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?

Self-discipline is for mediocre people.

@FaFoutis oh well I just love that, I feel like that could be my life motto ha!

Here's an interesting article on why grit theory, and by implication all theories about perseverance as the panacea for all social ills, really don't work:

www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2016/05/10/the-problem-with-teaching-grit-to-poor-kids-they-already-have-it-heres-what-they-really-need/

Here's another (by the way, the 10, 000 hours theory for success referred to in the article has recently been debunked):

www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/the-limits-of-grit

Opportunity is the one thing in life which separates a lot of people. And luck.

It's amazing to me that "intelligent" people still can't grasp such a simple thing with the enormous amount of information and education around them.

This thread probably isn't going the way the incredibly protracted OP thought it was gonna go.

Could it not have saved us all a lot of time by making your thoughts a bit more concise like

"Are poor folk just lazy?"

Oh, and mind set theory is bollocks too.

Your start in life has a great impact on your future. Stability, love and encouragement provide an environment for a child to grow in confidence and self belief. A chaotic and unloving home makes it almost impossible for a child to thrive in.

Self-discipline requires focus and a belief in your abilities. Some have had this knocked out of them from a young age.

Working hard does not always get you where you want. Working smart is far more beneficial. It took me years to realise this.

I agree with the poster who mentioned many middle/senior managers believe they have far more to offer than they do. They can talk the talk extremely well.

Really????? What about Boris Johnson???? hardly the paragon of self discipline...

God, all the anecdotes on these threads, reads like a Daily Mail fangirl club.

If self disciple was so important we wouldn’t have Boris Johnson as prime minister.

Faith50 Your start in life has a great impact on your future. Stability, love and encouragement provide an environment for a child to grow in confidence and self belief. A chaotic and unloving home makes it almost impossible for a child to thrive in.

So the people who had fairly awful starts in life but went onto to do really well must be truly exceptional, and probably good examples to follow. And there are many of them. So for instance, a child whose parents decided they were going to get divorced and had a massive ongoing argument involving constantly interrupting their child studying the night before one of that child's A levels might just learn how to focus and not lose concentration from an early age. And I dare say that same child might be rather irked by people who would like to write them off from a young age because someone didn't think their parental background was "suitable".

OTOH I know plenty of people who really had lots of opportunities, private educations, parents doing as much as they could for them, and they still ended up struggling to get by without ongoing parental assistance. There are loads of people like that. For many, parents who give too much support can actually be a handicap in the long run.

I'd say its still up to the individual. Opportunity of course can assist those who would otherwise be ordinary to become extraordinary.

self discipline, laziness, choosing instant gratification are all as much innate personality traits as intellect.

Being able to delay gratification at a young age is a marker in success as an adult but isn't a choice

Ideal parenting (which varies according to innate characteristics) can modify but not obliterate innate characteristics.

Many many many studies show that the main factor in academic and job success comes down to money. If you are born in poverty you are at a disadvantage before you even start. Why that is is complicated but it’s shown time and again to be true.

@Vulpine sadly money doesn't grow on trees. I can't afford to live in a city and never will be able to. The other towns around here are even more shit than the one I'm from.

If all it took was self-discipline to succeed then we wouldn’t see half of the rich people we do in positions of power. The reason why some people succeed and others don’t starts from the womb - those people whose parents want and are able to implement more for their kids than they had and instill ambition by working within the system (education etc) are more likely to succeed than others. This is why the kids of immigrants often succeed because despite the poverty parents will do anything and everything to ensure their kids don’t need to depend on anyone other thaj themselves.

Just....wow.

Why haven't you come back @equinox32? I'd love to hear more of your snobby shit.

I'm a high achiever- always have been.

But self discipline- I wish. Not in my toolkit I'm afraid.

Oh and OP, please define ‘success’, ‘high achiever’ and ‘low achiever’.

Nepotism and wealth will always outdo graft and intelligence...
Look at the government for proof if it were needed.

MonkeyToesOfDoom Look at the government for proof if it were needed.

I don't think the British government is currently a good example of success and high achievement, but I get your point!

@QualCheckBot, that does sound horrible and I don't wish to dismiss your experience but as a child growing up with a single mum (who had me as a young teen) and who had got pregnant with another useless ####, just before I left primary school, dare I say that I would have loved to have been in the position to have got as far as A levels 😔. But from the age of 11 almost 12, I was my D baby B's babysitter as my mum worked her cash in hand jobs 😳.
This is what these threads do, they make us compete in misery

@QualCheckBot but having parents row around you is hardly the worst thing that can happen to a child particularly if they previously had a stable home in which to develop resilience and coping strategies.

Disruptive yes but certainly not the worst.

What about kids who grow up with severe neglect and never get to learn those skills ever? Or in homes with highly expressed emotions or ambivalent or complex attachment problems? Or parents who are consistently absent? Or parents who don't care where they are?

Are they all just not seeing the opportunity to become extraordinary?

I actually got thinking about this yesterday as a poster on here made a comment to me which I found really odd. I can't remember exactly what it said, but it was something like "we" on mumsnet have on something and if you want to post on here you should conform. Said poster then tried to go on and bully me and then feigned being all upset and having some sort of panic attack when it didn't go as planned.

LOL

I'll have a look for that later.

Doingtheboxerbeat and doublebarrellednurse your posts provide a different perspective. I was always an unusually focussed and confident child!

I do think its important not to write people off though. I remember having an awful argument, aged 15, with a schools career adviser, who advised me not to aim too high. How many 15 year olds would have been put off by such negativity? And how strange that there seem to be more than a few people working in the education system so invested in stopping children fulfilling their potential.

If the family thing worked, how come everybody who is successful today isn't descended from somebody who was successful 1000 years ago?