
How to Succeed as an Introvert - hn12
http://h30565.www3.hp.com/t5/Feature-Articles/How-to-Succeed-as-an-Introvert/ba-p/1522
======
jonnathanson
As an introvert repeatedly flummoxed and exhausted by office politics in the
earliest stages of my career, I very nearly resigned myself to always being
overlooked. I didn't have the emotional energy to be schmoozing, wheeling, and
dealing; I'd much rather have invested that same time and energy in learning,
growing, and producing great work. Consciously, I realized that I was taking
the sucker's bet -- that the schmoozers and bullshitters would always rise to
the top, and that I'd be stuck in second gear. And so I came to adopt a
mentality of learned helplessness: an overreliance on the hope that, someday,
somehow, my ship would come in. I'd be recognized. My great work would produce
outsized results, and all of my quiet toiling would be vindicated.

That day never came. What came, instead, was an eye-opening reversal. I had a
very candid conversation with my boss about why I wasn't on track for
promotion, despite a long string of big wins, and a consistent track record
well above the expectations of my pay grade. And he told me that "Nobody
outside of our group knows what you're working on." Note that he _didn't_ tell
me that I wasn't bullshitting or schmoozing hard enough. Rather, he told me
that I was basically invisible to a large portion of the company. Maybe it's
just the way I'm wired, but this was a nonobvious and nontrivial revelation to
me. I suspect it may be for a lot of introverts.

To overcome this barrier, I adopted the "win a few key allies" strategy, as
loosely advocated in the interview. I knew I wasn't going to be a world-class
bullshitter. So, rather than try to bullshit clumsily and more frequently, I
opted to find people in positions of power who were known to have similarly
low tolerances for bullshit. And I volunteered to help these people. I made it
my mission to knock it out of the park for them -- and, in so doing, to become
known as the "no bullshit" guy who really delivered.

To this day, it's not all blue skies and roses. Even as a known commodity at
your firm, you're still going to get lapped by the extroverts. But as an
introvert, you really _do_ have to step outside of your comfort zone if you
want to advance your career. You don't have to out-BS the BSers, but you have
to consciously devote time to getting noticed _and_ staying noticed. Never
assume that good work will get noticed on its own. If a tree falls in the
woods, and no one's around to hear it, _it doesn't matter_ if it makes a
sound.

~~~
joshhart
Your boss should be fighting to make you recognized. That's a big part of his
job. If he isn't making that effort, and if he isn't helping you find
opportunities to be noticed, then you should look for a new boss who will.

If course, if you ARE a manager, then you should bang the drum for your best
employees if you want them to be happy and continue to contribute.

~~~
olalonde
In a smaller company, couldn't it be against your boss's interest?

~~~
vonmoltke
Could easily be against your boss's best interests, or at least what your boss
thinks is their best interests, in a large company, too. That's the hole I'm
currently trying to fight out from.

