Some here are looking at this from a low SSH perspective. It was not the Sigma's superior intelligence, logic or explanations that allowed him to deduce and convince others that hopping on the rainbow ride is a bad idea. It was his general vision and drive, and the fact that he is important and determined enough that he is able to say no. The detachment may have played a part as well.
The Cuckservatives believe that if they can just find the best presentation for their superior logical arguments everything will be redeemed. This is fundamentally low SSH and will never work. Learn from the Sigma.
He doesn't need to. He exercised his authority over the marketing budget and accepted the fallout from the conflict. Which might mean power struggle and a fight his job may or may not survive, but he took his stand for the Mission.
One thing many people are missing is that a situatuonal alpha is not an alpha. An Alpha is fairly rare. Most work alphas are situational alphas not actual alphas. I have worked with maybe 10 true alphas. The rest are all bravos or deltas.
Bravos will face their own issues in an org that is missing a true alpha because they will recognize its lack and will eventually move on.
Good idea. I'm going to create a comic called "Adventures of Juan the Mower and Leaf Blower" and it'll feature all the SSH ranks. It'll be a huge hit with the Mexicans.
Alpha: I need you to mow the client's front yard.
Juan (Sigma): No. Backyard first because reasons.
Three weeks later: Juan is without a job and is stealing car parts.
In a small team situation, the Sigma would have already nipped in the bud the problem before the meeting. He may not be interested in people much, but the project itself is very dear to him.
Fair enough. Take my comment with a grain of salt.
I agree this is not happening most of the time, I rather meant this should happen, as a best case scenario. Still, being disruptive *could* be a cause to fire somebody.
Someone who is outside or loosely attached to the hierarchy is also more likely to get blamed for a stupid group decision when it does eventually blow up. The reasoning doesn't have to make any sense. If Dag kept his mouth shut and everyone else voiced their approval of the stupid idea, they would still find a way to blame Dag for not speaking up. For the hierarchy he's the easy target.
A gamma fantasy. Even a delusional gamma knows he is not an alpha so the fantasy is sigma. Super capable loner , misunderstood and the ladies love him.
Or you use the Gamma's to torment the Sigma's, or vice-versa.
Other alternative is finding ways to make use of the idocencies of a Sigma vers the mission. There are parts where this trait helps keep the mission on track, just not if you are Boeing or corrupt.
That's probably more common than you would think. Actually Ejecting someone who is an otherwise good performer is tedious.
One company I worked for would tacitly allow "open season" on personas non grata where breaches of ettiquette and line-stepping against them were suddenly no longer discouraged. Sort of a passive-agressive hostile work environmnent. Normal people didn't tolerate that, and Sigmas who normally are good enough to have Options generally would punch-out even sooner.
The ingroup may not care and rather just see what happens between the sigma/gamma. Sigma, unless in. Position of powere will likely find someplace else because the agrivation is not worth interfering with his goals. Sigmas are not Apex preditor superhumans.
Now could they go Count Monte Christo, sure but that would only if they took interest in revenge vs their original goal.
Indeed, people will use "You're not a team player" to pressure you into all sorts of things. While being a team player is good, it also leads to group think. Teaching people to speak up when things don't seem right is tough. I was an STA at a Nuke plant and when I did speak up, as was my job, I was ignored, even thought the team had been trained to ignore group think.
I now raise sheep and they are not very bright. Yet it is hard to say people are any smarter.
Like anyone else, Sigmas can make good calls or bad calls. In a reasonably healthy team folks will give a pass for the guy who Upsets the Apple cart, especially when he's right and "Iceberg Avoided". After all, Success has many Parents, but Failure is an Orphan.
But boy, pull the proverbial Rip Cord when you're wrong...you get the picture.
On top of that, How you drop the Sigma Bomb on your teammates has a good deal to do with it. Some folks take the opportunity as licence, which chaps more asses than strictly necessary.
Again, this is highly dependent on the Win / Loss record. Too many L's and you get a rep, deserved or not, ranging from "nervous Nellie / Chicken Little" to "bomb-thrower / gets off pissing in the punch bowl" and you get discounted.
