You’ve likely heard the term “Fake it till you make it” atleast a handful of times over the years. The expression is typically used towards someone who desires to hold a particular job or profession, but doesn’t have the necessary skills to carry out the responsibilities effectively. By it’s nature, it would seem highly disingenuous. If you’re not adequately qualified for the position how would you begin to convince a prospective employer that you are?
I for one have a certain level of admiration for people with this ability. This should easily be caught out; it would only take one question specifically related to the roles subject matter to determine that this character is a phony. So how do they get away with it?
One theory I’ve coined is in relation to the person’s personality type. The idea of personality types is that each one of us is naturally driven towards a particular way of thinking, and the decisions we make and how we choose to live our lives are a reflection on our personality type. I certainly wouldn’t treat it as dogma, but it’s an interesting concept. I’ll leave a couple of references in the footnote1. There are multiple sites out there from groups of people with varying ideas on this.
In any case, I believe some people hold the ability to dominate a conversation more than others, particularly in regard to topics they’re comfortable with. Whether this is a natural ability or a learned skill could be disputed, but in practice, I think it’s reasonable to suggest that this is prevalent amongst some of those we interact with.
A classic fictional example can be found in the movie “Catch me if you can” starring Leonardo Dicaprio. Based on a true story, it follows the life of Frank Abagnale who posed himself as belonging to various professions, including an Airline Pilot and a Doctor. Because he was regarded a wealthy man by banks, they would offer him a high credit overdraft. Frank would then take advantage of this by counterfeiting Cashiers Checks. But how did he convince his employers that he was capable of something he wasn’t? In an interview with the Guardian he is quoted saying:
“Perception is reality,” says Abagnale, smiling that big, warm, trust-me smile. “What people see is what they believe.“
The charmer | Film | The Guardian
You get the sense that he exuberated great confidence. Through his charm, he has already convinced the recipient that he knows where he belongs, and any mention of the business is to be quickly glanced over as a minor formality, as was particularly the case in the fake checks he printed, which in Abagnale’s own words were “Laughable”. The checks weren’t meticulously convincing, but his persona took care of that.
Abagnale didn’t seem to be intimated by any of those he interacted with. In many cases, he knew little to nothing of the subject matter that was to be discussed; yet, in the manner he put himself across, he didn’t allow the conversation to steer itself in a way that would make him look like a fool.
So, how about someone with a very different attitude towards these scenarios? I like to think I’m conscientious in how I put myself across to others. I wouldn’t want to give the impression that I’m being somewhat disingenuous in my thoughts on what’s being discussed. I think being an “Open Book” as it were, allows you to have truly meaningful conversations with others. If you’re not required to hide 90% of your inner being, it seems reasonable to suggest that you can connect with people in a much more substantial way. Alternatively, to quote Abagnale again:
“The only time I was actually me was when I was alone in my room. There were no real friends because everyone believed me to be something else.”
The charmer | Film | The Guardian
Being overly conscientious can have it’s flaws however. I find it rather ironic that the idea of simply being judged by someone in a particular scenario can cause the side effect of performing in a worse way to how you would have done, should you have not thought about it to begin with. To offer an example, I’d like to think I’m a pretty good driver, excellent in fact, in the league of a professional racing driver (I like to think so anyway…). Regardless, before I became so well seasoned, I was undertaking driving lessons. I was a fairly confident driver with my instructor, so when I went in for my test, it should have been a breeze. However, to put it bluntly, it wasn’t. The thought of failing that test was nerve wracking to say the least. To fail meant waiting at least another 2 months to schedule another. It mean’t a lot to pass, and I felt I had a lot to lose. My anxiety in those moments seemed to get the better of me, and I failed. In fact, I would go on to fail 3 more times before eventually passing (quite something for someone who professes to be on par with a professional racing driver, I know), much to the relief of my mum who thought it was never going to happen.
If only I hadn’t let the thought of failure get to me in such a profound way, I may have passed the first time. The mere thought of failure led me to exactly that end. I also associate this within the scope of dialogue. Think about the times you were placed in a situation where it mattered; a job interview for example. Did the thought of not putting yourself across in the best way possible cause you to to indeed not set a good impression? Maybe you stumbled over your words by overanalyzing every thought that came to mind. If you can’t relate to this, maybe you’re more akin to Frank Abagnale who’s self-assured attitude afforded him a more carefree outlook on the world.
Accepting the idea of failure may just lead to becoming more accomplished in what you set out to do, and having confidence in your ability like Frank, may just allow those ambitions to flourish.
JW Blog 