Sometimes even after you finished your MBA Degree, there are still times and situations in real life where you can associate the things you've encountered now and the things that you have experienced during your academic life. One example is dating.
I realized that sometimes there is a tendency to treat your date like one of your groupmates in a certain project/activity or report. However, there is a huge difference between these two. Like what works with your groupmate or your partner in a schoolwork will really not work well with your date due to various factors:
A. Output
There is no denying that during our academic life, we encountered groupmates who are really loafing to the highest level or those who do not put much effort to contribute to the group. Sometimes the teachers or professors do not care if you are complaining that this person is not doing his/her job - it is such a rarity when you encounter teachers or professors who would encourage you to do peer rating so that you'll at least make sure that the loafer deserves it. All the teachers and professors wanted was an output. Nothing more, nothing less. This means that you can have a good output even if you have unreliable groupmates.
However in dating life, you cannot afford to have a loafing, laid-back or a person who does not like to put an effort into something. If you have that kind of prospective date, your output would always become poor no matter how good you are. If it does look good, it would not be sustainable enough for you to hold on to it.
B. Contribution Level
Have a loafer groupmate? Capable enough to carry the load of the whole group? No problem. In academe life, it is very rarely that you'll encounter an equally distributed workload in doing your part for that group. Sometimes you need to exert more just to have an output; other times, you might be lucky enough that you have a groupmate who is very skilled, diligent and wiling enough to do his/her part more so that you'll have an excellent output despite you not lifting any finger.
To explain my point, imagine a scenario where there are 5 of you in a group. Each of you need to exert 100% effort just to do your 20% share (100%/5) in the group. If each one of you exerted 100% of their effort to do their part, that is perfect. BUT in the real world, it does not happen that way. You would have loafer groupmates, grade conscious and those who are running for honors in one group. What would happen is that those who are running for honors or those who are scared to fail would be exerting more than 100% of their efforts just to make sure they can compensate the lack of effort from their other groupmates. The thing here is that exerting more than your required effort is worth it since you can total the amount of your effort for your group into 100%.
In dating? Using the similar scenario above, instead of 5 in a group, it would be a pair work. In order for a date or relationship to be successful, each one of you need to exert 100% effort just to do your 50% share. The problem in dating is that the one who exerted 100% of their effort to make the dating work CANNOT EXERT MORE EFFORT to compensate the lack of effort from the other person. Exerting more effort to make the date or turn it into a potential relationship would become wasted. It's like you are only allowed to put 50% of water into the tank and you are not allowed to fill everything because it is the other party's responsibility to put the remaining 50% in order to make the tank full. So even if you attempted to put more water to the tank, it would gone into waste because your respective container can no longer hold that much water.
C. Duration
You know the reason why most people who are really doing their part rarely put up a fight or argument with somebody who is a loafer? It's because they know the amount of time and suffering they need to endure with their uncooperative groupmate. If you realized that you end up having a groupmate who is not doing their part, you have the tendency to look at the amount of time left for you to suffer and keep sacrificing to do more. It usually last from hours to at most months (some projects maybe the duration of term of school year for thesis groups). There is a certain mentality that you already know what kind of groupmate he/she is and all you need to do is to get away from that person the next time there is another groupings. In the world of academe, time is definite. That means you are aware how long you are going to suffer at the onset of the problem. Yes, you might complain, but at the back of your head you know your agony with your uncooperative groupmate will end.
In dating, time is uncertain. How long are you going to endure the attitude of another person? How long are you going to be patient with that person to change? Will you hold on or move on?
D. Control
In the world of academe, sometimes when your group is already on the rocks or without the sense of direction or indecisiveness, you can just act like the alpha/leader and lead the group even if there's no clear leader. You have the liberty to bark orders to the group especially when they are passive and would be willing to follow orders. Because at the end of the day, what you really want is for you to produce a decent output no matter what it takes. These groupmates may be pissed off when you are controlling them, but you wouldn't do that if the group is lost in what they are doing right? The thing is the reason your groupmates would be more willing to follow your orders no matter how controlling it is, is because they know they would somehow benefit from it. Would you even do it if you won't get anything from it?
When it comes to dating, there should be no so-called leader. If there is one, it is usually said that the guys are the leaders and the girls would usually become followers. But if the guy is the indecisive one and the girl would not tolerate a guy's indecisiveness, the girl would take charge and the guy might feel that he was being controlled. If in the world of academe, strong personalities can bow down to those who are more capable than them because you both have the same goal (which is to pass), you cannot do that in dating because the problem here is that you might not have the same goal and what would be beneficial for you would not be beneficial to the other person. That's why controlling the other person by leading them to where to go, where to eat would not do you any favors, especially if the girl is the one doing it.
E. Primary Ingredient/s
In school, if you end up having a groupmate who is industrious, intelligent and everything you could ask for an ideal groupmate, you are in for a treat. It's like your life would be in breeze for as long as you do your part of course so that this wonderful groupmate of yours would not get upset at you not doing even a simple task.