Except that unlike Gammas, Sigmas are much less likely to make "bad calls", i.e., mouth off when they're not 100% certain that they're *objectively* right.
What makes the comic so funny is that everyone who's "based" knows full well that social justice convergence is disastrous -- especially now that ESG money isn't nearly as available as it was at zero interest rates -- yet there's still huge social pressure to go along with it.
Social pressure. The people in the group aren't going to choose differently. Not before the rest of the group isn't moving yet. Normal people will do what every other normal person does. Because they're of the group that doesn't tolerate being different.
> Except that unlike Gammas, Sigmas are much less likely to make "bad calls", i.e., mouth off when they're not 100% certain that they're *objectively* right.
Like an Alpha when a Sigma makes a call they are accepting responsibility. Gammas are just giving their opinion.
No. The sigma can earn respect from some when they are right, but they will cause far greater upset among others, especially if they make changes that are enforced throughout the organization or make Sally from engineering look incompetent.
A sigma's survival in any workplace depends on his direct supervisor. The boss would have to recognize his talents, know how use him effectively, have the opportunity to use him, be willing to defend him from the smart boys and girls desperately trying to prove him wrong about literally anything and tolerate an employee that can't be controlled (especially with fear). This is not likely a long-term situation if it can be found.
I don't think you're wrong here. I would still maintain that the Outcome for the Sigma who drops the Bomb is still heavily impacted by the details of What, How, and Who.
I would also say that it is telling on an Organization as well: if it can't tolerate or even accept some level of Sigma action, then it really is not a truly healthy organization after all.
Here's another incorrect assumption in your post, that the sigma would care how he was seen or even consider it. People are baffled by sigma behavior and often confused by them. The sigma feels the same way about you, especially when he's young. Being intelligent and knowing you are very different from a young age gives him a great incentive to study human behavior. So,while an older sigma may have learned to socially calibrate his behavior and reactions, a 25 year old sigma will be very comfortable walking into a meeting with senior management and dropping a hand grenade.
I am not making that assumption at all. I am pointing out that the How can effect the amount of blowback, not whether the Sigma in question worries about it or not. The amount of blowback and the organizational culture drives how soon/often/likely the Sigma will be ejected from the Org.
Iron is 100% on the mark with the whole "sounds like a gamma" thing. A delta doesn't have a mind that warps objectivity into personal insults.
Anyway, what's most interesting with Iron's post is that he's on to something when he says that an organization is unhealthy if it can't handle a sigma. Indeed, there's a pattern: too many homos = no sigmas; vice versa.
It delves into the problem that Charlton and Dutton write about in The Genius Famine: society is killing real intelligence (interpret nous for more accuracy, not IQ.)
I am speaking from experience here. I have managed, and been managed by Sigmas before. Sucessfully, but I have the stripes to show for it.
I have worked in places that were Sigma Hostile, Sigma Allergic (didn't expel but declared "open season" on them, and Sigma Tolerant- if-not-accepting. I am currently at the last one, and part of the managment team that tends that particular garden.
I'm not entirely disagreeing with Barbarian, but his experience isn't my experience.
I'm gonna put my entire package on the line here and make another call. (Honey, get the butcher's knife ready incase I fail and need to pay my dues.)
1. "You don't understand". I hear this all the time from the biggest homo at work as he seethes visibly and denies reality while playing stupid word games. And from women. (Mostly women.) It makes me want to scrape their faces against a brick wall while asking them if they enjoy it. (METAPHORICALLY SPEAKING. I AM A VERY MEEK MAN. DO NOT FEEL THREATENED.)
2. I don't care that you think I don't understand. I will inform you that my grasp of reality is either completely psychotic or absolute truth.
3. (The most risky call out:) You perceive yourself as a sigma, blithely unaware that you're a complete Silly Billy, so your own personal experience at your own personal workplace is that of the Hunted Sigma--it's a very ~personal experience~. I'm not a mind reader or anything, so call this a statistical analysis; an educated guess.
4. Iron = Alpha. Barbarian = Silly Billy. The dynamic of the hierarchy is visible in the thread. Vox's giant-brain taxonomy seems infallible.
