boss that actually made me a huge sign. It read
SLOW DOWN
ASK QUESTIONS

4 years into that season of work I took over her position for a couple of years.
Then I worked within the D. O. C. for a while.

well i have no real workplace experience whatsoever

i can say though that blind persistence had a lot to do with my eventual mental breakdown, while it had very little to do with what would eventually become my source of income

i got close to graduating (which would have meant a practically guaranteed well-paying job, possibly right away after graduating), but i realized i wasn't cut out for a corporate job, or a high-pressure job at a startup, or even a job in academia (which i already had very good contacts for), which seemed to be the only real options (i still believe that, apart from very lucky situations, i'm essentially unemployable. i'm easily bored, and i'm unable to work as a team member). so i freaked out... and then a series of bad things happened

fast forward a couple of years, a parent of a friend from high school contacted me asking me if i could help with a freelance job in an unrelated field. and it was like "wait a minute... this is what 'professional' work at this stuff looks like from the inside? i can do that!". and, yes, i can actually do that, better than the average professional with credentials

then i was very lucky to find a big client who was willing to experiment with candidates without formal qualifications, and which turned out to have long-term projects and turned out to like my work and the way i interacted with them. also i'm paid in foreign currency, which means that what they pay me is relatively inexpensive for them, but is decent money for me. the work i do feels very redundant, but, apart from tight deadlines sometimes, it's easy (and i'm not just better than the average professional, i'm especially a lot faster, and i'm paid per work volume and not per hour, which is great for me)

now i make more money than my sister does, even though i have no boss and only work an average (note: average...) of a couple hours a day, while she has a bunch of degrees, works full time and is supposedly a hard worker (or at least she's always complaining about how she works harder than everybody else at her department). and it's not even about "intelligence". she was always a "bright student" herself. and it's worth mentioning that my sister's self-righteousness and resentment (even before i managed to find any real source of income) played a major role in that "series of bad things" that i mentioned earlier

the school/teacher scenario was also not entirely hypothetical. it was based on (and exaggerated from) the personal experience of some people i know. and i do routinely have contact with corporate stuff as part of my job, so i have access to some "insider" information (which only makes me more and more skeptical about the corporate world). occasional comments from other people who actually work in corporate/industrial environments (from intern to kind-of-big-shot) also tend to match my impressions

Sounds to me you are doing real work.

It is good for this "Reader and Righter" to find things to say YESsssss to.

I believe when your inside any field you get a different feel. (From yuck to skeptical)Examples include restaurants, corporate, mental health and academia.

Me- SWT (smile while typing)

My two cents.

My take on this when I was working, was: "No one would "out-work" me." Even though I didn't have a clue about Asperger Syndrome I knew there was something others brought to the workplace that I didn't. I was determined to show I could be of value without the social skills of others so I made sure no one would be a "better worker" than I.

This plan worked for me (only lost a job once...and that just temporarily) no matter if I was pushing around, or building heavy machinery for a living, or if my job was buying/selling/negotiating...I always put in extra effort and time to make my effort worthwhile.

If my nose hadn't been to the grindstone I don't feel the outcome (financially at least) would have been as good. Just makes sense.

Fin

I just knew from school days to employment that I had to work harder then everybody else to but I did not know why. In employment it helped me in the 80's and into the 90's to a degree in that I stayed in jobs 7 or 8 years at time which I probably would have been fired from due to ability and social skills. Still when downsizing occurred it was always me first. When hiring criteria changed from more merit based to networking and being a team player and networking skills from the 90's onward I became gradually unemployable. In the late 90's onward I was told a number of times never to tell a potential employer I worked a lot of overtime because they will think you are not skilled.