
Why I Quit Being So Accommodating (1922) - mikecane
http://mikecanex.wordpress.com/2012/12/26/1922-why-i-quit-being-so-accommodating/
======
edw519
What a great read! Thank you, OP, for finding and sharing it.

I don't know what I like about it more, that it's from an earlier "simpler"
world or that it highlights a problem that's just as important today: learning
to tell the difference between and issue and a detail and dealing with them
differently. Sounds like the original author had his epiphany 90 years ago. I
wonder how that ended up changing his life.

(I have often commented here about issues vs. details. A few highlights:)

[http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=edw519+issu...](http://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/all&q=edw519+issue+detail&sortby=points+desc)

~~~
jessedhillon
How are you discerning issues v. details from this post? I feel it's quite
clearly about drawing/enforcing boundaries, being able to say 'no', and the
like. In my experience, there are a lot of people in SV (men, mostly -- partly
because SV is male-dominated) who can learn a lot from this lesson.

First, the author refrains from blaming those who were taking advantage of his
"kindness" (loose boundaries, really, but he framed it to himself as kindness
for so long). Instead, he takes full responsibility for his own
misapprehensions about how the world works -- not his father, not his college-
friend-turned-boss, not anyone else. Today, when I read posts about people who
undergo this specific epiphany -- "nice guy syndrome" if I can call it
something -- it inevitably is accompanied by resentment: _other_ people are
cruel and manipulative, _women_ are bitches who don't want nice guys,
_investors_ are sociopaths who just follow trends, etc.

Second, and related to the first -- this man did not act simply _in reaction_
to his epiphany. He didn't simply swing the other way, as if to say "well now
I'll be a jerk to everyone else to punish them." Instead, he continued to be
generous and magnanimous, but he took responsibility for drawing and enforcing
his own boundaries. And those boundaries still included room to be generous
and charitable, but what he gained was the facility to _choose_ those traits.

Previously, he felt compelled to oblige and unable to resist the impositions
of others. Now, he has the power to choose not to oblige, and he still chooses
to oblige when he feels drawn to do it. And when he doesn't, he now can turn
down the request.

As I said earlier, I have seen a lot of men arrive at the particular
revelation that what they perceive as a kind and generous nature is actually
compliance and subservience -- and then simply shut off that valve in
reaction. I greatly admire this author's example of maintaining the choice to
be generous, while gaining the capacity to choose the direction of his
generosity.

~~~
m_myers
> _Second, and related to the first -- this man did not act simply in reaction
> to his epiphany. He didn't simply swing the other way, as if to say "well
> now I'll be a jerk to everyone else to punish them." Instead, he continued
> to be generous and magnanimous, but he took responsibility for drawing and
> enforcing his own boundaries._

For a humorous example of the _wrong_ way to act after this epiphany, see the
1942 Joe McDoakes short film "So You Think You're a Nervous Wreck".

<http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0038960/>

~~~
zem
or sheckley's short story "cordle to onion to carrot"
[<http://arthursclassicnovels.com/sheckley/conion10.html>]

------
huxley
It's probably not a real story, The American Magazine published a great deal
of morality tale fiction anonymously -- mostly aimed at a female audience --
and this sounds a lot like one of those "just-so-stories" about a man that
brings his family to ruination (though usually it was demon alcohol or pool
halls).

~~~
mikecane
Oh, AM also published a great many profiles of real people too. I set up a
separate blog to highlight those: <http://ipeopleblog.wordpress.com/>

~~~
huxley
That's pretty neat, thanks for collecting all of those. I've spent hundreds of
hours reading newspapers from that period for a historical novel I've been
working on for a long while.

It's equally fascinating to see the parallels and the divergences in our
culture.

~~~
loceng
Any way to get updates relating to your novel?

------
jusben1369
"As a matter of fact, I was too often being friendly to the customers at the
expense of the house. It is a common fault in salesmen. They let a thousand
trivial demands on the part of the men to whom they sell take their time and
energy from the business of the men for whom they sell."

