Here's an easy question: Introverted or Extroverted?
The most important thing we know is that introversion-extroversion is a continuum. It is not a category as Jung thought. Introversion is one end of a dimension along which all of us vary from situation to situation and from time to time. Some of us tend to stay clustered around one end or the other, the rest of us (maybe 40%) fluctuate around the middle. (I will use the term introverted or extroverted for those people who are consistently at one
or other end of the continuum, possibly around 60% of us.)Hans Eysenck (1916-1997) the world famous psychologist whose research and theory of personality negatively stereotyped introversion.
The underlying mechanism that explains why we vary along this dimension seems to be cortical arousal. This was first postulated by Han Eysenck in the 1950s who rejected Jung’s notion of energy flow, though interestingly it is still a useful metaphor. The research shows that introverts are more quickly aroused to levels that are experienced as uncomfortable than are extroverts who often seek out excitement and social activity to keep their characteristically high levels of arousal at a comfortable/pleasing level.
Introverts avoid or withdraw from situations that cause them to have unpleasant levels of arousal such as too many people, loud background noise, surprises. In one famous study introverts salivated sooner than extroverts when given the same taste stimulus. Brain scan studies show different patterns of activity in different parts of the brains of introverts and extroverts. We now know that genetically determined differences in the brains of introverts and extroverts are amplified and/or moderated by different social experiences as the childhood of introverts and extroverts are often quite different.
On balance the research shows that extroverts report greater personal happiness than introverts, especially when this is associated with emotional stability. They also more frequently report being in a good mood and feeling optimistic though the relationship is complex and dependent on many other variables. Nonetheless the finding is consistent across studies. Introverts are often less cheerful and less optimistic than extroverts who also tend to have higher self-esteem than introverts. It can be hard work being an introvert.
Introverts and extroverts do equally well in exams though extroverts often do better in tasks that involve social interaction such as orals or viva exams, and assessments based on class participation. Introverts tend to do better when periods of solitary study are required. Regardless of personal levels of Introversion-Extroversion, Conscientiousness is the single most important quality determining exam success, and also career success. We know that emotional intelligence is a better predictor of longer-term career success than IQ.
High extroversion is associated with helpfulness and pro-social behavior, and participation which makes extroverts popular team members, though not always the most valuable. Extroversion is also helpful to transformational leaders who seek to motivate through empathy and persuasiveness. (It also helps to be Open and Agreeable in terms of the Big Five Personality Factors). By contrast, transactional leaders tend to rely on controlling and corrective action. Researchers such as Furnham and Hogan have tended to focus on extroversion as essential to leadership, though this is based on a very narrow view of leadership.
There is no difference in the overall career success of introverts and extroverts though both personal preferences and social stereotyping influence career paths and options. Introverts often add great value by going against social norms and resisting peer pressure, by daring to be different, being creative, pioneering, and iconoclastic. Just look at the founders of Google or the CEO of Facebook Mark Zuckerberg. It is easy to over-generalize here. One has only to think of Larry Ellison at Oracle.
BUT the real problem facing introverts is that extroversion is seen as socially more desirable in Western culture. (Interestingly this is not the case in many non-Western cultures). Over decades of personality research introversion has had a bad press. Hans Eysenck was particularly guilty of this. He saw introversion as a lack of the more desirable extroversion rather than a set of attributes that should be valued in their own right.
Eysenck, in his own words, characterized emotionally stable introverts as slow, controlled, careful, apathetic, and dull. By contrast he described emotionally stable extroverts as enthusiastic, positive, cheerful and satisfied. In his eyes it was clearly preferable to be extroverted. His influential research on personality dating back to the 1950s and his very successful series of books popularizing Scientific Psychology, contributed to the negative social stereotyping of introversion that is still common today.
Introverts are usually seen and described as shy, aloof, guarded, reserved, private, serious, cautious etc. They are not seen as team-players (though some function remarkably well in teams). They are not seen as natural leaders and are often overlooked in favor of less able candidates who have more “presence”. By contrast, extroverts are seen as sociable, outgoing, lively, enthusiastic, entertaining, fun-loving, talkative, energetic - all the qualities most employers are easily impressed with and are readily visible in job interviews, promotion panels, and even the causal observations of colleagues that lead to informal assessments of potential, fit, etc.
In reality, most jobs do not require extroversion in order to be successful, but being extroverted helps candidates sell themselves in interviews, dominate groups exercises and influence the outcomes of discussions. Introverts can add value by challenging group-think, slowing down over-hasty decision-making, pausing before committing unthinkingly, expressing unpopular views, seeing things differently, challenging assumptions, not fearing rejection in order to get a minority view heard, being stubborn, skeptical and even pessimistic in the face of gong-ho enthusiasm.
Often introverts are their own worst enemies. They often fail to project themselves positively in interviews; they often are poor at impression management and managing their career proactively; they drop out of, or don't enter into, debates that are uncontrolled and lively; they often use too little energy in a group to help them win an argument; they usually do too little networking inside and outside of the organization; they often fail to build a widespread reserve of goodwill relationships; they don't always adjust their social behavior to meet the needs of the group; and by thinking and reading rather than going to talk to people they can deliver less than they are capable of; sometimes they just wont play the game that would help them and others to succeed.
I know all of this from my personal experience as an introvert. The good news is that many of these unhelpful behaviors can be overturned by learned techniques. The challenge is to harness the benefits of being introverted in a socialized world without suffering the disadvantages and pitfalls. The practical steps that can be taken will be the theme of my next blog.
About Michael Pearn
Michael is a lifelong introvert who also works as an I/O Psychologist. He recently re-located from Dublin, Ireland to the Bay Area and is building a professional practice specializing in leadership development, and also personal and organizational well-being.
Posts