Here I am, rolling around in the mud again instead of doing what I should be doing. Shame on me.
He's not wrong. You are, because you're trying to turn what is obviously and observably a gradient into the binary model that is more comfortable for you.
Hey, I've got great news! If we change our process to this new way, we can be more productive with a lot less effort on our part. Our quality will greatly improve also, so we won't have to have all that negative attention. We'll all look good. We're going to be on easy street from here on out...
What the delta hears:
Listen Pal, I know I've only been here for a couple weeks, but YOU have been doing things pretty messed up for about 30 years now. You must be incredibly retarded to have not figured out something so simple. How did you even find your way to work? So, pretty soon, you're going to have to do what I tell you. And, all that respect and esteem you've enjoyed as a SME, that belongs to me now. Retard!
The delta will now go to his boss, present himself as the voice of experience and reason, and complain about how you won't listen and he just can't do anything with you. And he will most likely be believed.
You're right on principle. I've seen an Alpha boss invite a sigma, and in doing so, increase production MARKEDLY. The sigma was hated by everyone despite his contributions, unsurprisingly. But Alpha's are men. They're objective enough to set aside petty squabbles for the survival of the group (the company was failing.) Bravo bosses might do this, too, but I've yet to see anything concrete.
Exactly... I might add that an Alpha boss is more likely to make this arrangement work due to his people skills and hence being less likely to be subject to a revolution than a Sigma boss would be.
We seem to think of sigmas as being really cool, but they can also be cold, off-putting and down right unpleasant. To illustrate this I will give a few examples of brief, real life interactions with a sigma.
1
Sigma: Only a complete retard would do/ think x.
Gamma:*puffs himself up* Hey! I do think x!
Sigma: See.
2
Delta: I'm sorry, I've forgotten your name.
Sigma: That's alright.
Delta: ...that's alright?
Sigma: Yeah, don't worry about it.
3
Woman: *crying * Why won't you LOVE me? * cries uncontrollably *
Sigma: Can you.... go do that somewhere else? It's kind of irritating.
This is what it looks like when someone genuinely doesn't care.
Kobe Bryant
Turn off auto correct is the best professional move
Some here are looking at this from a low SSH perspective. It was not the Sigma's superior intelligence, logic or explanations that allowed him to deduce and convince others that hopping on the rainbow ride is a bad idea. It was his general vision and drive, and the fact that he is important and determined enough that he is able to say no. The detachment may have played a part as well.
The Cuckservatives believe that if they can just find the best presentation for their superior logical arguments everything will be redeemed. This is fundamentally low SSH and will never work. Learn from the Sigma.
There's no indication in this comic that that guy convinced anyone of anything.
He doesn't need to. He exercised his authority over the marketing budget and accepted the fallout from the conflict. Which might mean power struggle and a fight his job may or may not survive, but he took his stand for the Mission.
He did convince the ladies that he's hot.
Good point. I think I missed the overarching plot of the comic, which is what you explained here.
There are effective, experienced, polished sigmas and those that are less politically adroit.
The successful ones are allowed great latitude within their boundaries and will avoid public humiliation of their leaders.
That said, rather than be associated with a failure, the will quit. They understand they are the first scapegoat anyhow.
One thing many people are missing is that a situatuonal alpha is not an alpha. An Alpha is fairly rare. Most work alphas are situational alphas not actual alphas. I have worked with maybe 10 true alphas. The rest are all bravos or deltas.
Bravos will face their own issues in an org that is missing a true alpha because they will recognize its lack and will eventually move on.
They're about 2%-3% of the population and most of those aren't the Trump type alphas. They're more low key and usually run small groups.
Now imagine being a low IQ sigma. That would be the worst. Prayers to all the low IQ sigmas out there.
It's like being omega except you have good hygiene, style, and you get laid.
Good idea. I'm going to create a comic called "Adventures of Juan the Mower and Leaf Blower" and it'll feature all the SSH ranks. It'll be a huge hit with the Mexicans.
Alpha: I need you to mow the client's front yard.