~~~
alextrob
I don't see how it's in a manager's interest to not promote good work that
their team members are doing. If your manager says to his/her superiors things
like, "look at the talent that's thriving under my leadership", that's a good
thing for everyone.

~~~
stream_fusion
Examples that come to my mind, would be the risk that the employee gets
promoted over the boss, or alternately, that the employee is poached and
shifted out of the group by a different group boss.

------
eof
I would imagine the readership of HN is over represented by 'successful'
'introverts'.

I am not rich, but I am reasonably happy and by pretty much any reasonable
measure have a 'successful' life. At 29 y/o I command an hourly wage that puts
me in something like the top .05% of humanity, I have a gf I love, etc.

And, I am an introvert. I am _also_ a tiny bit shy with folks I don't know.

I think my ability to navigate a loud, look-at-me world comes chiefly from
self awareness and really just NGAF.

Put in a high-schoolesque way; the key to being a succesful introvert is by
coming across as mysterious rather than boring. There can be an inherent urge
to justify ones actions when confronted with things like 'why are you so
quiet.. or you havent said much over there..'.

The difference between blubbering and trying to defend yourself with excuses
and calmly showing your palms, or saying 'im just listening' is the difference
between someone who knows who they are and someone who doesn't.

I think really though the title of this submission/article is generally
implying something that isn't so true: that it is particularly difficult to
succeed as an introvert. The advice for an introvert is really the same as an
extrovert: do what you are good at and what you like to do; and don't spend so
much time and effort on things you don't like.

------
ReidZB
I don't really like the article. It seems to cultivate the mindset that
introverts are somehow disabled or lesser than extroverts in social
situations, which obviously isn't true: otherwise, how could we have had any
introverted presidents? (I'd argue to be the president, you have to have quite
a bit of social finesse.) The reality is that introverts are not incapable of
dealing with social situations and don't really need advice on how to "tackle"
group situations, as one of the questions implies. As an aside, that question
is what inspired me to write this response, because I found it very offending
that an introvert would need 'tips' on how to tackle a group situation.

For instance, I am extremely introverted. When I am in a group situation
(especially in a position of leadership), it's not that I balk at the contact
with others or have difficulty interacting socially. Instead, I am very quiet
and much less chatty than the rest of the group because I am listening very
intently and analyzing what they are saying. The net effect is that when I do
actually start to speak up, everyone else listens because they have a pretty
good idea that what I'm going to say is going to be relevant and/or
interesting, at least hopefully.

What this boils down to is a different style of management. I'm only in
college, but my experience so far is that extroverted 'leaders' tend to guide
discussion through conversation and heavy interaction. As an introvert, my
approach is quite a bit different: I try to let the discussion happen
organically and guide it through questioning/assent if it's absolutely
necessary. And if I hear an idea I really like but feel like the person
explaining it hasn't done it justice, I'll agree with it and try to add some
more reasons. In other words, I only intervene when I feel like it's _actually
necessary_ , and that means that when I do talk, people tend to listen more,
as a general rule.

I don't really know what method is better, and like I said, I'm only in
college so I don't claim to be some manager with a few decades of experiences
by any means.

Beyond the manager scenario, typical social interactions aren't much different
for me. The real difference that I prefer downtime between big social events,
whereas it seems to me that extroverts don't like that downtime. But most of
that is based on my trying to classify my friends as introverted/extroverted
and looking at their behavior; i.e., this reply is mostly anecdotal.

(I'm also not sure introversion/extroversion is so black and white, which most
people tend to treat it as.)

~~~
kijin
You're right, there's nothing black and white about this introvert/extrovert
business.

At one extreme, there are highly extroverted people who simply can't imagine
not interacting with hundreds of people on a regular basis. At the other
extreme, there are people who actually suffer a medical condition known as
autistic spectrum disorder (which itself contains a large gradient).
Everything in between is a gradient. Psychiatrists still have no idea how to
distinguish a person with mild Asperger's from a person who is simply
introverted.

This, of course, doesn't mean that there's anything wrong with taking a slice
of the gradient and analyzing the hell out of it. Writing about a complicated
topic always involves a certain amount of simplification and drawing lines
where it's actually quite blurry. I've read articles that do this job much
better than the link does, but this one isn't the worst, either.

~~~
unimpressive
"Psychiatrists still have no idea how to distinguish a person with mild
Asperger's from a person who is simply introverted."

Classic rule of logical argument: Two things which are equal to one thing are
equal to each other.

Or rather: If "Introversion" and High Functioning Autism (HFA) both
essentially meet the DSM guidelines for diagnosis, what difference is there
besides how pop psychology abuses the concept?

~~~
larve
I think the way to treat them. There are tons of illnesses or syndromes out
there that have similar symptoms. Take stomach pain for example, or flu-like
symptoms.

------
darasen
I applied for a job that had one of those idiotic 'personality tests'. They
could have boiled it down to one question: Introvert or not.

I was told they thought I scored too low to consider. For some reason I had
decided to answer honestly instead of the choice they were obviously looking
for. One question in particular annoyed me was something along the lines of
when not at work do prefer to be in a crowd of people or at home. What does
not at work have to do with anything work related?

~~~
setrofim_
If a company seriously uses such tests to select hires, you're probably better
off not working for them. Personality and "cultural fit" are important aspects
(for some jobs more than others), but a much better way to assess those is to
spend an hour talking to the potential employee; _not_ through some
standardized test.

I've also heard that some companies still use graphology in their screening
process (though this may be just an urban myth).

------
yason
Introversion means you charge energy by being alone and enjoying your own
company, and you discharge when you spend time with others. Extraversion is
the opposite.

Introverts can exhibit extraverted behaviour, just like extraverts can exhibit
introverted behaviour. It's just more taxing and the key is to balance between
charging vs. discharging so that you won't run out of juice.

------
asdkl234890
_Deep-thinking, sensitive and publicity-shy, introverts_.

Sensitive and publicity-shy is NOT introversion! Screw this, I give up. From
now on "introvert" means shy and other social problems.

