I once used the term “George Castanza” as a means of describing an employee who embodies all of the characteristics least desirable in an employee. A George Castanza is inattentive, careless, sluggish, but most of all, a George Castanza is a slacker. A George Castanza is an employee who, in every instance, prefers the calming waters of a lazy stream to the trying rapids of a river. In fact, a George Castanza would prefer to avoid water altogether, preferring to spend his or her time sleeping, or perhaps watching others attempt to navigate a river’s rough rapids. While being a George Castanza will certainly land you in some hot water, is a George Castanza, and the characteristics such a character embodies completely bad? While we may all agree that employees everywhere should refrain from modeling themselves after this archetype, everything bad has some good. Is being a George Castanza all bad?
According to a recent study published in the Journal of Applied Psychology, researchers seem to be saying, “No.” According to the study, which was recently covered by Wall Street Journal contributor Sue Shellenbarger, slackers, or those who “withdraw” from tough situations and, “lie down and take a nap instead of tackling dilemmas right away, do better with life conflict, and seem to have more energy,” says the study. That is, quite curiously, slackers do well in stressful situations because their lackadaisical attitude prevents them from becoming overwhelmed with the situation or problem with which they are facing. So, while being a George Castanza might be professionally inadvisable, remaining cool and collected in the face of peril—approaching difficult situations with, dare I say it, a slacker’s sensibility—may not only reduce your stress-load, but also allow you to better process and react to that situation.
Comments are closed.