Juan (Sigma): No. Backyard first because reasons.
Three weeks later: Juan is without a job and is stealing car parts.
No I think thats gamma
In a small team situation, the Sigma would have already nipped in the bud the problem before the meeting. He may not be interested in people much, but the project itself is very dear to him.
Sounds convincing, assuming the organisation itself is rather healthy.
Only thing that matters imo is if the Sigma in question was objectively right or wrong.
Objectively as in "from the viewpoint of a totally disinterested extraterrestrial observer".
If he was wrong, fire him. If he was right, fire the team.
Right or wrong is a gamma tell. He wears the hat of a moral judge.
I was talking about right and wrong in a scientifically measurable, factual sense. 2 +2 = 4 is right, period, no matter your morals.
You've never worked in an office, have you. It's very difficult to fire someone without cause, and "being wrong' is not cause.
Fair enough. Take my comment with a grain of salt.
I agree this is not happening most of the time, I rather meant this should happen, as a best case scenario. Still, being disruptive *could* be a cause to fire somebody.
https://ibb.co/NxMpR3y
-\_(".)_/-
Take the money and run, Sigmamouse. That job sucks.
Someone who is outside or loosely attached to the hierarchy is also more likely to get blamed for a stupid group decision when it does eventually blow up. The reasoning doesn't have to make any sense. If Dag kept his mouth shut and everyone else voiced their approval of the stupid idea, they would still find a way to blame Dag for not speaking up. For the hierarchy he's the easy target.
A gamma fantasy. Even a delusional gamma knows he is not an alpha so the fantasy is sigma. Super capable loner , misunderstood and the ladies love him.
'He's literally me.'
This comic will result in no less than 6 gammas receiving disciplinary actions for insubordination this week.
- Boss: "Let's change the background color to grey."
- Gamma: "Akshually, grey is not a color, it's a shade on the black-white-continuum."
- Hot Secretary: *detects sigma*
- Gamma: "Wanna see my Funko Pop collection, milady?"
- Hot Secretary: *undresses on the spot*
They forget the observable patterns betray their proclaimed sigma archetype. VD emphasises on the what and not why.
Or you use the Gamma's to torment the Sigma's, or vice-versa.
Other alternative is finding ways to make use of the idocencies of a Sigma vers the mission. There are parts where this trait helps keep the mission on track, just not if you are Boeing or corrupt.
That's probably more common than you would think. Actually Ejecting someone who is an otherwise good performer is tedious.
One company I worked for would tacitly allow "open season" on personas non grata where breaches of ettiquette and line-stepping against them were suddenly no longer discouraged. Sort of a passive-agressive hostile work environmnent. Normal people didn't tolerate that, and Sigmas who normally are good enough to have Options generally would punch-out even sooner.
Purposely tormenting the sigma is not recommended.
Welcome to modernity.
The ingroup may not care and rather just see what happens between the sigma/gamma. Sigma, unless in. Position of powere will likely find someplace else because the agrivation is not worth interfering with his goals. Sigmas are not Apex preditor superhumans.
Now could they go Count Monte Christo, sure but that would only if they took interest in revenge vs their original goal.
This comic is very good. Is this particular scenario based on something that happened in real life?
It's based on what should happen every time a marketing executive recommends partnering with a tranny for an IMC campaign.
Indeed, people will use "You're not a team player" to pressure you into all sorts of things. While being a team player is good, it also leads to group think. Teaching people to speak up when things don't seem right is tough. I was an STA at a Nuke plant and when I did speak up, as was my job, I was ignored, even thought the team had been trained to ignore group think.
I now raise sheep and they are not very bright. Yet it is hard to say people are any smarter.
The key point here is "as they perceive it".
Like anyone else, Sigmas can make good calls or bad calls. In a reasonably healthy team folks will give a pass for the guy who Upsets the Apple cart, especially when he's right and "Iceberg Avoided". After all, Success has many Parents, but Failure is an Orphan.
But boy, pull the proverbial Rip Cord when you're wrong...you get the picture.
On top of that, How you drop the Sigma Bomb on your teammates has a good deal to do with it. Some folks take the opportunity as licence, which chaps more asses than strictly necessary.
