To say that the difference between high achievers and low achievers is self discipline?

[equinox32]

Hello,

Was having a discussion with a group of friends recently and the discussion of personality types came up.

I put it out there that the people who are most successful usually have a stand out personality trait, that they are very self disciplined and delay instant gratification for long term goals.

One of my friends got really offended and said that just because people are not successful, it doesn't mean they are lazy. I wasn't actually saying that, but I would say laziness is associated with those with low discipline.

I am lucky enough to mix with a large group of people. My family background is reasonably well off, stable home, but my husband comes from a family which is quite 'working class', constant struggle for money and low level jobs. We both share our social circle and I see a lot of different type of people.

His family, are really quite low disciplined. Lovely people, but they will always choose instant pleasure over saving or waiting. They have no long term outlook, disorganised, useless with money and 'live for the moment'. Since being with my husband, I have come to enjoy some elements of their approach, but most of it frustrates me.

My family are quite different. We were all expected to do chores as we grew up, keep the house tidy, make our beds etc. Takeaway was once a month (not due to lack of funds). Our parents took a great interest in our education. We had pocket money, but if we ran out there would be no more until the next one came along, to teach us the value of money.

So my theory is this. Intellect is one thing, but if you do not have the self discipline required to do the right thing, you won't get as far. If you are of average intellect but highly self disciplined, you will achieve success.

There was an article (trying to find it), that interviewed top CEO's and most of them indicated they have great self-discipline.

Another interesting thing I heard on the radio:

As time goes on, people who are similar end up together and have families. Since self-discipline is linked to higher intellect, the theory is that in a few hundred years you will have two groups. Highly intelligent, self disciplined people and low intelligence and low self discipline people.

Anyway, AIBU? Is self discipline the most important trait for success?

It depends what you want to achieve and what aspirations you have. That expectation is limited by experience, environment, education (not strictly school education but what you learns in terms of morals and work ethic and so on), insight and probably other factors as well.
Discipline is a very useful trait to have and, I believe, can also be learned. Same with hard work.
For a lot of people, success is not about monetary stability.
For an artist, things might be very different and yet they can have a very successful career without the kind of discipline you refer to.

I thought CEOs were actually more psychopathic than others (as a group?). Maybe it is less self-discipline and more not giving a stuff about others that got them where they are.

I think the thing is that even if it is self-discipline you then need to look at why some people have more than others. It may be about genetics (in part) and also about stability of upbringing (lots of evidence to point towards that). The danger of this position is that it feeds a narrow discourse of 'I deserve it' and 'poor people are lazy' which we know is both wrong and highly damaging. If it is about self-discipline you still can't take credit. You still need to recognise that luck is the main thing that got you were you are.

I think you're getting a bit of a pasting here, because your point is valid. Self-discipline does make a difference.

My DH had fuck all growing up. He did a paper round before school at 5am from the age of 13, worked very hard to get into a good grammar, made it to Oxbridge and into a good graduate scheme. He is now at the top of his game and earns a fortune. But he is so disciplined and driven that even now he hasn't taken his foot off the pedal.

I, on the other hand, had everything. Private education, pony, the lot. I dicked around a bit at school, but still scraped into Oxbridge. Didn't like it, dropped out. Fucked about until eventually taking a admin job at the company we both work for. I then got a bit of a rocket up me and worked my way up to a managerial role and I earn a good salary, but about 10% of what DH gets. I am still prone to laziness and procrastination.

Guess who has the higher IQ by quite some margin?

So even with all the privilege in the world and all the raw materials, I am the lower achiever in our relationship. Self-discipline has a big part to play.

There is probably a question there around the effect of a privileged upbringing on one's self-motivation and ambition, isn't there?

That being said, I am still a higher rate tax payer, in spite of my natural torpor, so while self-discipline can be a differentiator, I think is has to be underpinned by a decent education and family support. We were both lucky enough to have those.

I think it's vanishingly rare to make it to the top if you've never had either.

YABU. This thread is an example of why 'grit' and 'resilience' are so dangerous. Recent studies have show that grit does not have empirical support. Also, the famous marshmallow (delayed gratitification) test is v questionable. Its most likely that it all comes down to socio economics. www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/561779/

depends on circumstances my father died when i was nine i passed at 11 to go to grammar school, got told later i got 97% but as a daughter of a widow who had no money i couldnt stay at school and go on to uni because in the 60s there werent the help you can get now , so i did my four years took my olevels a year early and left school, had my dad not died i would probably be a vet now and not the job i do

I want better self discipline for myself than to comment on this fucking goady post. But apparently I'm stupid, weak and lacking self discipline. So here we are....

Also for good measure, you sound like a delight op.

