next!
Why we need fewer leaders (really?)
I intend to prove how the current trend to squish all germs of leadership early and often is merely a healthy response to market realities, and as such, since market realities are akin to Providence, the existence of no-leader zones is a Good Thing.
Sunday, September 09, 2007
on the Marshmallow Test
(about delayed gratification)
In a recent church event I was trying to converse with a lady whose 2-year-old kept whining and yelling for attention. Turned out the tike wanted something that mom considered dangerous, so mom was trying to both keep the conversation going and pacify the kid somehow. I voiced that she could tell her son he wasn't getting what he wanted (committing here the cardinal sin in these US and A of telling a parent what to do), since to me it was obvious she was trying to "negotiate" with her boy, instead of establishing her authority on what was what. She was kind enough not to quarter me right there and then, and instead just expressed her desire there were another way out.
Well, there ain't.
Somewhere around the 6o's some psychology researcher gave 4-year-old kids a marshmallow each, telling them that if they waited instead of eating it right away they would get a second one. Details here -> Wikipedia link.
What was really interesting was a look at those same kids a while later. 200+ SAT points was the average gain that came together with waiting for that second marshmallow.
The issue here is that some kids can wait. There are kids that don't.
And contrasting with most "noble savage" images of youth, I believe strongly that in this case we have a clear example of "nurture" in action. Yes, there is such a thing as obsessive-compulsive disorder, but the biggest problem in Why Kids Can't Wait is that they never have to.
Generation Y was bad enough. Pampered to extremes, little backbone, a culture of sensual values, unused to stress and convinced of the Right to Have. Now that from their loins we are gifted with Generation Z, things go from silly to Monty Pythonic. Maybe that it is the last in the alphabet stands for something.
I wish I could dare to have a Conversation with that lady, or with the assorted parents that see no evil in training their brood to be out-of-control.
Right now I can only offer hypotheses. Primary among them, parents fear pain. GenX were pretty bad about it, GenY even worse, so they will go to outrageous extremes to provide any sort of happiness for their young. This, of course, actively encouraged by marketeers of all stripes. There is assorted media evidence to this behavior, probably even to its cause.
Parents eventually begin to realize they need to do something different. This happens by the time they are truly frustrated with their children, say by the time kids are 10 or so - it is no fun living with an ever bigger and louder "gimme" child. By then many parents have given up in gaining any sort of positive feedback from Junior, and those who care sound almost desperate.
Yet when Baby was still Baby, they thought he can do no wrong, and had to have it all, whatever the cost.
Now, should we be in the least surprised about the consequences?
(about delayed gratification)
In a recent church event I was trying to converse with a lady whose 2-year-old kept whining and yelling for attention. Turned out the tike wanted something that mom considered dangerous, so mom was trying to both keep the conversation going and pacify the kid somehow. I voiced that she could tell her son he wasn't getting what he wanted (committing here the cardinal sin in these US and A of telling a parent what to do), since to me it was obvious she was trying to "negotiate" with her boy, instead of establishing her authority on what was what. She was kind enough not to quarter me right there and then, and instead just expressed her desire there were another way out.
Well, there ain't.
Somewhere around the 6o's some psychology researcher gave 4-year-old kids a marshmallow each, telling them that if they waited instead of eating it right away they would get a second one. Details here -> Wikipedia link.
What was really interesting was a look at those same kids a while later. 200+ SAT points was the average gain that came together with waiting for that second marshmallow.
The issue here is that some kids can wait. There are kids that don't.
And contrasting with most "noble savage" images of youth, I believe strongly that in this case we have a clear example of "nurture" in action. Yes, there is such a thing as obsessive-compulsive disorder, but the biggest problem in Why Kids Can't Wait is that they never have to.
Generation Y was bad enough. Pampered to extremes, little backbone, a culture of sensual values, unused to stress and convinced of the Right to Have. Now that from their loins we are gifted with Generation Z, things go from silly to Monty Pythonic. Maybe that it is the last in the alphabet stands for something.
I wish I could dare to have a Conversation with that lady, or with the assorted parents that see no evil in training their brood to be out-of-control.
Right now I can only offer hypotheses. Primary among them, parents fear pain. GenX were pretty bad about it, GenY even worse, so they will go to outrageous extremes to provide any sort of happiness for their young. This, of course, actively encouraged by marketeers of all stripes. There is assorted media evidence to this behavior, probably even to its cause.
Parents eventually begin to realize they need to do something different. This happens by the time they are truly frustrated with their children, say by the time kids are 10 or so - it is no fun living with an ever bigger and louder "gimme" child. By then many parents have given up in gaining any sort of positive feedback from Junior, and those who care sound almost desperate.
Yet when Baby was still Baby, they thought he can do no wrong, and had to have it all, whatever the cost.
Now, should we be in the least surprised about the consequences?
Monday, September 29, 2003
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)