~~~
stewbrew
So, shyness is a social problem now?

~~~
bh42222
Well if you're shy enough it will stymie your social life. Also it has nothing
to do with introversion.

But I think the OP's point is that "introvert" now means anyone who could be
either, shy, or socially anxious, or any number of other things.

I remember not that long ago the on-line geeky community embraced Asperger
syndrome as an excuse for lacking social skills, or being socially anxious, or
forever alone, etc. People who clearly did not have it claimed they had a
"light" version of it. Other people called them on it, fortunately that meme
did not sick.

But the all my social awkwardness is due to me being an introvert (when in
fact you could very well be an social super awkward extrovert) meme is
sticking.

That's too bad for those who are not socially awkward at all, but are
introverts. But oh well. We just need to invent a new term which will not be
co-opted by every shy and socially rough extrovert who thinks she's an
introvert because he doesn't have enough friends or enough recognition at
work.

------
atldev
Don't waste time worrying about how to succeed as an introvert. You'll find
examples of successful communicators, entrepreneurs, leaders, and CEOs that
are all introverts. I would write more about examples and experience, but back
to point #1. Don't waste time worrying about how to succeed as an introvert.

------
larve
I am a bit wary of the introvert/extrovert labeling, but have bought the
bought and decided to read through it. Playing the game, I'd say I'm an
introvert, and to be honest, the cool thing about this is realizing that all I
really need is time for myself. It doesn't really matter what happens or what
the circumstances are, as long as I have a book or a computer or a pencil I'm
pretty much happy in my own little bubble.

Because I used to love sharing what I discovered in that little bubble so
much, I went through a phase where I learned public speaking, and also
connecting to people. I usually do this one and one, but find it very easy to
establish deep connections by actually cutting through the "bullshit". I then
started a company, and had to put myself out there quite a bit more. Having
had no real experience of social contacts before though (except these
connections with I have to admit people pretty much far out there), I went far
overboard, which came back to bite me. I think that is the biggest issue with
all the "introversion" (not really thinking about reaching out to other
people, maybe even not really thinking about myself as a person nor other
people at all). I have no real concept of emotions, of how people could react,
that people can do things that hurt, that you can do things that hurt other
people, etc... I am now 30, I still believe that people are fundamentally
good, but I see the shades of gray in their actions. That's stuff that more
"extrovert" people probably learn at age 15.

The older I get the more I realize that I actually need social contact, at
least a few times a week. And I'm definitely struggling with that very much.
After that "getting out there thing", and running into a few quite hurtful
things, I completely lashed out to the other side, going back to my hacking
and art and what not, but actually actively destroying everything I produce
(unless it's for a client) so that other people won't notice, and I don't feel
the need to talk about it. It's a hard habit to get out from. And I still
don't actually know if it would be better for other people to notice, or if
being the submarine in a society where most people you notice are actively
craving for recognition. Recognition feels empty, while being happy on your
own is much more rewarding.

I hope that this book (it may be nicely written and founded, or just another
substanceless self-help book) will instill a small spark of self-confidence by
just putting a label on my behaviour. That never hurts.

------
nplusone
It's fitting that a story that hit the front page on Hacker News about
introverts has no comments. </meta>