In dating, sometimes if both of you have everything that you are looking for in another person, chemistry and connection between two parties is crucial to transition from dating to going into a relationship. So even if you know this gal or guy has everything what you are looking for, but if the two of you cannot find a connection between your likes, interests or even values, the possibility of ending up together would be impossible.
However in dating life, you cannot afford to have a loafing, laid-back or a person who does not like to put an effort into something. If you have that kind of prospective date, your output would always become poor no matter how good you are. If it does look good, it would not be sustainable enough for you to hold on to it.
B. Contribution Level
Have a loafer groupmate? Capable enough to carry the load of the whole group? No problem. In academe life, it is very rarely that you'll encounter an equally distributed workload in doing your part for that group. Sometimes you need to exert more just to have an output; other times, you might be lucky enough that you have a groupmate who is very skilled, diligent and wiling enough to do his/her part more so that you'll have an excellent output despite you not lifting any finger.
To explain my point, imagine a scenario where there are 5 of you in a group. Each of you need to exert 100% effort just to do your 20% share (100%/5) in the group. If each one of you exerted 100% of their effort to do their part, that is perfect. BUT in the real world, it does not happen that way. You would have loafer groupmates, grade conscious and those who are running for honors in one group. What would happen is that those who are running for honors or those who are scared to fail would be exerting more than 100% of their efforts just to make sure they can compensate the lack of effort from their other groupmates. The thing here is that exerting more than your required effort is worth it since you can total the amount of your effort for your group into 100%.
In dating? Using the similar scenario above, instead of 5 in a group, it would be a pair work. In order for a date or relationship to be successful, each one of you need to exert 100% effort just to do your 50% share. The problem in dating is that the one who exerted 100% of their effort to make the dating work CANNOT EXERT MORE EFFORT to compensate the lack of effort from the other person. Exerting more effort to make the date or turn it into a potential relationship would become wasted. It's like you are only allowed to put 50% of water into the tank and you are not allowed to fill everything because it is the other party's responsibility to put the remaining 50% in order to make the tank full. So even if you attempted to put more water to the tank, it would gone into waste because your respective container can no longer hold that much water.
C. Duration
You know the reason why most people who are really doing their part rarely put up a fight or argument with somebody who is a loafer? It's because they know the amount of time and suffering they need to endure with their uncooperative groupmate. If you realized that you end up having a groupmate who is not doing their part, you have the tendency to look at the amount of time left for you to suffer and keep sacrificing to do more. It usually last from hours to at most months (some projects maybe the duration of term of school year for thesis groups). There is a certain mentality that you already know what kind of groupmate he/she is and all you need to do is to get away from that person the next time there is another groupings. In the world of academe, time is definite. That means you are aware how long you are going to suffer at the onset of the problem. Yes, you might complain, but at the back of your head you know your agony with your uncooperative groupmate will end.
In dating, time is uncertain. How long are you going to endure the attitude of another person? How long are you going to be patient with that person to change? Will you hold on or move on?
D. Control
In the world of academe, sometimes when your group is already on the rocks or without the sense of direction or indecisiveness, you can just act like the alpha/leader and lead the group even if there's no clear leader. You have the liberty to bark orders to the group especially when they are passive and would be willing to follow orders. Because at the end of the day, what you really want is for you to produce a decent output no matter what it takes. These groupmates may be pissed off when you are controlling them, but you wouldn't do that if the group is lost in what they are doing right? The thing is the reason your groupmates would be more willing to follow your orders no matter how controlling it is, is because they know they would somehow benefit from it. Would you even do it if you won't get anything from it?
When it comes to dating, there should be no so-called leader. If there is one, it is usually said that the guys are the leaders and the girls would usually become followers. But if the guy is the indecisive one and the girl would not tolerate a guy's indecisiveness, the girl would take charge and the guy might feel that he was being controlled. If in the world of academe, strong personalities can bow down to those who are more capable than them because you both have the same goal (which is to pass), you cannot do that in dating because the problem here is that you might not have the same goal and what would be beneficial for you would not be beneficial to the other person. That's why controlling the other person by leading them to where to go, where to eat would not do you any favors, especially if the girl is the one doing it.
E. Primary Ingredient/s
In school, if you end up having a groupmate who is industrious, intelligent and everything you could ask for an ideal groupmate, you are in for a treat. It's like your life would be in breeze for as long as you do your part of course so that this wonderful groupmate of yours would not get upset at you not doing even a simple task.
In dating, sometimes if both of you have everything that you are looking for in another person, chemistry and connection between two parties is crucial to transition from dating to going into a relationship. So even if you know this gal or guy has everything what you are looking for, but if the two of you cannot find a connection between your likes, interests or even values, the possibility of ending up together would be impossible.
No comments:
Post a Comment