\- This is one of the hardest concepts to teach in enterprise sales nearly 100
years later. Too often customers (worse prospects) ask for all sorts of things
from compliant sales people who never ask if it's necessary. References, POC's
etc. The salesperson chews up hours of their time and other employees times
because they don't have the backbone to say "No" or at least "Not yet" The
rationalization is "I'm advancing the deal for the company!"

~~~
greenyoda
_The salesperson chews up hours of their time and other employees times
because they don't have the backbone to say "No"_

The salesperson does this because he'll get a nice commission if the sale goes
through, and doesn't really care about the people whose time he's wasting.

~~~
vidarh
If he' on commission, then either he's not wasting his employers time with
these things, if they genuinely lead to high total sales, or he's wasting his
own time as well.

~~~
greenyoda
Total sales don't determine whether a company lives or dies. It's the bottom
line, profit or loss after all the expenses are paid, that matters.

Sometimes, the real cost of a sale can exceed the revenues to the company from
the sale. For example, I've seen salesmen sell vaporware that the company then
has to drop everything to implement, possibly a feature that's not of use to
any of the company's other customers. The salesman gets his commission and
doesn't care that the development group is tied up with the feature he sold
and unable to work on the really important features.

If salesmen could receive a commission on profits rather than gross revenues
it would give them incentives that are better aligned with the health of the
company. Unfortunately, it's easy to calculate a salesman's revenues and very
difficult to calculate the actual profits (or losses) attributable to him.

~~~
jusben1369
What you're describing though is a management/leadership problem not a sales
problem. Also, with the ongoing emergence of cloud/SaaS based offerings it's
much easier to tie real revenue/profitability to comp plans.

------
puh
First off: I don't know if anything of this is really true. I just don't know
people exactly and this is my perception and ONLY a perception.

I don't know. Usually, when someone says they quit being nice I find it hard
to believe that they were accommodating. Maybe I am wrong, but everyone I ever
knew calling themselves nice actually wasn't, but rather the opposite.

Yeah, I am not a nice person. I never was and I will never be. Yeah, a lot of
people call me nice, helpful and whatever, but come on that's what everyone
gets to hear all day long.

Yeah, I spend working a lot and I spend my money for others and I have all my
stuff second-hand because of that. I spend all night being awake, because
there are people who rely on being. Yeah, on my way home I will bring your
book to the library, so you won't be stuck in the traffic. Yeah, I feel better
buying fair-trade goods - no actually, stuff that pays higher than fair trade
stuff. But don't we all have something like that? I work more than 50 hours a
week, spend most of my free time helping others and write here only because
there really isn't anything else I can do right now - well besides thinking
about what I could do better or sleeping (unlikely), when they need help (and
someone always does), just to not feel like a bad person.

But come on, everyone else does so too and most people on this planet do way,
way more or else things wouldn't run as day do. And if everyone else is like
that how does it make sense to call you nice?

Okay, there are exceptions for all of this of course, but just because someone
isn't a lazy asshole it doesn't make them nice or extremely accommodating,
does it? And if someone has time to write a long article on how they are so
accommodating are they really?

P.S.: I slept about 3-4 hours per night last year, because there always was
stuff to do and I (really) worked until I fell asleep. I guess it affected me
mentally, but people rely on me.

~~~
peteforde
I recognize some thought patterns in what you said here that I have also felt
previous to this year, before I started working with an excellent professional
coach. Several of the "practices" he gave me to work on involved learning how
to say no to people. That includes delegation, qualifying, hidden costs. It's
an involved set of closely held attitudes and assumptions that can be hard to
break out of.

My advice for you is that your intelligence might be working against you,
because it appears that you've constructed a [familiar to me] set of logical
assertions which seem to support this viewpoint. It's like a perpetual motion
machine which lets you congratulate yourself and seem like both the everyman
and an ascetic at the same time. While it's possible that these things are all
true, it's at least likely that you're flattering yourself.

Life is not black or white. By participating in HN are you nice for sharing
your wisdom or egotistical and vain? By giving to charity are you paying it
forward or celebrating your own self-image? People do things for selfless
self-serving reasons all of the time. I personally don't think that this is a
bad thing, so long as the end result is that people share wisdom and help
those less fortunate.

Anyhow, I sense I'm rambling but in closing the author isn't suggesting that
he stopped being a nice person, he's explaining how he was shocked into
realizing that spending his time doing things for other people at the expense
of those closest who deserved his priority was not a winning proposition. He
could in effect be nicer by putting on his oxygen mask before putting one on
his kid.

------
blisterpeanuts
One has to strike a balance. "No" is a very powerful and effective strategy
when used judiciously. However, you don't want to say "No" to everyone about
everything, or you become known as the opposite of the overly helpful fellow
in the story, and people will resent you.

I enjoyed this article and I'm grateful to Mike Cane for turning me on to this
charming bit of Americana. In those days, it was said that "The business of
America is business" and the writings in this magazine fully reflect that
belief. It's all about getting ahead, becoming the big boss, achieving
financial security. Underlying it all is a naive yet practical optimism, a
sense that we [white males] can achieve anything if we set our minds to it.
It's a bit sad to think in contrast of today's narcissistic, short-sighted
attitudes which are so prevalent.

