Last month the New York Times published an opinion piece titled “The Rise of the New Group Think.” In it, author Susan Cain argues that the professional world’s recent push towards group work-centered environments is actually squandering innovation and efficiency. The jist being: if you’re an introvert, you prefer to work alone the majority of the time. Forced socialization in the form of on-the-spot group brainstorming and offices that allow no individual, private space causes extreme anxiety in many employees and distracts them from focusing on the work itself—effectively rendering them functioning far below capacity.

When I shared this article on my personal Facebook profile and on the Works Progress group page it clearly struck a chord with many, and, not surprisingly, struck a nerve with quite a few others. Some people took issue with the obvious bias of the article, Susan Cain being the author of the recently released book Quiet: The Power of Introverts in a World That Can’t Stop Talking (to which I would say simply: it’s in the opinion section), some people took issue with Cain’s romanticizing of “the lone genius” figure, and some people simply rejected the notion that collaboration rarely leads to creativity.

Overall though, most people on either side of the argument still acknowledged that the overriding lesson Cain didn’t quite hit is balance. Some group time is good, some individual time is good. The proportion of each necessary for producing the most innovative and efficient work is entirely dependent on the individual.

Despite Cain’s heavy use of evidence to support her point about the lone genius, to me, the more important message to be gleaned from the article was less “introverts do it better!” and more “everyone does it differently, but the recent trend more often leaves introverts with the short end of the stick.”  Many people are experiencing or have experienced work cultures that stigmatize an individual’s need for occasional privacy by forcing employees into a space that can’t physically accommodate that need. No, having to work at a table instead of a cubicle is not the end of the world, but when a person is looked down on, called anti-social, or accused of not being a team player simply because they need to sneak off and work in the broom closet for a couple of hours, something is clearly off. A physical work space can be just as dynamic as the individuals that inhabit it, but to intentionally create one that implicates some of those individuals in a negative light is not only unnecessary, it’s also not conducive to a harmonious, productive organization.

So what can we do about this? Well, if you like your statistics Wikipedia-style like I do, you’ll accept that nearly 70% of the population is actually considered ambivert—possessing qualities of both extroversion and introversion, with no extreme leaning to either side. Running contrary to this cold, hard, Wikipediafied truth unfortunately, is the popular fad in the professional world of books, blogs, and articles dedicated to some variation of the topic “surviving as an introvert in an extroverted world,” or “networking for introverts.” While I’m all for the general message behind this writing—challenging yourself to step out of your comfort zone and learning how to do it in the most painless way possible—I take issue with the constant need to boil people down into one label or the other.

Yes, there are absolutely some people (let’s go with another Wikipedia fact and say 16%) that are really, seriously introverted, and getting along in a culture that more and more frequently celebrates who you know rather than what you know is an incredible challenge. But for the majority of us who land somewhere in the middle, the repeated bandying about of the terms “introvert” and extrovert” often only perpetuates the problem. If I identify myself as an introvert and go about life with this label at the top of my mind, frequently trying to figure out how I can combat my prescribed short-comings, I’m most likely setting myself up for a self-fulfilling prophecy. True, there is certainly a real issue with stigmatization of others habits in the workplace, but how often do we actively contribute to this problem by stigmatizing ourselves?

What if instead of approaching life with the cut and dry attitude of “how can I, as an introvert, figure out how to survive surrounded by a bunch of extroverts,” we went in with the mindset of simply being a unique person, with unique needs, trying to work as best we can with a bunch of other unique people with their own set of unique needs?

Yes, work inevitably demands some sacrifices and compromises no matter what, and not everyone will always be happy. But I, as an introvert/extrovert/ambivert/lover of Certs, think we’d probably all be a lot better off if we’d just do away with the persistent self-labeling for a while, hearken back to lessons from our kindergarten days of yore, and focus on exercising empathy and respect for each others’ individuality instead.

-Regan