内向的人更能提升团队表现

    假如一份工作有两位求职者。他们有相同的学历和经验，但个性却截然相反。一位非常安静，看起来有些紧张，面试的时候，基本都是你在讲话，显然这是因为他担心自己说错话。而另一位则非常健谈，魅力十足，自信满满。你会选择哪一位？大多数招聘经理都会选择性格外向的求职者。然而，对于需要团队合作的岗位，从长期来看，有一点“神经质”个性的求职者可能是更好的选择。

    加州大学洛杉矶分校安德森管理学院（Anderson School at UCLA）的管理学教授科琳•本德斯基说：“这和常识有些相悖。”她曾参加过一项名为“外向性格者的衰落与内向性格者的崛起：任务组内地位分配的动态过程”（The Downfall of Extroverts and the Rise of Neurotics: The Dynamic Process of Status Allocation in Task Groups）研究，研究报告将在下一期《管理学会学报》（The Academy of Management Journal）中发表。

    本德斯基称：“我们的研究发现，外向的人在最开始会受到团队成员的重视。然而，随着时间推移，他们的表现通常都令人失望。而与此相反，内向的人表现往往会超出预期，最终成为高效的团队成员。”

    原因何在？本德斯基解释道：“主要是因为，内向的人会更努力去满足别人。许多人认为焦虑紧张具有破坏性，而内向的人们之所以会格外努力与其他人友好相处和尽量做得更好，原因恰好在于这种焦虑和紧张。而外向的人们通常都是糟糕的倾听者，对其他人的想法缺乏耐心，并不是出色的合作者。”因此，随着时间的推移，外向者对团队伙伴的贡献会远远低于预期，进而失去了在团队成员心目中的地位。

    本德斯基和她的研究团队通过两组试验发现了这个现象。在第一组试验中，一年级MBA学生先进行个性测试，然后每五个人被分成一个研究小组。学生们在一起合作一周之后，每一位学生按要求完成一份对其他团队成员的评估调查。调查的重点是在每一个小组中，哪一位成员拥有最高的地位，同时被期望拿出最好的表现。在这场人气竞争中，外向的人轻松获胜。“然而，在五个班级经过为期10周的高强度合作之后，我们重新进行了之前的评估调查，结果却出现了很大的不同，”本德斯基说。“个性偏内向的学生超出了预期，获得了外向的人们失去的地位。”这项研究“切实证明，预期和实践存在巨大的差异。”

    当然，这并不意味着要炒掉所有外向的人。本德斯基称：“他们非常适合某些岗位，尤其是直接面对客户的工作，例如销售等。但在需要配合的岗位上，他们的效率通常都不会太高。”

    她补充说：“我们的团队中或许有太多外向的人，因为他们在面试时的表现总是如此的出色。但最优秀的团队应该是不同性格类型的混合体。”如果你所领导的团队表现并没有达到你的预期，而且团队中已经有一部分具有内向性格的员工，本德斯基建议：“试试再多招点这样的员工”。（财富中文网）

    译者：刘进龙/汪皓

    Let's say you're considering two candidates for a job. They have similar credentials and experience, but their personalities are poles apart. One is quiet, seems anxious, and lets you do most of the talking in interviews, apparently out of fear of saying something wrong. The other is talkative, engaging, and bursting with confidence. Which one do you choose?

    Most hiring managers would opt for the second, extroverted candidate. Yet, for a job requiring teamwork, the anxious one, who shows signs of the personality type called "neurotic," might be the better choice in the long run.

    "It's counterintuitive," notes Corinne Bendersky, who teaches management at the Anderson School at UCLA. She is co-author of a study called "The Downfall of Extroverts and the Rise of Neurotics: The Dynamic Process of Status Allocation in Task Groups," set for publication in the next issue of The Academy of Management Journal.

    "Our research shows that extroverts are held in high esteem by their teammates at first, but over time, their performance tends to be disappointing," Bendersky says. "By contrast, neurotics exceed everyone's expectations and end up being highly effective team members."

    Why? "It's mainly because neurotics try harder to please. The same anxiety that coworkers initially view as possibly disruptive is what causes neurotics to try extra hard to get along with others and perform well," Bendersky explains. "Extroverts, on the other hand, are often poor listeners, impatient with others' ideas, and not good collaborators." So, over time, they contribute less than their teammates expected and lose status among their peers.

    Bendersky and her research team discovered this by doing two experiments. In one of them, first-year MBA students took personality tests before being divided up into study groups of five people each. After the students had worked together for a week, everyone was asked to complete a survey evaluating their teammates, with emphasis on which members of each group had the highest status and were expected to perform the best.

    The extroverts won that popularity contest hands down. "But when we repeated the survey after the teams had been working together intensively in five different classes for 10 weeks, we got a very different result," Bendersky says. "The students whose personalities were more neurotic had exceeded expectations and gained status where extroverts had lost it." The study "really showed a huge gap between expectations and experience."

    That's not to say you should fire all your extroverts. "They're very good in some roles, especially client-facing roles like sales, for example," Bendersky says. "But in jobs that require a lot of collaboration, they are often not as effective.

    "We've probably overpopulated our teams with extroverts, because they do so well in job interviews," she adds. "But the best teams have a mix of personality types." If you're leading a team that just isn't performing as well as you'd hoped, Bendersky suggests, "try adding more neurotics to it" -- if you've hired any.