General v. Specific Compliments
Today we had an interview community chat in Decentralizing Capitalism where time was a bit limited due to personal circumstances. I had an incredible time diving into some of the nuances of ETFs, a prime example of centralized intermediated capital allocators. Indeed, they are potentially the prime example of both a virtue in a world of low-interest fiat bonds and a burden of poor returns compared to proper equity management.
But we had a minor slowdown in diving into the nuances because of my early complimenting strategy of sorts to attempt to influence someone. One thing I’ve been very grateful for lately is that I don’t particularly need to directly “politick” my way into social orgs thanks to the work I’ve done contributing to the group’s benefit. This has made it easier for me to lean off the traditional sucking-up I’ve understood as necessary in central organizations.1
The challenge, which I’ve also seen with Kayla, is that I praise some general action that I’d like to see more of. However, this is quite often simply due to myself not wanting to put in the work to contribute towards such an effort. Rather, I should continue steadfastly recognizing specific exemplary actions in writing;23 give ample time for recipients to internalize and enjoy, acknowledge, and the praise; and then leave it as a joyous celebration of their ingenuity rather than introduce my own self-serving ambitions in a future-oriented context.
-
For instance, we saw a lot of this in the Congressional testimony in the House Finance Subcommittee where the speaker was leaving as their last discussion being chair. Almost every government representative spent considerable hearing time praising and advocating for the individual. They have done exceptional work, but it made me think about the great productivity waste that goes into making your views acceptable or favored by those in traditional power. ↩︎
-
I’m not saying get rid of any positive reinforcement or general support through, e.g., collaborative emoji reactions to work or thoughts. But there is a fine line between nondirective support and praising distant past actions for their general demeanor, or a portion of such which you select at will. This past reminiscing seems irrelevant since people do things oftentimes for their own reasons, and forcing them to identify exactly what motivated them can frankly introduce unwarranted internal uncertainties about their own journey’s validity. ↩︎
-
Or orally as the case may be for large announcements or major public appearances. However, in this case, the praise likely falls on large numbers of individuals, and perhaps the most one can dole out is acknowledgment of a group or its leaders. But by singling out the leaders, especially when they are centrally assigned in a top-down fashion, I wholeheartedly believe you demoralize the majority of individuals embedded in the team who completed the bulk of any actual work in the generalized common circumstance. ↩︎