Again, this is highly dependent on the Win / Loss record. Too many L's and you get a rep, deserved or not, ranging from "nervous Nellie / Chicken Little" to "bomb-thrower / gets off pissing in the punch bowl" and you get discounted.
Except that unlike Gammas, Sigmas are much less likely to make "bad calls", i.e., mouth off when they're not 100% certain that they're *objectively* right.
What makes the comic so funny is that everyone who's "based" knows full well that social justice convergence is disastrous -- especially now that ESG money isn't nearly as available as it was at zero interest rates -- yet there's still huge social pressure to go along with it.
Social pressure. The people in the group aren't going to choose differently. Not before the rest of the group isn't moving yet. Normal people will do what every other normal person does. Because they're of the group that doesn't tolerate being different.
> Except that unlike Gammas, Sigmas are much less likely to make "bad calls", i.e., mouth off when they're not 100% certain that they're *objectively* right.
Like an Alpha when a Sigma makes a call they are accepting responsibility. Gammas are just giving their opinion.
No. The sigma can earn respect from some when they are right, but they will cause far greater upset among others, especially if they make changes that are enforced throughout the organization or make Sally from engineering look incompetent.
A sigma's survival in any workplace depends on his direct supervisor. The boss would have to recognize his talents, know how use him effectively, have the opportunity to use him, be willing to defend him from the smart boys and girls desperately trying to prove him wrong about literally anything and tolerate an employee that can't be controlled (especially with fear). This is not likely a long-term situation if it can be found.
I don't think you're wrong here. I would still maintain that the Outcome for the Sigma who drops the Bomb is still heavily impacted by the details of What, How, and Who.
I would also say that it is telling on an Organization as well: if it can't tolerate or even accept some level of Sigma action, then it really is not a truly healthy organization after all.
Canary. Coal Mine.
Here's another incorrect assumption in your post, that the sigma would care how he was seen or even consider it. People are baffled by sigma behavior and often confused by them. The sigma feels the same way about you, especially when he's young. Being intelligent and knowing you are very different from a young age gives him a great incentive to study human behavior. So,while an older sigma may have learned to socially calibrate his behavior and reactions, a 25 year old sigma will be very comfortable walking into a meeting with senior management and dropping a hand grenade.
I am not making that assumption at all. I am pointing out that the How can effect the amount of blowback, not whether the Sigma in question worries about it or not. The amount of blowback and the organizational culture drives how soon/often/likely the Sigma will be ejected from the Org.
Putting my sack on the line here with a callout:
1. Iron doesn't lie. Speaking from
experience?
2. Barbarian is speaking off a script.
Moving on.
Iron is 100% on the mark with the whole "sounds like a gamma" thing. A delta doesn't have a mind that warps objectivity into personal insults.
Anyway, what's most interesting with Iron's post is that he's on to something when he says that an organization is unhealthy if it can't handle a sigma. Indeed, there's a pattern: too many homos = no sigmas; vice versa.
It delves into the problem that Charlton and Dutton write about in The Genius Famine: society is killing real intelligence (interpret nous for more accuracy, not IQ.)
I am speaking from experience here. I have managed, and been managed by Sigmas before. Sucessfully, but I have the stripes to show for it.
I have worked in places that were Sigma Hostile, Sigma Allergic (didn't expel but declared "open season" on them, and Sigma Tolerant- if-not-accepting. I am currently at the last one, and part of the managment team that tends that particular garden.
I'm not entirely disagreeing with Barbarian, but his experience isn't my experience.
You are wrong. You do not understand. Enough people in any organization will take offense to the sigma's very existence to put him at risk.
I'm gonna put my entire package on the line here and make another call. (Honey, get the butcher's knife ready incase I fail and need to pay my dues.)
1. "You don't understand". I hear this all the time from the biggest homo at work as he seethes visibly and denies reality while playing stupid word games. And from women. (Mostly women.) It makes me want to scrape their faces against a brick wall while asking them if they enjoy it. (METAPHORICALLY SPEAKING. I AM A VERY MEEK MAN. DO NOT FEEL THREATENED.)
