Your Most Important Skill: Empathy

There are lots of articles and books out there that probably cover this better than I can. This was an interesting read though.

http://blogs.psychcentral.com/balanced-life/2014/05/setting-...

If anything, the "skills" demanded by the present economy are those of a high-functioning psychopath [1]. That is, total lack of empathy but with a modest ability to fake it.

[1] http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/09/10/1015320/-Why-High-F...

Given all of that, I have gradually established certain "rules of engagement" that aim for noble uses of these various strengths and weaknesses - whom I am allowed to be involved with, and on what levels, in various situations, and what is a "good" way to be involved with someone. I subscribe heavily to Stoicism. I also think often on how socialization works elsewhere in nature, to realign my perspective on human society.

0] http://omswami.com/2014/12/seed-empathy.html 1] http://omswami.com/2014/10/if-truth-be-told.html

On the opposite end of the scale, there are "sponges" who receive and absorb others' emotions unconditionally, as you describe. I've known many people like this, and many seem to develop unusual health issues -- but it's equally possible to notice this process in the moment and modulate it.

In both cases, practicing mindfulness meditation is the most direct way to develop the necessary skills.

I've been diagnosed with aspergers by one specialist. I had experience that sort of wreaked havoc on my life, so I've learned to carefully not conflate the term empathy with 'mind reading'. It takes a lot of practice, but you can actually learn to (not turn off, but subdue, I suppose is the best wording) the voice in your head that flags every face, body expression, tone of voice, topic of conversation, etc - to a more appropriate level, a more course granularity (depending on the relationship). If you want. I used to memorize conversations and attempt to predict what people were thinking/wanted/needed, and based my action and decision from this prediction. I was very unhappy. I felt like I had no self, my mind was just consumed with the needs of everyone else.

I am also a domestic abuse survivor, so I think my obsession with people behavior, feelings, and thoughts has been 'on alert', hypervigilant. At some point I had to decide that I wanted to study code and math more than I wanted a false sense of people security. I am less depressed because of it, but I also avoid close relationships. It is easy to fall into a black hole when others are suffering because it is so incredibly sad. But I just try to be strong and supportive now, because the world needs people like that too.

[1] - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2518049/

If there's someone in the office having a confrontational phone call, I have to either feel their rage or isolate myself (loud music). Seeing other people's injuries (especially my son's) is overwhelming. I naturally do the 'Choose the other side' suggestion from the article - possibly due to an incorrect belief that other people act rationally, and so must have had some reason for being mean. I have to be really careful with emotive TV/films. They can screw me up for days.

1. http://www.npr.org/programs/invisibilia/382451600/entangleme...

This is the dangerous line this article is suggestive toward: empathy as a tool for manipulative gain.

I wonder if someone truly naturally capable of understanding differing perspectives would even write such an article. It sounds more like a robot discovering a trick they can utilize to score points.

I think empathy is a sense. When I read some people talking about it in this way, it feels like deaf people thinking they're able to hear music because they found a trick of feeling the speaker's bass.

I don't know about best but other effective and often used methods of getting things from people include:

* Instilling a deep fear in them, so they avoid crossing you or look to you as their savior.

* Manipulating their sense of worth so they need what you are offering them to merely feel OK about themselves.

* Creating the impression that you are so important and highly valued by others that getting only the smallest amount of time from you is a great blessing.

* Telling them that other people are awful and out-to-get them, so that they need to work with you to oppose those other, awful people.

I try to avoid doing this kind of thing but these are methods that have made many people much money and earned them many dollars. Empathy is great, I support empathy and try to practice it whenever I can. It's also important to understand that real empathy isn't necessarily a skill that will help you get ahead in the present work world. Often it's a "skill" that others will aim to exploit in you.

Don't confuse being a good person and being a successful person. You might be able to be both but they definitely two different, uh, "paths". I'd encourage being a good person more than being a successful but I think everyone should have their eyes open concerning our modern world.

I am incredibly empathetic towards people (by the article's definition), but in no way you could label me as "agreeable".

That's sad.

