How competitive are you generally?

13 messages
06/06/2013 at 20:13

I'm not really.

I did a degree while working full time and to be honest I geared the reading to the questions.  If I didn't need to use it I didn't look at it. 

First class honours would have been nice (and possible) but it just wasn't practical given the time I had to study. 2:1 was good enough and I was perfectly happy with it.

06/06/2013 at 21:07

Play hard, drink hard is definately a motto I could grow to adopt 

09/06/2013 at 15:52

In answer to the question how competitive am I.. Against others, not at all. Against myself, very.

09/06/2013 at 16:42

I was accused of being competitive when I discovered that I was the best in my age group in GB at something recently 

10/06/2013 at 15:52

I'm of the opinion that the saying if something's worth doing, it's worth doing well is a load of dingo's kidneys. There are plenty of things that are worth doing that aren't worth doing well.

But when I play boardgames and card games I always play to win.

15/06/2013 at 19:30

I was once informed at a job interview that competitiveness could be considered an infantile attribute. Which was a bit confusing when you think how competitive life is.

However, though life may be competitive, the success is acquired through co-operation with others, not competing against them. A subtle difference.

Unless its a sporting event. Open season with that one.


15/06/2013 at 19:57
Nick Windsor 4 wrote (see)

I agree a degree of success can be achieved with the right team but all teams need a driven competitive leader  

At which point the team becomes a wolf pack.

And a couple of steps later a dictator with a collection of subservient lackeys who opt for an easy life instead of arguing with some pushy sod who always wants to get their own way all the time. 

Edited: 15/06/2013 at 20:04
16/06/2013 at 15:04
RicF wrote (see)

However, though life may be competitive, the success is acquired through co-operation with others, not competing against them. A subtle difference.



If everyone could form an orderly pyramid, I'll be glad to climb to the top on your shoulders.......

16/06/2013 at 15:58
Nick Windsor 4 wrote (see)

You can get so far with a consensus approach, the last bit takes that little bit extra 

Yes, they're called bullies.

If you take a group of typical blokes, you're going to get one who models themselves on someone like John Terry. He's a leader, why? because he fucking says so.

He doesn't mind the consensus approach as long as it goes where he want it too. he isn't going to listen to any opinion unless its his.

He weighs up the opposition and if he reckons he's got the measure of them, takes over.

Now a guy like me at 9 stone and 5' 5" tall doesn't get a look in when Neanderthals like this are about. You don't even exist.

Quite often the reason people are termed non-team players is simply because they don't see why their views are less valid than some others and why the fuck should they take a subservient role.

So many teams aren't teams. They're fucking dog packs led by an infantile bully.

Doesn't management luv em?

Fortunately I'm spared any of this corporate crap. 


Edited: 16/06/2013 at 15:59
16/06/2013 at 17:09

I compete with myself when I run. In general I am quite competitive, you are talking about leadership as if it is a disease, you ccondo run anything worthwhile by committee, someone has to take charge and responsibility if this person takes the hit fr failure why shouldn't they take credit fr success, and some of the more Bolshy and bossy people are the small men who seem to think they ave mre to prove. Maybe a very basic Neanderthal attitude but it works fr them so why not

16/06/2013 at 17:10

Apologies for the crap spelling, and for once size don't matter

16/06/2013 at 17:28
Nick Windsor 4 wrote (see)

I'm sorry but taking a lead role needn't be anything to do with a macho image, or bullying, and what on earth does size have to do with true leadership.

intellect and decisive behaviour make real leaders, please don't confuse John Terry type characters with this

That's exactly what my opinion is too.

The problem is where people miss potential leaders since they are blinded by image and noise.

Admit it. If there was a mass of people in a room, who'd do you think will be noticed. The guy who's 6' 6" or the shorty?

Who do do you think commands instinctive respect without doing a thing. Same big guy. Image is everything these days.

Look at when Cameron was made leader of the Cons. There was a montage of all the candidates and without even knowing any of their talents I picked him out. Why? easy, he was the best looking. 

We know what makes a good leader but are held in thrall to image, bullshit and bluster. true substance doesn't get much of a look in unless its the same substance that owns the show. 

As I own mine.

As for bullies, they don't make good leaders, but certainly end up in charge. But not with me on their case. 


16/06/2013 at 18:17

Agreed, bullies would be a poor example to lead anything but a cavalry charge, however if you look at first glance at your room full of people, yes the tallest, loudest, fattest, best looking, worst looking and even the most hysterical will be noticed long before me if I sit quietly. That doesn't mean these people end up leading, you have to trust that if your view is worthwhile it will eventually be heard, sometimes in life you do have to contend with the bullies, if you don't compete with them (on your own terms) then they win

We'd love you to add a comment! Please login or take half a minute to register as a free member
13 messages
Previously bookmarked threads are now visible in "Followed Threads". You can also manage notifications on these threads from the "Forum Settings" section of your profile settings page to prevent being sent an email when a reply is made.
Forum Jump  

RW Forums