~~~
_feda_
I sense a certain disdain from much of the HN community for
introvert/extrovert pop theory. They're all too frequently reduced to
meaningless buzzwords.

~~~
gwern
My general rule of thumb is that any thing which talks about a Big Five
personality trait (like Extraversion, in this case) but does not cite any
studies is not worth reading.

------
agilebyte
If someone is looking for a more detailed set of "labels" then check out
Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). Take a test here:
<http://similarminds.com/personality_tests.html> and searching for your
"type", judge for yourself if the advice given could advance you.

As discussed before on HN, the readership here is skewed towards INTP/INTJ
compared to a general population
(<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1675197>).

------
troels
I really dislike that whole idea of an intro/extrovert dualism. I don't
consider myself one or the other. Most people who know me would probably
describe me as introverted, but I don't have any problem letting myself be
heard or taking leadership of a situation if it's needed. So I just plain find
that those labels don't fit me very well and I somehow find it implausible
that I should be a unique snowflake, a statistical outlier.

------
rokhayakebe
There are 2 phases in your life, and a third one if you are really lucky.
During the first phase you will care what others think of you (and you will be
a puppet); most people were born and will die here. Extroverts live there.
During the second phase, you will ask yourself "what is the fucking point",
then you won't give a fuck what most people think. Some introverts make it
there. I'll skip the third phase.

~~~
ChrisMac
Gotta disagree with your statement that extroverts all care about what people
think of them. Just because someone is outgoing and energized by interpersonal
interactions, it doesn't automatically mean they're a mindless slave to other
people's opinions and social conventions. It's just a negative stereotype, and
comes across as a bit bitter and "Us vs. Them"

The implied positive stereotype about introverts isn't necessarily true
either, that they're all independent thinkers and unshackled from social
trivialities.

~~~
rokhayakebe
_Some introverts make it there_. Some, not most. As for extroverts, I stand by
my statement. They just need others too much in order to keep up. With that
kind of mind set, it is hard to get near emotional independence.

------
joshu
Author should consider writing "how to get traffic by posting your blog to
social news sites" article.

[http://h30565.www3.hp.com/t5/user/v1/viewprofilepage/user-
id...](http://h30565.www3.hp.com/t5/user/v1/viewprofilepage/user-id/23)

~~~
rsmiller510
Joshu, I'm not sure what exactly you're complaining about. The person who
posted the link is not the same person who wrote it. They just happen to work
at the same site with oh 50 or 60 other writers. But even if the author had
promoted her own story, so what? I can tell you that as a writer, I promote my
own work on social sites because being read is a goal of mine and also because
page views make my editors happy and keep me working. I make no apologies for
that. It's actually part of what any good writer should be doing. After I
publish a post I usually spend a good 20-30 minutes promoting it on social
sites--so people know it's there and actually read it.

~~~
joshu
self-promoters have awfully mixed reasons for promoting their own stuff. this
leads to problems.

\- they are free-riding, not helping the community. notice that OP doesn't
really post things they are not involved with. i notice you do the same.

\- they do not disclose it is self-authored.

\- the behavior is often looked down-upon by communities. i certainly feel bad
about doing it.

\- when authors are chasing pageviews and not reputation they are often
submitting everything rather than attempting to curate good stuff.

\- there's an incredibly fine line between this and spam.

when someone submits something that they found, they are saying "this is
good."

when someome submits something that they wrote, they are saying something
subtly different: "please look at this"

it's forgivable when they are part of the community, because at least they
know what the community is about. i notice that your first comment on this
site is about self-posting.

you are unapologetic about submitting your stuff but the vast majority gets
zero upvotes. wrong audience, probably.

~~~
rsmiller510
joshu, The fact is that the writer of this post and the person who posted were
two different people, so regardless of what you think of self-promotion, it
simply wasn't relevant in this instance.

~~~
joshu
the submitter works for the submitted blog, thus it is not completely
irrelevant.

~~~
hn12
I'm the submitter. I'll write a little of what I know.

joshu, you wrote, "notice that OP doesn't really post things they are not
involved with". In this case, I think you intend me when you write, "OP". At
this point, <http://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=hn12> seems to tally
sixteen items I've submitted to HN. The first fifteen were to pieces I'd
written: the tiny minority of all I'd written in the past couple of years that
I thought would particularly interest HN, but certainly related to me. The
sixteenth, and most recent item, was the one which spawned this thread. In my
mind, I had nothing to do with the piece on introversion, and know nothing
about the author, but it's true that I write sporadically for the same site.