~~~
zeidrich
"No" isn't a strategy.

I think if you think the story is about saying "No", then you've missed the
point. The point is the mental shift between living reactively and ceding
control to anyone who asks for it, to living with purpose and giving your time
and attention to those people who deserve it.

People will resent you for being unreasonable. People will resent you when
their expectations are not met.

When you are too accommodating, people may value your courtesy. However, they
will expect you to be accommodating, and if you ever try to stop, they will
resent you for violating their expectations.

If you say no when it's reasonable to do so, then you set fair expectations.
People respect your fairness, so they don't expect more than is reasonable
from you.

If you are unreasonable, people expect you to be unreasonable. They will ask
little of you, but they wont have any respect for your character.

It's very easy, especially when you are worried about people's perception of
you to be too compromising, which leads to unmanageable expectations and that
feeling of persecution. It's your own fault when this happens, you've been
silently making promises with your actions, and people get angry when you
break them.

Say you go to a coffee shop every day and get a sandwich, and to be nice, the
server gives you a free small coffee, and you do this for a few months, and
every time you get a free coffee. Then one day, you go to the coffee shop with
enough money for your sandwich and ask for a sandwich and coffee, but the
server demands you pay for the coffee this time. That's frustrating because
you don't have the cash to get both, so you either go without the coffee or
plead with the server.

However, consider another coffee shop where you ask for a sandwich, and the
server asks if you want a small coffee for a dollar. You decide you want the
coffee, you buy them both. You're happy with the arrangement, and the former
situation never comes up. You never have the opportunity to be frustrated with
the server because she hasn't set any expectation she's not willing to
maintain.

------
gjm11
I notice that his name is Bert at the start of the article and Joe at the end.
If there were any doubt about whether the story is real or made up, I think
that clinches it; people very seldom forget their own names.

~~~
scrumper
More likely bad editing. Joe was his roommate and eventual boss. It's only
once near the end that his aunt calls him Joe.

~~~
jrochkind1
yeah, bad editing, but if it weren't fiction, would the author have mis-stated
his own name in his first draft?

~~~
moconnor
If it were real, names would have been changed to anonymize it. No search
replace in those days, so it's an easy way for such a mistake to creep in.

I still suspect it's a fictional or largely fictional piece though.

------
wyclif
"First: A man’s chief loyalty must be to the woman who has joined her life to
his; to the children who call him father; and to the business which feeds and
clothes and houses them all."

A greater truism can hardly have been spoken.

~~~
btilly
Truism, yet not true!

The first two are backwards. If you doubt me, think about what happens in a
divorce.

Disclaimer, I've been married over 20 years and never divorced. My kids come
first. I'm fairly sure that my wife puts our kids first as well.

~~~
losvedir
I'm not married, nor do I have kids, but I've decided when that time comes I
will put my wife first.

It seems to me "your children come first" is the traditional expectation of
modern, American society, but I think it's wrong. At least in my case, it led
to me being very well treated and doted on within a tragic environment of my
parents' relationship falling apart.

This NYTimes blog post [1] captures my feelings pretty well.

[1] [http://parenting.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/06/14/priorities-
chi...](http://parenting.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/06/14/priorities-children-or-
spouse/)

~~~
vidarh
> I'm not married, nor do I have kids, but I've decided when that time comes I
> will put my wife first.

You are not prepared for the hormone storm that you'll experience the first
time you hold your child.

For me, I wasn't sure I was ready. I said yes to having kids because my wife
wanted kids. The moment I held my son for the first time, on the other hand,
all my priorities shifted instantly.