2. I don't care that you think I don't understand. I will inform you that my grasp of reality is either completely psychotic or absolute truth.
3. (The most risky call out:) You perceive yourself as a sigma, blithely unaware that you're a complete Silly Billy, so your own personal experience at your own personal workplace is that of the Hunted Sigma--it's a very ~personal experience~. I'm not a mind reader or anything, so call this a statistical analysis; an educated guess.
4. Iron = Alpha. Barbarian = Silly Billy. The dynamic of the hierarchy is visible in the thread. Vox's giant-brain taxonomy seems infallible.
Here I am, rolling around in the mud again instead of doing what I should be doing. Shame on me.
He's not wrong. You are, because you're trying to turn what is obviously and observably a gradient into the binary model that is more comfortable for you.
Stop it. Very few things work that way.
What the sigma could say:
Hey, I've got great news! If we change our process to this new way, we can be more productive with a lot less effort on our part. Our quality will greatly improve also, so we won't have to have all that negative attention. We'll all look good. We're going to be on easy street from here on out...
What the delta hears:
Listen Pal, I know I've only been here for a couple weeks, but YOU have been doing things pretty messed up for about 30 years now. You must be incredibly retarded to have not figured out something so simple. How did you even find your way to work? So, pretty soon, you're going to have to do what I tell you. And, all that respect and esteem you've enjoyed as a SME, that belongs to me now. Retard!
The delta will now go to his boss, present himself as the voice of experience and reason, and complain about how you won't listen and he just can't do anything with you. And he will most likely be believed.
Never going to happen.
That feels more like a Gamma vs Delta/Bravo than a Delta vs Sigma to me.
And my impression is that such a boss would probably have to be either Alpha or another Sigma.
You're right on principle. I've seen an Alpha boss invite a sigma, and in doing so, increase production MARKEDLY. The sigma was hated by everyone despite his contributions, unsurprisingly. But Alpha's are men. They're objective enough to set aside petty squabbles for the survival of the group (the company was failing.) Bravo bosses might do this, too, but I've yet to see anything concrete.
Exactly... I might add that an Alpha boss is more likely to make this arrangement work due to his people skills and hence being less likely to be subject to a revolution than a Sigma boss would be.
Not sure it has to be...but @Barbarian does touch on something important:
If your org can't handle some Sigma behavior, its not truly healthy, and that on Managment at the end of the day. Truly.
Team/Org culture is like a garden: it must be minded, tended, Guarded, and when needed Pruned. This duty falls upon Leadership because the
*team can't do it for themselves* by and large particularly the Guarding and Pruning part.
Good managers know when to stomp a hole in toxic behaviors and people, including balancing the ROIs for their Sigmas and Gammas as well.
We seem to think of sigmas as being really cool, but they can also be cold, off-putting and down right unpleasant. To illustrate this I will give a few examples of brief, real life interactions with a sigma.
1
Sigma: Only a complete retard would do/ think x.
Gamma:*puffs himself up* Hey! I do think x!
Sigma: See.
2
Delta: I'm sorry, I've forgotten your name.
Sigma: That's alright.
Delta: ...that's alright?
Sigma: Yeah, don't worry about it.
3
Woman: *crying * Why won't you LOVE me? * cries uncontrollably *
Sigma: Can you.... go do that somewhere else? It's kind of irritating.
This is what it looks like when someone genuinely doesn't care.
Having sucessfully managed high performing Sigmas, you are preaching to the Choir here.
I would point out that there is a difference between not caring and caring but weighing it as low-importance.
Normal people have a word for folks closer to the former than the latter: Asshole. They're not always wrong here.
More importantly and topically: People *Will* tolerate a high-performing Asshole. For a time.
But eventually, they will stop doing so...and thus one part of the Sigma ejection phenom.
A healthy culture can mitigate, but not entirely eliminate this.
It's kind of cool how vox is staying out of this and letting us have at each other.
So, how many sigmas did you have. Maybe a dozen of them?
The team membership/culture delineates the degrees of freedom, the leaders have, in gardening org health.
Yes