I agree with Chloe 9

Many intelligent people with self discipline have never become 'successful' because of there race, sex, class and money etc

Watch this.

m.youtube.com/watch?v=4K5fbQ1-zps

Since self-discipline is linked to higher intellect,

Err, what?

Bourdieu on Capital, the control of the Field & Power. Simply put, it can be about who you know, your net works, & the wealth of social etc knowledge. For instance: you go for a meeting (job interview or what ever) because you understand the social rules & the language you can adapt & understand the person who is interviewing you - who in turn is more likely to be in your group because the control of the (social) field is aware of the unwritten rules & knows the language & reactions to use to their advantage - (simplistic version) imagine the work place - the people in charge - University Oxbridge - the way their interviews go. Different people have different forms or amounts of Capital hence who is more likely to gain a good position?

You are so wrong.
I was brought up with the whole 'if you work hard you'll succeed at whatever you want' rubbish.

I have worked hard all my life but due to ASD and resulting mental illness I'm now unemployed, have limited prospects and all my ambitions have been shattered.

All my hard work goes into just staying alive and existing. You can't see it from the outside.

I am not what you would consider successful despite giving life my all.

I am very lazy. I have no self discipline. I am a chronic high achiever. No idea why, somehow it all just works out for me.

I'm intelligent & worked hard, achieved a BSc & a career. However it was very stressful.
Then I developed schizoaffective disorder which is like having psychosis & bipolar.
Now I'm struggling to cope mentally & financially with a pt min wage care assistant job.
Waiting for the DWP to decide if I qualify for benefits.

Tell me again how working hard gets you a good life?

Who wants to be a CEO? Is that the measure of success?
Fuck that.

I think charisma and a positive, can-do attitude are more important

Depends on what you class as being a high achiever.

I come from absolutely nothing

I am someone who does what I need to do when I need to do it.

I prefer to take the easy route when ever I can

My mother had self discipline, worked hard and was at work at 8am and was so wrapped up in what needed to be done and working hard she didn’t see the bigger picture.

Confidence, a certain amount of common sense, hard work when needed and surrounding yourself with people who don’t necessarily agree on everything you think gets you to the top.

My husband has appalling self discipline, and is a manager at a big 4 accountant.

I have great self discipline, and I do earn more than him, but not much. I'd also say, fairly, that I'm more intelligent than him.

I don't equate discipline with success, but I think self disciplined people do, on average, have more orderly lives whatever their incomes.

YABU To say that the difference between high achievers and low achievers is self discipline

It is made of many things. They may have a stand out personality trait and delay instant gratification for long term goals.

So YABVU to suggest it is only self-discipline.

In fact you are not self-disciplined if you are going to contradict your own self.

I am intelligent (was a gifted child, have multiple degrees) and self-disciplined (couldn't have done the degrees otherwise), but have not achieved well at all. This is mostly because I am socially inept, and lacking in confidence (maybe partly because of my working class background?), so don't interview well at all. So YABU, and from the other side too - people don't lack self-discipline just because of some chatacter flaw. Totally agree with the PP who said this argument is used to justify a "meritocracy".

Being a CEO doesn’t float my boat at all but you need to put the work in to do well in lots of areas

It’s this sort of simplistic and entitled thinking that gives us workhouses and The Undeserving Poor.

“Let’s instill some discipline and a culture of hard work, it will be good for them.”

And then for some things, CEO even, it’s as much help if the face / background fits

As time goes on, people who are similar end up together and have families. Since self-discipline is linked to higher intellect, the theory is that in a few hundred years you will have two groups. Highly intelligent, self disciplined people and low intelligence and low self discipline people

Problem is the low self-disciplined people will eat the intelligent beautiful people. Have you never read H G Wells' The Time Machine?

In fact you are misquoting. The theory is physical appearance will gravitate. Conventionally beautiful people will mate with others, there will then be a tall, languid race and a short, fat hairy race.

Intelligence will not be a part of that. You only have to watch TOWIE or Love Island to realise that.

Self discipline, talent, good role models, privilege.
But don’t forget low self esteem, fear of failure, and an inability to feel good about yourself unless you are excelling.
I am a therapist and one of the organisations I work for has super rich clients.
I see one after another who edit world class publications, head up massive organisations etc but can’t do intimacy, have never felt love, try with everything they have to impress their cold distant father, and end up crying alone at night because he spurned them yet again, So they go into work at 5 the next morning to pull it out of the hat again to try and feel adequate.
No one could say they weren’t successful.

For someone processing to be clever, you really are coming across as thick. I think you’ll find out ancestors, who worked 16 hour days with a half day on Sunday had plenty of discipline and many had intelligence. If they didn’t work they didn’t eat. That tended to sharpen the senses.

Processing = professing. Bloody autocorrect.