Maybe you'll still hold on to the idea of putting your wife first, but you're
not in any position to make decisions about it at this stage and expect them
to hold firm.

~~~
cicero
Actually, now is the perfect time to rationally come up with some sound
principles _before_ the hormone storm hits. Hormones are not a good basis for
decisions that affect the course of peoples' lives.

~~~
vidarh
Except when the hormone storm hits, you will rationalize to yourself exactly
why you need to reverse those decisions with the greatest ease, if that's what
fits best.

Hormones control a substantial part of your life, no matter whether you like
it or not, and they influence and control a large part of the decision you
think you made rationally.

------
xradionut
I just had a call from someone conducting an IT survey. I asked the person,
"What's in it for me?, I'm at work, time is money." They were confused and I
responded, "I'll do your survey if there's a gift card or lunch involved. You
are not a client, nor a friend. Time is money."

~~~
jakejake
I used to work at a marketing firm and we did occasional phone survey which I
would have to listen in periodically to ensure the questions were
understandable and getting good answers.

I was always amazed that anybody would spend 20 minutes answering questions
asked by some random person for absolutely no reward. I still don't understand
why. And our surveys had to be representative of the area demographics so it
was not just all lonely, elderly people. It was people of all ages, race, etc.

~~~
zevyoura
People are bored, and a lot of people want someone to listen to them.

~~~
philwelch
This is especially true for people with strong opinions.

------
mutineer
The underlying principle in this article is the same one that underlies the
advice at <http://marriedmansexlife.com>. mmsl helps husbands who endlessly
say "yes" to all of their wives' requests, but who are frustrated by a lack of
sex in their marriages. If you found the OP interesting and your marital
relations are lacking, you need to read mmsl.

~~~
camus
Well if one is married and lacks sex then one should make it clear , and
discuss it with his wife , because sooner or later things will break apart.

~~~
Tichy
Or discuss it with the man? Sometimes it is the woman longing for sex.

------
SatvikBeri
Compare the man in the article to someone who can take any request, no matter
how absurd, and make sure it gets done behind the scenes. You can take a very
similar set of actions, but by presenting them differently you come across as
an extremely talented and capable person-almost a magician. And people will
respect you and entrust you with more important things.

~~~
lusr
This simply cannot be possible. Perhaps you've been fortunate enough not to
encounter the sort of people the article is referring to, and consequently
aren't familiar with the drain these people are.

Some examples from my own life, a more modern context:

\- acquaintances ask me to "fix their Internet" because I'm "good with
computers": I point out I have other priorities and they're already paying the
line provider/ISP so should call them for assistance

\- similarly, people who ask me to fix their computers: I point out that they
wouldn't expect a mechanic to fix their car for free, and besides IT !=
software development

\- back in university when people asked me to help develop or debug portions
of their solutions: if I couldn't figure it out in 15 minutes I told them I
had other priorities but gave them general advice about what the problem or
solution might be

\- people asking me to work longer for the same amount of pay and
unpredictable benefits (i.e. bonus formulas): I became a contractor instead
and I've been immeasurably happier for it

You simply cannot consent to _every_ request from such people - they will
literally drain your life (i.e. time) from you, to what end?

~~~
SatvikBeri
I certainly don't mean that you can or should respond to every request.

I mean that you can do the same amount of work, and depending on how you
present yourself, you can be seen as the accommodating doormat (and
consequently, treated like shit) or the guy who can get things done (and be
treated well, trusted with more important stuff, etc.)

~~~
roc
The distinction is in the _type_ of work being accommodated.

The article is particularly referring to _trivial_ tasks. The person who does
trivial stuff, no matter how impressive their demeanor, is going to be known
as the person to whom you take your trivial requests.

Not the person you take important work to. Not the person you entrust with
serious responsibilities.

Unless you have your own staff, to which you delegate the actual doing of
trivial things, there's really no way to dress that up.

------
vijayr
Very good article. I think at some level, most "nice" people know they are
taken advantage of. They know that they are supposed to say no, but they don't
- primary reason being they don't know how to say no, plus they don't want to
offend anyone. So the cycle keeps going.

~~~
StavrosK
Plus they aren't confident enough to know that people will still like them
even if they don't do everyone favors.

