Category: The No Asshole Rule

I was talking with Bruce Nichols at HarperCollins about The Peter Principle, and suggested that we need a self-test based on the book to determine if someone has reached their level of incompetence, and which methods they are using to mask and cope with what Professor Peter called "final placement syndrome." We have been toying with the idea of doing a self-test similar to the ARSE.  Regular readers of this blog will recall that the ARSE test (Asshole Rating Self Exam) is for assessing if you are a certified asshole or not.  The ARSE continues to be filled out at a pretty high rate; Emily at Electric Pulp reports it is closing in in 190,000 completions (currently at 188,580).

Bruce suggested we could pair the ARSE with the FARCE.  He proposes five questions linked to the acronym and derived from the logic and language of The Peter Principle:  

Friend: Do you have a crucial friend and mentor in the
company, without whom you wouldn't be where you are?

Assistant: is yours so priceless and efficient that you
couldn't survive without him?

Reach: Have you reached as high as you are likely to go
in the company?

Current practices: can you readily explain and defend
them?

Explain away: can you readily explain why proposals for
change are bad?

Guy Kawasaki took a quick look at the FARCE and his reaction is that we need a longer and more interactive version, along the lines of ARSE. I think he is right and I am tempted to do one, although I should probably resist the temptation because I am too busy and distracted already.  But it sure would be fun to pair the ARSE and FARCE, and then people could take tests to determine if they are an asshole, incompetent, both, or neither. 

P.S. There are some pretty interesting comments in response to my Peter Principle Lives essay at BusinessWeek, and a bit of a polite debate about whether of Sully of "Miracle on the Hudson" fame was one of the few pilots who could have pulled-off that landing or not. 

There is a lot anger these days toward all sorts of villains associated with the meltdown.  And I certainly got plenty mad at the AIG executives and a lot of those financial services CEOs.  But I have tried to remind myself that getting angry and obsessed with avenging others isn't very healthy. 

Yes, there are times when justice demands it and when fighting back creates feelings of control.  Indeed, when it comes to fighting back against assholes, my favorites stories include Jason Zweig's tale of the abused airline employee who sent the culprit's bags to Nairobi (even though he was going to LA),  Sue Sherman's story (see the post about Jason's story)about how she taught new bus drivers in Ann Arbor to save-up an "accident" for revenge against an asshole driver during Christmas time, and my favorite about the radio producer who got back at her food-stealing boss by putting some Ex-Lax laced candies on her desk.

But it is also important to remember the downsides of revenge include — as you can see in Getting Even,  a classic and well-documented effect is that it can fuel a vicious circle of revenge where each party feels as if the last act of revenge needs to be avenged, and each side travels through life being harmed and then harmed — without the score ever being settled.

The other and related aspect of revenge is that there are times when people who are damaged devote so much emotional energy and mind share to thoughts of getting even and generalized anger toward their abuser that consumes them, and — whether they are able to fight back or not — that inability to get it out of their mind damages their mental and physical health and their other relationships.   I emphasized in The No Asshole Rule that, especially when you are trapped in situation –  bad job with an asshole boss — that you can't escape from, learning the fine are of emotional detachment, of simply going through the motions to keep your income coming in, but not letting it touch your soul, is sometimes the best solution.  Alas, with unemployment rates what they are, I am afraid that more and more people throughout the world are trapped in that situation than ever before — so although not everyone agrees me — I would argue that learning not to give a shit may be a more important survival skills than ever.  I blogged about Why Indifference is as Important as Passion awhile back, and as you can see, got some strong reactions, both pro and con. Tom Peters especially objected — although I suspect that he isn't trapped in a job with an asshole boss while struggling to pay mortgage and keep food on the table, like all to many Americans are these days. He brags about leaving McKinsey, but I would point out that writing the best selling business book of all time gave him an escape route that most people don't have!  I generally agree with Tom on most things, but not this time. I think his argument holds best for elites during good times, and not so well for the most people the rest of the time.

Indeed, to that point, an interesting study by some Spanish researchers was just published (see it summarized at BPS Digest) that followed 500 employees who suffered job stress, and compared those who responded with thoughts of revenge and anger to those who responded with emotional detachment.  The findings suggest that those who responded with detachment were less likely to be bullied and (albeit a weaker finding) were less likely to suffer strains such as unhappiness, depression, and loss of sleep.  The authors also cite related research in the article that shows having the ability to "switch-off" thoughts about the stress of work during off-work hours protects people from the damage caused by a stressful job.