I submit rarely to HN in part because I don't understand it. While I scan it,
I don't feel familiar enough with its ethos even to qualify myself as a
lurker. I frequently post--mostly pieces I have _not_ written--to Reddit,
DZone, Stackoverflow, and so on, because I am far more comfortable with what
"works" there.

My main personal conclusion from my submission is that I'm surprised--
astounded, even--and pleased with the quality of the comments that have
followed. I've found them more meaningful, in aggregate, than those for any
other submission I've read in HN. This encourages me to believe that there
must be much more to HN than I've found, and I simply need to approach it some
different way.

joshu, in a nearby comment you suggested I "disclose". Please provide detail:
how do you recommend I have submitted the article on introversion?

joshu, in a nearby comment you write about "chasing pageviews and not
reputation". When I posted the piece on introversion, I was "chasing" neither
pageviews NOR reputation; as I've suggested above, I understand the latter
only dimly. I thought the article would interest HN readers.

I underline: rsmiller, hn12, and the author of the introversion piece are
three different people. I suspect the three of us have never met each other,
although of course I'm in no position to be certain of the other two.

I'm unsure what you mean, joshu, by "the submittor works for the submitted
blog". I occasionally write for the HPIO site. It's possible I'll never do so
again; I certainly am not an employee or otherwise related to HPIO with a duty
to submit articles from the site to HN.

------
strickjb9
Extrovery & Introverts compliment each other extremely well. Imagine if Steve
Jobs & Steve Wozniak where both introverts.... or if they were both
extroverts. That tandem would have never played out as well.

------
gamechangr
The truth....Extroverts are consistently chosen as leaders.

There is no way around it, from the numbers. That doesn't make them better or
worse.

We all have our part to play.

~~~
duggan
Dear me, how patronizing.

The reason, by the way, that leadership is often correlated with extroversion
is more to do with American ideals of the perfect citizen since about the time
of Dale Carnegie than due to any actual results.

In fact many successful CEOs are introverts, because deep critical thinking
and mediation tend to be useful qualities, surprisingly enough.

Not in finance though. And the world of finance has had a smooth ride,
alright.

~~~
gamechangr
Actually think it has more to do with the fact that extroverted people are
more persuasive and generally voice their opinions more. Some of it is just in
the numbers...if you know more people you have a strategic advantage of more
opportunities.

Oh yeah....It's not an American concept????

------
drivebyacct2
I don't understand these articles. Introvert does NOT mean that you're
incapable of communicating well or being friendly. I pride myself on
communication skills, yet I can go weeks at a time without any human
interaction and prefer to work in conditions that are mocked by others as a
"cave". These things have not prevented me from having good relationships with
clients and/or colleagues.

As for jonnathanson's comment, frankly it doesn't sound like an introvert
issue, it sounds like a basic communication issue. If no one knows what you're
doing and you don't take the time to let others understand your
accomplishments (even just an email to the team "Hey, I got X,Y,Z done and a
proposal for W", what are they supposed to do exactly?

~~~
suneilp
I'm with you on the communication issue. After all, no one is 100%
introverted. That term has also become misunderstood and misused.

Additionally, there tend to be other negative qualities associated with
introverts. Just as there are negative qualities for extroverts.

One thing I did recently that's helped me deal with being an 'introvert' was
to take improv comedy classes. It's helped me significantly to overcome
shyness and communicating with people.

Communicating is a like a muscle, you need to step out of your comfort zone
and just do it. Staying in the 'cave' too much at a time isn't good. It's
sorta like atrophy. Just go out once a week and socialize or go to lunch with
a co-worker.

~~~
hobin
"I'm with you on the communication issue. After all, no one is 100%
introverted. That term has also become misunderstood and misused."

Yet you still seem to think that introversion and communication skills have
something to do with each other ('after all ---'). I don't think this is true.
The fundamental difference between introversion and extraversion appears to be
how people 'spend' energy and how they 'gain' energy.

For example, I'm probably as introverted as they come. Yet in social
situations I seem like an 'extraverted' person, because when I'm with people,
I like to talk quite a bit, have some social chatter, all that stuff. But this
can tire me. And then there are months when I don't go out and socialize,
simply because I'm tired and like to be alone with my thoughts. None of this
has much to do with skills of any kind.