~~~
vijayr
This is something I've struggled to understand too - how is it that someone
who is always nice to everyone _isn't_ high on the popularity list (they are
only remembered when _needed_ ) whereas someone who only cares about his/her
stuff, is popular?

~~~
nollidge
Because to be popular is to be admired, and nobody _admires_ someone who's
desperate for approval.

~~~
larrys
True and this also more or less dovetails with wanting what you can't have as
well.

------
justjimmy
Can't help but be reminded of a novel I read in university - Faith of the
Fallen (Sword of Truth series). It wrote of similar theme (with a more focus
on faith/religion), of how one must serve the greater good, humanity and the
whim of his fellow men. Going down further, you go into the philosophical
territory of individualism vs collectivism, how do you decide and balance your
own moral ground, your 'selfish' needs and the needs of your neighbours.

~~~
charlieflowers
That is one of my favorite books of all time. You're right ... it centers on
exactly what this article covers. The people in the book were members of a
culture that taught that it was selfish to spend time and energy on your own
needs. Your duty was to sacrifice your needs and your life for the "greater
good". The "moral" was that there is nobility in taking charge of your own
life and making what you want of it, and that, in fact, it is from doing so
that the greater good benefits too. The slogan that captures it all: "Your
life is yours and yours alone. Rise up and live it."

Not selfish: the main character in the book would give up everything for the
woman he loved. I have no idea how much it overlaps with Ayn Rand. But taken
as its own individual work, I consider it one of the most profound things I've
ever read.

------
nakodari
This is beautiful! Thanks for writing this and sharing it. You will be amazed
how many capable men and women I come across who demand simple tasks that they
are perfectly able to take care of themselves. I finally learned to say "No"
and the requests died down over a period of 2 years. These same people are
happy to have me around.

Pro tip: If you are sitting in a large gathering and someone asks you to help
them out. At best, if you cannot say "No", what you should do is give them
pointers. That's it, nothing more. Those who are motivated enough will take
your pointers and handle it themselves, others will not.

I have found that people in general are just trying to get someone else to do
their work for them, for free, without giving a thought to the other person's
schedule.

------
ergest
Incredible find! This is my favorite quote (which hits home) "People never
trust an accommodating man with important things"

------
xutopia
Reading this article rings so true with me. It's why I quit playing MMOs... I
always felt like I was doing work for others rather than enjoying myself.

~~~
Benferhat
Haha, I'm pretty similar. If it's impossible to solo the game, I won't play.
It's nice to be able to help others, but not if it's _mandatory_.

------
rgbrenner
What a wonderful article for the Chrismas season. Helping people is so
overrated. May we all strive to live in a world like the 1920's; when a 12
year old child could work in a coal mine for 16 hours a day and receive 1-2
dollars, when minimum wage laws were non-existent; and the income disparity
between the top and the bottom was at it's highest point in all of US history.
What a wonderful time to have lived, and this article is exactly the type of
attitude we need to cultivate in todays society.

I hope you detect the sarcasm.

~~~
newbie12
The 1920s was a period of extraordinary economic and technological progress.
Economic progress, not passing laws or stewing with envy over income
distributions, is what has made society wealthy and advanced enough to end
child labor.

~~~
rgbrenner
Sorry, but no. Child labor was ended in the aftermath of the great depression.
The efforts in the decade prior to that failed, including one case where the
supreme court said child labor laws are an infringement on the rights of
children. The 1938 fair labor standards act was the first at the federal
level.

[http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2012/08/16/158925367/child-
la...](http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2012/08/16/158925367/child-labor-in-
america-1920)

------
ryguytilidie
My god, as someone who wakes up at 7, starts working right away and doesnt
usually stop until around 7-8, this rang pretty true to me. I really need to
going out of my way to help people because I never get as much out of it as I
give. I do recruitment for a startup and constantly have people asking me to
help them fill roles at other companies. I wonder how many extra hours I'd be
able to give to my girlfriend or current job without those. Need to work on
shedding some excess.

------
osdiab
I think that helping people definitely can give you preferential treatment and
respect, but whether it does depends heavily on _how_ you help them.

