how do you decide whether it's better to (a) put in the effort to prove a point (to yourself? to other people?) or (b) quit while you're (sort of) ahead because the situation is lose-lose?
i've always tended too much on the side of (a) either because i would feel like a total failure if i chose (b) - when in fact that may not actually be a failure - or because i'm not good enough at recognizing lose-lose situations ... or because i hear my mother nagging me if i try to quit. which would argue for choosing (b).
on the other hand, i think successful people are often those who are have just been determined and have persevered long enough. which would argue for (a). and i hear my mother nagging me if i try to quit.
sigh. i think one of my friends told me freshman year of college that life is not a meritocracy, and i needed to stop acting like it was.
Comments
lessons from a frosh | edward
As someone who took on enough tasks until burnout approached, and never quit any organization, it took me several years to realize that that particular methodology is flawed.
Having said that, in the real world, I've only quit one job and been let go twice. So the relevance of my advice must be taken with a large grain of NaCL.
posted at: 2009-08-27 11:31:08it depends, no? | brad
i'd say most of the time when people are debating the merits of a proposal, there are usually more than just two people involved. and then there's always a third option - c - to make sure that you quit while others know you're right, so that you gain their support even if you don't convince the primary antagonist. also - has my phone arrived?
posted at: 2009-08-28 14:27:47poker | edward
Yes, yes, Brad.
posted at: 2009-09-05 18:38:26