This website uses cookies

This website uses cookies. The essential and functional cookies are necessary for the proper functioning of the website and cannot be refused. Other cookies are used for statistical purposes (analytical cookies) and are set only after you have made a choice. More information about cookies.
Blog overview

Some scientists are not nice people

Harley Lovegrove
3 responses
While waiting for a guest to join me at my lunch table in a busy Brussels restaurant last week, I overheard a person at an adjoining table say “some scientists have unpleasant personalities, you just have to live with it.  They’re obsessive; it’s all they think about.”  From what I could hear, I was pretty sure the couple engrossed in the conversation were both academics, most likely scientists. This got me wondering.  We all have unpleasant personalities to a greater or lesser extent but does being a scientist, engineer, artist, CEO or whatever we are in anyway excuse it?

From many psychologists we can learn that one’s personality is pretty well fixed, but behavior not. Therefore (and I can testify for this) significant behavior pattern changes (‘improvements’) can be witnessed in the work place, assuming the person in question sees a benefit.

I do not like the idea of excusing unacceptable behavior, not even on the grounds of the person being a genius, or even a scientist!  On the other hand, we do not all need to be smooth talking socialites either. Surely an acceptable balance needs to be established and maintained, too far in either direction and we have a problem?  

So here’s this week’s dilemma: if some of the genius’s of this world can only come up with extraordinary achievements that could benefit the whole of mankind, by being objectionable; possibly with bullying, obsessive or even just anti-social behavior, do we still have to put up with them?

Have a good week,

Harley

Written by

Harley Lovegrove

Harley is a dynamic 'we can do this' kind of person with a successful track record of working for a wide variety of companies in all kinds of sectors. From very small family run businesses right through to giant multi-nationals. Over the last thirty five years Harley has built a reputation for inspiring those around him to rout out and tackle the core problems facing their organizations. Armed with a wide range of pragmatic tools that he has developed over the years, Harley is able to help his clients bring about long-term, sustainable solutions, while having fun at the same time. Harley is a motivational 'people person' who is nonetheless tough on efficiency and delivery. Apart from being well known for his highly entertaining and motivational speeches, Harley is also a blogger and author of four books; 'The Change Manager's Handbook', 'Transition', 'Inspirational Leadership’ and ‘Making a Difference’.

3 responses

Leave a response
  1. A Anonymous -
    Would you laugh about a comedian that is known to be bullying his whole social environment when not on stage? As a child I chose to no longer laugh about Jerry Lewis, after I heard that he was like this. Today I would differentiate. I think the "negative" parts of a personality are inseparably melted with the "positive" ones like the two sides of a coin. The genius of the fictitious person you describe might result from his personality as a whole. If you have chosen to be in a <strong>personal</strong> relationship to such person you have to deal with them as a whole and try to cultivate their behaviour. However, if you are in a <strong>professional</strong> relationship you should just pick the results of the work. Just like The Animal of the Muppets who is very dangerous and was <a href="http://muppet.wikia.com/wiki/Animal" rel="nofollow">chained up in a basement cell when he wasn't onstage performing</a> but also a brilliant drummer! I like the term "Available Light" used in photography, which means make the best of what is there. A few weeks ago I watched Jerry Lewis' "The Caddy" with my children and we laughed a lot.
  2. O Bert Oberholz -
    Would you laugh about a comedian that is known to be bullying his whole social environment when not on stage? As a child I chose to no longer laugh about Jerry Lewis, after I heard that he was like this. Today I would differentiate. I think the "negative" parts of a personality are inseparably melted with the "positive" ones like the two sides of a coin. The genius of the fictitious person you describe might result from his personality as a whole. If you have chosen to be in a <strong>personal</strong> relationship to such person you have to deal with them as a whole and try to cultivate their behaviour. However, if you are in a <strong>professional</strong> relationship you should just pick the results of the work. Just like The Animal of the Muppets who is very dangerous and was <a href="http://muppet.wikia.com/wiki/Animal" rel="nofollow">chained up in a basement cell when he wasn't onstage performing</a> but also a brilliant drummer! I like the term "Available Light" used in photography, which means make the best of what is there. A few weeks ago I watched Jerry Lewis' "The Caddy" with my children and we laughed a lot.
  3. K Koen -
    This topic seems to be close to the "Dr. House" topic not long ago. Although this kind of behavious might be funny on television to some, the big advantage of television is that you can turn it off or choose not to turn it on at all. In real life that is not possible and the question becomes for every individual: do the benefits weigh heavier then the inconveniences ? A "bully" PM might be efficient and get the job done, on the same time people might refuse to work with the same person in his project team because he does not respect others "(intellectual) space" (not having anyone in mind). The company might consider this bully PM effective on the short term but damaging on the long stretch. (good people might resign to be sure not to have to work with him). On the other hand it may be very well acceptable that someone with the same bully mentality who does not have to interact a lot with other people, but who does his/her own thing in a corner in an efficient way. I experienced an example when I got people with ASS in to do software testing. They were very efficient SW testers, but we had to foresee a room where they would not have to interact with a lot of other employees, as both sides would be "disturbed" by the others behaviour. We also needed to make sure that their (morning) routine was not disturbed.

Leave a response

*Required fields