A Bravo writes to share his perspective on having a Sigma in the place of an Alpha in his personal hierarchy:
It seems like being a “Sigma” is all the rage these days, especially amongst gamma secret kings. They’re actually an Alpha, deep down even though no one knows, or wants them to be. Always rejected by the group but it's by choice! Sigma male! Nope, just Gammas.
Having worked closely with an actual Sigma now for years, I thought my perspective as a Bravo might shed some light on the true nature of a Sigma. They’re basically weird Omegas who appear to be Alpha but still have all the bizarre, aloof, damaged qualities of your textbook Omega.
I’m a Bravo. I feel the most comfortable backing up someone else’s game plan. So, when I met this particular Sigma, I assumed he would be the man with the plan. I was wrong.
The thing to remember about Sigmas is they don’t feel that normal responsibility for the group they manage because they don’t view themselves as managers. When you ask them what the plan is, there is usually a pregnant pause followed by mild disgust. Sigmas can be highly effective at various missions, and quite successful, so it’s understandable that one would view them as the team leader, but they aren’t.
That would require a team. And a leader.
The Sigma is capable of constant communication as we complete a very specific and challenging task. And then he can disappear for months only to show up again as if no time has passed. Despite the Sigma’s ability to have friends, they don’t have any identity with a group or many human traits that most of us assume everyone has.
As the world romanticizes the Sigma, an Alpha with no ties to the world, an independent lone wolf who does what he wants with status and charisma. I know the truth. They’re pretty fucked-up. Which is fine. They do their best and can operate at very high levels.
But never ask them what the plan is and expect to find your own ride from the airport.
It’s fascinating to see how the policeman and chief enforcer of the hierarchy - the Bravo - views the Sigma in such a completely different way than the romantic view of them held by Gammas and women. Unlike the latter pair, the unfortunate Bravo has had the opportunity to directly experience all that aloofness and detachment over time and realize that a) it’s not an act, b) it applies to friend and foe alike, and c) it has significant consequences, most of which are negative.
Unlike the Alpha, there is something broken or even backwards in the Sigma with regards to his social relations. Rather like the drama-seeking woman who blows up her every relationship once it gets too smooth and comfortable for her, the Sigma finds it difficult, if not impossible, to remain for long in any social group or organization, no matter how well it functions, how well he is treated, or how successful he is within it.
You can sense the palpable frustration in what the Bravo describes as the Sigma’s lack of “many human traits”. He’s not wrong. For my part, I could give a long list of how my excessive detachment has materially harmed virtually every project with which I’ve ever been involved in some way.
The recent Epic-Disney deal only underlined that…
While their unique skills and ability to ignore performance-limiting traditions and social mores often makes putting up with their idiosyncrasies worthwhile, it’s vital to accept that, unlike a Bravo, the Sigma is never going to successfully grow into a situational role as an Alpha. It’s just not going to happen
This is why Sigmas are best utilized in business as a form of corporate spec-ops. Their skills are best suited for use in small, focused teams that have a single mission over a limited period of time, where innovation, flexibility, and thinking outside-the-box are more important than infrastructure-building or team and project management. They’re ideal for heading up skunk works, for external contract work, and they can be extraordinarily effective in short-term consulting gigs, but their success should never be rewarded by giving them bigger organizations to run and more people to manage.
That’s just asking for trouble.
Instead, give them a new challenge, ideally in a different field and a different location. Turn them loose to do things their way, don’t ask too many questions, and once they deliver, praise them and proactively move them on.
My favorite part is the first paragraph.
The harsh reality is that most of us who fashion ourselves to be “Sigmas”, really are probably just Gammas aspiring to be the Alpha male. But it’s easy to imagine oneself as Sigma when you rarely engage in social hierarchies.
Second point; people are using the term “Sigma” far too loosely now in these circles. It seems to have become something more akin to the MBTI personality designation, with little or no respect at all for one’s actual social status.
Someone on another forum brought up the topic of historical Sigmas, and apparently for some, Octavian—you know, Caesar Augustus, first emperor of Rome—was a Sigma male because he used “cunning and indirect maneuvering” to increase his political power. It’s getting ridiculous with some of you. Putin is a Sigma? Seriously? Dude’s a bloody Alpha. That’s what an Alpha is—the top dog. Alpha. First. Primary. Please correct me if I’m wrong Vox, but you didn’t intend for this to be a “What’s your spirit animal?” system of classification…?
Last point; these social strata likely have existed since before all recorded history and were very well known and generally accepted in traditional societies as what we now call the Caste system. (Apologies if I’m being redundant). The Alpha roughly corresponds to the Warrior class; Sigma roughly to the Priest/Sage class; Betas and Gammas roughly to Merchants and/or Laborers. But these weren’t just arbitrary designations set in place by clever authoritarians—they were in tune with nature & ideally aligned to each individual’s personal inherited traits, and also to their lineage by birth. Yet, with enough leeway for social mobility either up, down, or sideways within the hierarchy. Some good historical/mythological examples of Sigmas would be the Buddha, Socrates, and Odin. Sigmas would often fulfill the “magician” function but could also fulfill the function of the “explorer”, the “spy”, the “poet”, etc.
TLDR; I think it’s important not to confuse an Alpha who utilizes Machiavellian strategies with a Sigma. They’re ultimately different beasts.
I never comment on articles, but this commenter really caught my eye. I wanted to say that, although I intellectually kind of agree with this bravo fellow in his assessment of the overall situation, I find it absolutely stupefying. To me this sounds like 'waahh. why won't you tell me what to do?' When I was reading this, I had this overwhelming feeling that this must be what a talking dog would sound like. I have been chuckling since I read this, at the thought of someone being considered to lack human traits because they are not militantly subservient. Imagine having to get your own ride from the airport? Oy. This substack is very intellectually stimulating.