Though I don't agree with everything he says (it smells a bit like hippie) and was a bit turned off by his allusions to Harvard & Yale, I like Shawn Achor's message (credit for finding this goes to Hoda). 75% of success is determined by the individual's optimism, social support, and ability to see setbacks as a challenge rather than as a threat. Good message!
My only reservations with his message are that
* He confounds ideas dissatisfaction arising from endless ambition (Harvard kids being dissatisfied after achieving their "elite" status) with negativity. I think those are distinctly different. Ambition may be a cause for dissatisfaction, and perhaps negativity, but not always the case. I can't really see a reverse relationship where negativity would be a cause for ambition... They are distinctly different concepts to me, where he is interested in knowing their effects on success. But why do I bring up this point? In my opinion, it's not wrong to be dissatisfied and always look forward to the next accomplishment. However, being negative about challenges and your ability to accomplish them, that is an incorrect attitude to maintain, one likely to reinforce failure. I just had a conversation over dinner with Tina and Lauren last week about this. Our 2nd years are the biggest whiners - talking about how much work they have to do, how difficult it is, how we "don't understand," which as Tina said, is wrong! We've all been through it! Jade has spoken about two of them, who would spend many productive hours whining, in the past. Lauren constantly hears them complaining in our offices, which share a thinly separated wall. I brought up Achor's point - graduate school can really get you down, especially when you add in the hurtles from this program. It's fine to feel down for a little bit, but focusing on the negative only reinforces your negativity and propensity to fail. The only thing that has worked for me is to pick myself up and try again. It's getting harder over time, though. I do feel that the eager beaver who entered this program 2 years ago has been whittled away to a hardened, skeptical shell. I think, in my 30 minutes pact, I'm also going to devote that time to writing 3 things that made me feel good or happy each day.
* His critique of averages - “if we study what is merely average, we will remain merely average" - the social sciences would disagree with that... The point of studying averages is to be able to predict what might happen. For instance, clinical trials, public programs.. If we don't know how people are likely to respond, we don't know whether things will work! Using averages helps us find commonalities among people so we can increase our understanding of people and their development. It should not be the end-all-be-all, but it it is what links people with many different identities, orientations, physiologies together.
My only reservations with his message are that
* He confounds ideas dissatisfaction arising from endless ambition (Harvard kids being dissatisfied after achieving their "elite" status) with negativity. I think those are distinctly different. Ambition may be a cause for dissatisfaction, and perhaps negativity, but not always the case. I can't really see a reverse relationship where negativity would be a cause for ambition... They are distinctly different concepts to me, where he is interested in knowing their effects on success. But why do I bring up this point? In my opinion, it's not wrong to be dissatisfied and always look forward to the next accomplishment. However, being negative about challenges and your ability to accomplish them, that is an incorrect attitude to maintain, one likely to reinforce failure. I just had a conversation over dinner with Tina and Lauren last week about this. Our 2nd years are the biggest whiners - talking about how much work they have to do, how difficult it is, how we "don't understand," which as Tina said, is wrong! We've all been through it! Jade has spoken about two of them, who would spend many productive hours whining, in the past. Lauren constantly hears them complaining in our offices, which share a thinly separated wall. I brought up Achor's point - graduate school can really get you down, especially when you add in the hurtles from this program. It's fine to feel down for a little bit, but focusing on the negative only reinforces your negativity and propensity to fail. The only thing that has worked for me is to pick myself up and try again. It's getting harder over time, though. I do feel that the eager beaver who entered this program 2 years ago has been whittled away to a hardened, skeptical shell. I think, in my 30 minutes pact, I'm also going to devote that time to writing 3 things that made me feel good or happy each day.
* His critique of averages - “if we study what is merely average, we will remain merely average" - the social sciences would disagree with that... The point of studying averages is to be able to predict what might happen. For instance, clinical trials, public programs.. If we don't know how people are likely to respond, we don't know whether things will work! Using averages helps us find commonalities among people so we can increase our understanding of people and their development. It should not be the end-all-be-all, but it it is what links people with many different identities, orientations, physiologies together.
No comments:
Post a Comment