Either way makes sense to me, empathy is a horrible trait in a leader. I know that seems like a horrible thing to say, but I am a very empathetic person and would make a horrible leader. Wanting to please everyone leads to stress and indecision.

It's clear that if you want to get ahead in life, understanding how other people perceive things is THE skill. Being warm, kind and sympathetic is also good, but not required. I can understand how being agreeable can be a detriment in many professional situation. The form of "empathy" being described in the blog post is always an advantage.

Often I see more senior leaders in business have a somewhat flagrant disregard for their staff and suppliers constraints - "I don't want excuses or reasons, just make it work... You should have foreseen these problems, and worked with me to mitigate them."

Personally I find getting the balance right, between understanding how and why a situation has occurred, or will occur - and how to "motivate" a customer/supplier/colleague to do "better" irrespective of the resources - really quite hard.

Indeed, I will often be making the excuses on behalf of my suppliers... because I often understand the constraints on them just as well as they do, and can articulate them more clearly. And that is the complete opposite of what I see many "successful" executives do. Many of who have selective hearing, and only hear the good news, and never the bad unless it gives them an advantage.

You mean, that _bad_.

A great salesman can also be sociopathic. We are all salesmen to some extent, so this isn't to denigrate the profession or the ability to read people and use it for personal gain.

I suppose the difference lies in whether what one is selling tends towards symbiosis or exploitation.

In my understanding, empathy is pretty much a skill to emulate the other person's thinking. There's a discussion about Kolmogorov Complexity, which says to emulate an already complex system you need an even more complex system, which means a bigger brain. Of course human minds are not that simple, but I think this is onto something.

In addition to smartness, you'd probably need a patience and some serenity to react (or not react) to the situation accordingly.

I couldn't understand these things until I interned in a software outsourcing company. Empathy started to make a lot more sense. Employees felt like slaves, which clearly had an impact on their lives and productivity of the company.

How do you teach something where you have to feel it to understand?

Not that I would accuse TFA of that -- it's explicit about "knowing your enemy" and listening to someone you are disagreeing with.

Yes I have. I'll tell you I didn't see empathy I saw fear and inability to act through lack of cognition. I'll agree with the lack of obligation but that depends. A parent will move into danger to rescue their own child, a stranger may not.

Service people move into danger putting their lives at risk to rescue strangers every day.

> I think that if you assume and expect the worst from others you'll in turn hold yourself to the same standard. (b)

(b) does not necessarily follow from (a). Lack of empathy does not automatically make you expect the worst from others. For example you can easily assume that people will treat you at least superficially nicely because "being nice" is some expectation. Or maybe because it's even their job, e.g. someone in a leadership position.

Or put differently, if you do not have empathy and do not expect empathy from someone else (whether rightly so or simply due to your own lack of empathy) you could assume they still act rationally and that it is simply not in their interest to "do their worst" when interacting with you.

And then when people correct me, they are actually reacting on their own prejudgements and projecting it on my joke.

It's too bad that so many startup founders are in it because they never want to work for somebody else. That denies them the opportunity to practice this skill, which tends to come back to bite them when they're dealing with customers or trying to manage employees.

I actually find it debilitating at times, because it can come out in weird ways. I will sometimes fixate on situations or even individuals and feel vast amounts of pain for them, even carrying massive guilt for things I cannot fix. (I am seeing a counsellor.)

He describes in the very beginning that his reason to learn these techniques was to find out how he can get his wishes fulfilled, easier and with less friction. His conclusion is that seriously caring about others wishes and wants is one of the best ways to do that. He also tries to do that without being manipulative.

One thing I've gotten better at--with a derivative that's much steeper than the rise in my technical skills over time--is a kind of empathy that I can use in a professional context. What I've found that this lets me do (this can also be read "forces me to do") is understand others' needs and actually care about them at a level that makes it important for me to do the right thing. People can tell when you give a shit about them, and they're more likely to entrust you with responsibility even when you may not be, from a technical or historical perspective, the best candidate. Not just because they like you, but because they can have confidence in your desire to do well, with their interests in mind. That matters.