To agree that charm is more useful than qualifications

[bubblybox]

Inspired by India Knight's article today. I don't often agree with her views, but this one struck a chord with me.

I was shy and an academic high-flier as a child. The fact I was socially awkward to the point of appearing rude and humourless to adults is still impacting me negatively today. I strongly believe I would have had some very valuable headstarts up the career ladder and enjoyed much more fulfilling relationships had I been encouraged to be charming at school rather than focusing single-mindedly on getting all the qualifications I could.

I do think India is incorrect with one assumption though - she thinks all public schools teach charm and manners. Mine certainly didn't, and I think I was at a disadvantage for this - it wasn't until I was well into Uni that I realised that personality and sociability counted for a lot more in the wider world than book smarts.

I had a superficially charming colleague. Soon after we employed her we discovered that she was also an incredibly destructive fantasist. I am now very suspicious of charm and look for substance behind the smile. There is a difference between those that can 'work the room' and those that have both good people skills and integrity. Integrity is what I look for first and foremost now. People who big themselves up and cannot back their claims I run a mile from. Natural charm means that there is always a temptation to claim more than you can deliver, knowing that you can get away with it if you smile sweetly.

Perhaps a better word is "empathy" than charm. Autistic people with outstanding qualificiations often fail to get or hold down jobs due to a total lack of social skills.

A person with a good theory of mind can see the other person's point of view and negioate better. They can communicate their viewpoint better and are more assertive. A person with good social skills can read body language better. They can tell if a person is bored and adapt their conversation.

Empathy and theory of mind comes more naturally to some people than others.

Charm to me suggests a shallow, superficial quality. I have worked with suprficially charming people who were all fur coat no knickers, and all were (eventually) found out. Likeability and good social skills can go hand in hand with competence, and of course those people will always be preferred in work and social situations.

Good social skills are invaluable in a work context, a toxic person can poison a workplace. I remember once recruiting for my replacement at a job and my boss said to me that all he was looking for was someone who was good natured, reliable and smart enough (i.e. basically had the right degree and interest in the area) - that he could teach the rest. I tried not to take it as a slight on my intellectual capabilities He was right though - having worked with too many erratic, nasty or unreliable people, the combination of good nature, reliability and basic competence is gold.

I read the article and thought it was really annoying. I often agree with IK but this piece shows how limited her personal experiences are. Sure, if you are a writer/journalist/politician charm and manners are probably more important to get on but she seems to have no clue what is required to be a good scientist/doctor/engineer/any other job that needs someone who actually understands what they are on about, charm or not.