The physical act of helping earns you a reputation as a 'nice' person;
however, I've found in my limited time that when people start trying to use me
(getting a sense for this is a very useful thing to have, and something I had
to learn the hard way after being used), I either need to (a) draw the line
and say no, or more commonly, (b) help them in such a way that I force them to
think or do something along with me. In my experience, plan (a) happens
strictly only after you've done plan (b) before.

By just doing everything for others and magically making things happen, you
allow people to trample on you; but by teaching them exactly what you're
doing, you (1) demonstrate that you really know what you're doing, (2)
practice your understanding of the thing it is you are doing, and (3) place on
them the expectation that they won't come back for trivial help. I only resort
to plan (a) if, after doing plan (b) a few times, they still attempt to use
you. Teach a man to fish...

------
barking
Great story.

In case you're wondering who, Agassiz, the scientist mentioned in the article
was, I thnk that this is probably him:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Agassiz>

------
knitting
Being the "nice guy" certainly has its own benefits. Having performed favours
already, the author can certainly ask for returns. He would also win various
popularity based scenarios. But instead, he is so busy scratching others'
backs that he forgets his own. I find the reason that the author was not trust
with responsibilities in his friend's company, is due to the fact that he
lacks the ambition and tact that would make a successful business man. How he
blames himself for others taking advantage of him is admirable, and fitting
with his "nice guy" attributes.

------
lkrubner
This says a lot about about how much the human life span has changed in the
last 90 years:

“You are thirty-five years old,” I said to myself. “More than half of your
life has already been spent."

~~~
Tichy
Hm, really? Sure, I hope to get older, but I don't really make great plans for
life in my 70ies. While life expectancy might be higher, I know people who
died younger, and many who are 70 and not in the greatest shape.

~~~
16s
"The days of our years are threescore years and ten (70 years old); and if by
reason of strength they be fourscore years (80 years old), yet is their
strength labour and sorrow; for it is soon cut off, and we fly away." - Psalm
90 10

Edit: Not sure why this would be down-voted. It's a quote from the King James
Bible with a source reference that supports the notion that 70 years is about
all the time we as humans have to live life in good health. It is relevant to
the article as it lines-up with the 35 years old, "half of my life" claim as
well. People do live longer than that, but quality of life and good health
tend to go down a lot in the 70s.

~~~
gruseom
Some people are emotionally unable to tolerate any mention of the Bible, even
a literary one. I once quoted Saint Paul in a way I (smugly) thought was
rather witty, and one of the people in the room freaked out.

------
kamaal
Well the axiom of offering things to people is to realize, anything that you
do/give away/offer for free _will be_ perceived as a valueless. No matter how
difficult or important the work actually is.

Go out of your way to help someone, its almost dead certain you will be
treated like a doormat next time. You will always be expected to keep doing
things for free. Its a given.

No person should ever be helped unless he is totally incapable of helping
himself.

------
ableal
_"Unless, in a word, he commands his time. Read the life of a great scientist
like Agassiz."_

Hmm. 1807 – 1873, Swiss paleontologist, ended at Harvard,
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Agassiz> . Plus, Ezra Pound's take,
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_sunfish>

------
analyst74
Aside from being able to say no. I believe a more subtle and useful technique
is to actually use the good will you built into an actual relationship.

How do you turn an acquaintance that you occasionally do favors for to a good
friend? Well, you get the favors back in other ways. To put it in nicer words,
you give them chance to help you back. That's how relationships grow.

------
hizanberg
Fantastic lessons from life experiences, really puts into perspective what
really matters in life.

------
jaggederest
Interesting read. Resonates on a couple levels. I do tend to think that people
take the work-life balance a bit too seriously in the startup world, but those
are also the same people who might otherwise have problems saying no to
partnerships and business deals.

~~~
RyanZAG
I don't think that's really the message the author was trying to convey:

 _"Read the life of a great scientist like Agassiz. Was he forever at the
world’s beck and call? Not for a single day. To letters inviting him to write,
or to lecture for money, he replied that he had no time for those things."_

The message seems to be more about using your time the way you want to use
your time, and not the way others want you to use it. Want to work 20 hours a
day? No problem - the author would encourage that as you're using the days you
have as best you can to get where you want. Want to work 4 hours a day and
spend the rest of the time with your family? Author encourages that too as
long as you're providing them what they need.

