Is perfectionism the secret of success or a disease?
Author: Roman Logan,University of practical psychology
Perfectionism is a buzzword.
I often hear, my friend, how young people with black circles under their eyes from fatigue speak with pride about themselves: "I'm a perfectionist."
They say, like, with pride, but I don't hear enthusiasm.
I propose to think about the thesis that perfectionism is more evil than good. Specifically, a nervous breakdown.
And second , what can be an alternative to perfectionism?
Wikipedia: Perfectionism - in psychology, the belief that an ideal can and should be achieved. In the pathological form-the belief that an imperfect result of work has no right to exist. Also, perfectionism is the desire to remove all " superfluous "or make" uneven "object " even".
The pursuit of success is in human nature.
In this sense, perfectionism encourages hard work to achieve results.
As a driving force-quite a useful quality, the fictional positive perfectionist psychologist in my head tells me.
Agree. Now, my friend, the dark side of the moon:
- Perfectionism is characterized by large time expenditures (not so much on developing a solution, but on putting a gloss on it).
- As well as energy consumption (doubts, doubts, doubts).
- Denial of reality (rejection of the idea that the ideal result may not be achieved).
- The closeness of the feedback.
- Fear of failure = anxiety and high level of anxiety.
I understand perfectionists well, because for many years I have proudly positioned myself as a workaholic perfectionist.
I started my career in marketing, and this is just a source of a pandemic of perfectionism (especially the part related to visual communications - who knows, will understand).
Benefits: high-quality products (website, articles, design solutions).
Anti-benefits: work 15 hours a day, lack of privacy, constant feeling of anxiety, lack of opportunities to develop through feedback.
And then I discovered the concept of optimalism (by Ben-Shahar), accepted it, and offer it to you for reflection.
The optimist also works hard as a perfectionist. The key difference is that the optimist knows how to stop in time.
The Optimalist chooses and implements not the ideal, but the optimal - the best, most favorable under the current set of conditions.
Not perfect, but a sufficient level of quality.
Sufficient doesn't mean low. Sufficient - so, within the current task - for the top five without striving for the top five with a plus.
The same Ben-Shahar offers comparative characteristics of two types:
- Perfectionist-the path as a straight line, fear of failure, focus on the goal, "all or nothing", defensive position, error seeker, strict, conservative.
- Optimist-the path as a spiral, failure as feedback, focus including on the path to the goal, open to advice, seeker of advantages, easy to adapt.
General George Patton
For example, I write a creative work. There is a topic, I set a goal. I give myself 60 minutes to write. Another 30 minutes for adjustments (usually after a couple of hours, "insights" catch up with me). That's about it. I did it quickly and efficiently, in the best possible way within the task and in the allotted time, and moved on.
Recommendations:
- Determine the desired result that will satisfy you
- Determine the ideal result. Answer me, why do you want to bring a satisfactory result to the ideal? What are the benefits?
- Drop the excess
- Set a deadline for completion
- Go for it!
Another example to think about:
a year ago, I took a course in public speaking, and as a result, I took part in an oratorical tournament.
Because I really invested in the process and achieving the result, I performed brilliantly according to the judges.
And here's the paradox-the feedback from the judges is enthusiastic, but they vote for my opponents who were objectively weaker.
I won the tournament. With high energy consumption.
I ask my mentor, - How is it, like the feedback "everything is cool, fire", but do not vote?
You perform so perfectly that it annoys people, " the Coach tells me.
Like this.
And finally, a few examples:
Thomas Edison, who registered 1,093 patents-including patents for the electric light bulb, phonograph, and Telegraph. When it was pointed out to him that he had failed dozens of times while working on his inventions, Edison replied: "I haven't had any failures. I just found ten thousand ways that don't work."
What if Edison was a perfectionist? It might have been a light bulb that was a century ahead of its time. And only a light bulb. Sometimes quantity is important, not quality.
Michael Jordan, one of the greatest athletes of our time: "In my career, I missed more than nine thousand times. Lost in almost three hundred competitions. Twenty-six times I was passed the ball for the winning shot, and I missed. All my life I have failed again and again. And that's why I was successful."
What if Jordan waited every time for the perfect combination of circumstances to make a throw? The best place to wait for such a combination of circumstances is on the bench. Sometimes it is better to make even a seemingly hopeless attempt than to wait for the ideal.
One man in his twenties lost his job. A year later, he tried his luck in politics, running for the state legislature, and lost. Then he tried his hand at business — unsuccessfully. At the age of twenty-seven, he had a nervous breakdown. But he recovered, and at the age of thirty-four, having gained some experience, ran for Congress. Lost. Five years later, the same thing happened again. Undeterred by the failure, he raises the bar even higher and, at the age of forty-six, tries to get elected to the Senate. When this idea fails, he puts forward his candidacy for the post of Vice President, and again unsuccessfully. Ashamed of decades of professional failures and defeats, he runs for the Senate again on the eve of his fiftieth birthday and fails. But two years later, this man becomes President of the United States. His name was Abraham Lincoln.
What if Lincoln was a perfectionist? Most likely, the first failure would have been a knockout for him. The perfectionist is afraid of failure, the optimist is able to rise after failures.
And, of course, in memory of many software products of Microsoft Corporation that were published "raw", "unfinished", caused a lot of criticism. But they were released before the competition. And they were refined in the process, including feedback from dissatisfied users. But bill gates is a different story.
Summarize:
Optimal - the best solution within the specified conditions for a limited time. This is enough, my friend, for success.
PS: and it seems that a whole generation of procrastinating perfectionists has appeared, they will do everything perfectly, but not today, but tomorrow - have you met such people? :)