How to exploit the negative sides of a person
Dear Sante Di Renzo, I read the interview on your web site and blog regarding your regulatory activities. I was surprised by the fact that you were able to develop such an activity lending to it a decisive international connotation. However, what surprised me mostly was your psychological-sociological answer in regards to the selection method of your personnel. You stated that it is important to know the defects of your personnel in order to transform them into strengths. How can a defect or inefficiency become a point of strength? Wouldn’t it be better to select valid staff right from the start?
Thank you for giving me the opportunity to elaborate on the subject, given my psychological background, considered as my strong point. That being said, I do not want to give to my words the validity of the law, nor give the impression that I am fully comprehensive on the subject, but then who would you consider “a valid person”? One who is physically attractive, dynamic, intelligent, smart, willing to make sacrifices, honest and well educated? I imagine that all employers would wish for an army of such perfect employees. The problem is that perfection does not exist. And I must say thankfully, as I fear that it would remove any competition. I would like to briefly digress regarding the value of competition, wrongly considered as a negative element within the workplace. Competition is only a negative value when it is an end in itself. When one plays to the lowest common denominator, or rather highlighting a person’s weakness rather than their strengths, the winning solution is elsewhere. So competition has a positive meaning and value when there is a winning solution. Where one is able, the other is pushed to do better. It is not playing to the lowest common denominator but more an uplift. But going back to your question of how a defect or inefficiency becomes a favourable element. Are we sure that a defect is also a sign of inefficiency? Normally, I have found that once one knows the weak points and defects of the people one is working with, one can avoid creating useless tension.
As such, weak points create inefficiency only when they generate tension. And this generates tension when you do not know how to take them, as you are unprepared how to go about this. So this is my personal conviction: if you know a persons defects, you are ready to get around or handle them avoiding the situation that they become points of tension. But there is more. A worker must have merits, otherwise it would be difficult to employ them and include them within the organisation, but a strong point for a worthwhile employer, as far as I am concerned, is possibly the comprehension of weaknesses, sensitivities, and aspects of character that are hidden and are sometimes unknown even to the actual person themselves. Let’s make an example. A pernickety person, at the limits of compulsiveness, may become a problem if forced to work in public relations, but is undoubtedly a precious resource if, for example, he or she is involved in the field of accounting. A dynamic person who is unable to stay still will have better and safer results if in a condition where he or she can move about and change their roles frequently, rather than being forced to stay behind a desk. This may sound simplistic, but that is the way it is. The perfect person does not exist. Imperfect people inserted within a “perfect” work context do exist. We all have our defects, behaviour tainted by our life experience and personal history which will be with us for ever. I venture to say that not only are we used to this but we are bound beyond measure. Even knowing that these are negative aspects, we take up the cudgel on their behalf. Therefore, what sense is there in entering into a conflicting situation that a member of staff has already arrived at, as always, between two or more parts of their personality? It is better not to enter into the situation or, if you do, it is important that you know how to move. In order to get to know these aspects it is not necessary to carry out a profound search, even if this is what happened in my case. Often the sensitivity one gains with years and years of interpersonal relations is sufficient. That is, if one really does want to understand others.