Basically: it's your time, not someone else's time to decide what you do with
it.

~~~
pekk
It's your time, but you're a lucky person if nobody else has any leverage over
you

------
mikecane
I have made these into basic ePub eBooks people can download for free from
Google Docs: [http://mikecanex.wordpress.com/2012/12/27/an-experiment-
in-e...](http://mikecanex.wordpress.com/2012/12/27/an-experiment-in-epub-
ebooks/)

------
smagch
This article hit the nail on the head. In essence, the human kind is identical
with dog. There are certain amount of people that need a indication that you
are in a higher-order in the pecking order. Otherwise, you'll be
imposed/bullied.

------
philjohn
This situation was used to great comedic effect in "Blackadder's Christmas
Carol".

------
shanellem
Fantastic read. Long, but well worth it. Maybe if we had taken note of this
decades ago, we wouldn't be seeing the "no" revolution now. It's ok to say no
sometimes, it doesn't make you a bad person.

Thanks for sharing this, OP.

------
elanperach
Great Read!

------
michaelochurch
Social status and being well-liked are different things, and sometimes you
have to choose one at the expense of the other. It's not a comfortable
feeling, but it's the truth.

Being accommodating lowers your social status but makes you well-liked. The
end result of this is that people waste your time because they get away with
treating it as having less value than theirs. But the default mode of most
people is insecurity so, when the chips are down, they go with the high-status
guy (the rival druggist who was not accommodating but prospered).

Respect, not popularity, is key. I spent many years of my life doing
obnoxious, ridiculous things on the basis that it was better to be hated than
ignored. I was completely wrong. Being hated or disliked is undesirable, if
you can help it. Being ignored is fine. Being liked but not respected turns
you into one of those whiny "but I'm such a nice guy" types, so it's the worst
of all outcomes. Being liked and respected is what you want, but to get that,
you have to accept the fact that some people will ignore or dislike you.

The reason it is better, in most cases, to be ignored than disliked is that it
takes less effort. The same goes with being liked but not respected-- lots of
effort. You should expend effort only for people who respect you. That's a
chance to show true loyalty, not subservience. Subordinate people can never be
really loyal, because power relationships always evolve and, when they do,
their colors will change. So you only gain anything by doing someone a favor
if you're already from a position of equality.

~~~
m0nty
I have always found that helping people does not make you more popular: they
just start treating you like their bitch, and get angry when they ask yet
another favour and you eventually say "no". Also, they will not reciprocate -
why should they waste time helping their bitch, when the bitch is supposed to
help them? As soon as you act like a subordinate, you become one, at least in
their eyes.

People often mistake my role as tech support, which means anything from
changing toner cartridges to setting up their presentation equipment. They
often just turn up in my office with another "emergency" and I'm supposed to
drop everything and run off to help them. I have learned to issue a flat "no"
when this happens unless they let me know well in advance that I will be
needed. They are often furious but I'm thick-skinned enough not to care: at
least I have _some_ control over the situation if I play it this way. My boss
supports me so that helps.

"You should expend effort only for people who respect you" is something I've
learned the hard way and it really does work. I keep pushing back until they
learn that (even if I annoy them) my time is not worthless, and if they treat
it as such I will not help them. Actually, I usually end up feeling quite good
about this way of working.

~~~
zimbatm
Tech is a bit special because you also mix in the insecurity feeling that some
people have towards that "black magic". I know a lot of people who just become
frustrated and aggressive when things don't work as they expected.

When I was working in a computer shop one of my trick was to clearly state
what was going to happen or to lay down the options that they had. That would
often help them feel in control and calm down. Obviously before I had to wait
for them to calm down enough to be able to listen.

~~~
m0nty
Yes, they are insecure. One of my pet hates is when they go on about how I'm a
"genius" or a "miracle worker" when mostly I do basic stuff they could do
themselves. It's both an excuse for them not to do it, and a way to flatter me
into doing it for them. Except I don't flatter that well, and I'm not really
tech support in the first place.

I keep reminding myself that these are otherwise highly intelligent people who
have insecurities about technology. Part of the "pushing back" is about
encouraging them to do it themselves.

A trick I learned from a one-time co-worker was to listen attentively and
repeat the words "I understand" and "yes, I understand" until they calm down
and I can say something more meaningful. Keep reassuring them you're listening
and their problem is valid. Works like a charm.

