Comments on: Internal Auditors http://www.eqsq.com/vivreladifference/2007/05/23/internal-auditors/ Vivre La Difference Fri, 09 Jan 2009 15:19:48 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5 By: Tim Worstall http://www.eqsq.com/vivreladifference/2007/05/23/internal-auditors/#comment-5496 Tim Worstall Mon, 11 Jun 2007 16:02:15 +0000 http://eqsq.com/vivreLaDifference/internal-auditors.html#comment-5496 I agree that this is a slightly difficult one to pigeonhole. You need to have the systemizing intelligence and the lack of empathy to enjoy tracking down those who are stealing. But you also need to have the emotional intelligence to think like the potential criminal and work out how they might be trying to steal. One part requires one set of talents, the other, the other (as it were). Which is why I thought that the balanced brain type was best. I agree that this is a slightly difficult one to pigeonhole. You need to have the systemizing intelligence and the lack of empathy to enjoy tracking down those who are stealing. But you also need to have the emotional intelligence to think like the potential criminal and work out how they might be trying to steal. One part requires one set of talents, the other, the other (as it were).
Which is why I thought that the balanced brain type was best.

]]> By: Lucy http://www.eqsq.com/vivreladifference/2007/05/23/internal-auditors/#comment-5440 Lucy Thu, 07 Jun 2007 17:44:38 +0000 http://eqsq.com/vivreLaDifference/internal-auditors.html#comment-5440 If the job is to determine whether someone is lying or stealing, it might not be a good one for our empathizers. The black-and-white systemizers might be better at calling someone on the rug: they will less likely feel bad for the ‘bad’ guy. I know, firsthand, that I would not want the job of blowing the whistle, and thus getting fired, sending to jail, etc, on my colleagues, even if they deserved it. Second, I think we should, on some level, protect our society’s empathizers. When guiding our young (as teachers, guidance counselors, career counselors, etc), one would probably not send a truly empathetic type into this field. I realize, Tim, that you said ‘balanced brain types,’ and not empathizers, but I think there are some jobs (not many, but some) for which many people wouldn’t work out. And here, I think an extreme systemizer might be best. Do you remember that long ago Cheer’s episode when Norm ‘moved up’ in his company to become the guy who fired people? At first, he got overly emotional with every lay off (even crying with the unfortunate firees), thus making them feel bad for him and not angry about being laid off. But after a while, he hardened up and it barely fazed him to fire people. Strange example of my point, I know. If the job is to determine whether someone is lying or stealing, it might not be a good one for our empathizers. The black-and-white systemizers might be better at calling someone on the rug: they will less likely feel bad for the ‘bad’ guy. I know, firsthand, that I would not want the job of blowing the whistle, and thus getting fired, sending to jail, etc, on my colleagues, even if they deserved it.

Second, I think we should, on some level, protect our society’s empathizers. When guiding our young (as teachers, guidance counselors, career counselors, etc), one would probably not send a truly empathetic type into this field.

I realize, Tim, that you said ‘balanced brain types,’ and not empathizers, but I think there are some jobs (not many, but some) for which many people wouldn’t work out. And here, I think an extreme systemizer might be best.

Do you remember that long ago Cheer’s episode when Norm ‘moved up’ in his company to become the guy who fired people? At first, he got overly emotional with every lay off (even crying with the unfortunate firees), thus making them feel bad for him and not angry about being laid off. But after a while, he hardened up and it barely fazed him to fire people.

Strange example of my point, I know.

]]>