As I have written before, I am not saying that people ought to be doormats.  In fact, as I read through the research on bullying, revenge, asshole bosses, and detachment, my sense is that fighting back and winning against a bully — but finding a way to do it without worrying about it constantly and without creating a cycle of revenge might be the best solution possible.  Indeed, the airline employee that Jason Zweig met seemed to have it down. She seem unfazed by the assholes tirade, and just smiled through it all, and sent his luggage 6000 miles or so from his destination.   Alas, however, such perfect acts of revenge are often impossible.  The old saying "don't get mad, get even" is a useful half-truth — but beware of being locked in a battle with someone who applies the same strategy. 

And, in any case, do everything you can to avoid letting it touch your soul.

P.S. The study is: B
MORENOJIMENEZ, A RODRIGUEZMUNOZ, J PASTOR, A SANZVERGEL, E GARROSA
(2009). The moderating effects of psychological detachment and thoughts
of revenge in workplace bullying. Personality and Individual Differences, 46 (3), 359-364

One of the themes seen in the current outrage about AIG, executive pay, and the rest is that what seems "normal" to people who have a lot of money and power may be interpreted as signs that they are arrogant, greedy, and insensitive assholes by people who lack such riches and influence.   There are lots of causes of this weird clash, but certainly one of these — as I have written here before — is that being in positions of power and status causes people to become remarkably oblivious to the needs, feelings, actions, and even mere presence of those who lack power. See here and here.

Lawyers aren't the only ones who suffer from this disease, but the dynamics of law firms, with vast status differences and cultures that too often encourage selfish and nasty behavior, are breeding grounds for such dynamics.  When my wife worked at a law firm, she often commented how insensitive some the lawyers were to paralegals and legal secretaries, standing and talking in front of their desks as if they didn't exist, bragging about their riches, or perhaps most unfortunate, complaining about how little they were paid within easy earshot of people making who made one-tenth of that amount.  

Along these lines, I ran into a great blog post at She's Lump.  I frankly can't figure out who Lump is, but she clearly works in an office with a lot of attorneys who are suffering from power poisoning.  And her blog is great, no bullshit, and straight from the heart.  Here is her post There Apparently Isn't a No Asshole Rule Here — which starts:

For a little over a week, I’ve been making a list of things I hear the
many attorneys I work with say on the elevator ride up to my office.
It’s not as if I’m eavesdropping because I am in an elevator
after all, and it’s somewhat hard to have a conversation without
someone taking note – and that someone is obviously ME.

These
attorneys want to know everyone’s business as well as flaunt their own
for the whole elevator audience to hear (OK, not all of them are like
this). Or maybe they’re just fucking loud.

Loudly trying to ONE UP the other.

One uppers are assholes.

Then, she provides all kinds of examples of "one uppers," notably the attorney who is bragging about his new Porsche and then is one-upped by the one who bought a new plane.

Of course, lawyers aren't the only ones who suffer from this problem — I am all also for capitalism and I think it is great when people get rich, especially if they are people I like.   And certainly, we need people to start buying stuff to help bring back the economy.  But if you have more money or power than the people you come in close contact with, the lesson is that you might show a little restraint and awareness about how insensitive your words and deeds may sound — unless you WANT them to think you are an asshole.

P.S. This also reminds me of a conversation that I had with one of my former neighbors perhaps 15 years ago.  I asked her what she was doing for Thanksgiving. She looked very sad,and told me that, she would have to stay around the Bay Area because her husband — a new venture capitalist — hadn't made enough money to buy a place in Palm Springs like his more wealthy partners.   Envy is an awful thing, isn't it?  By the way, her husband struck it rich during the dotcom boom, and she know lives in a huge mansion.  I am not sure they ever got the house in Palm Springs, but I hope she is happy with her riches. I guess Kurt Vonnegut's poem didn't capture her world view. 

It is time to update my Honor Roll of Places That Don't Tolerate Assholes.  I got an email from Nils today with a nice addition, from a group of partners Green Modern Kits, who provide energy efficient solutions of all kinds, including plans for green cabins and houses.  Well, their website reveals how the no asshole rule  can sometimes be created in response to a disturbing event. 

"Today, after all this time, I received my first rude request for
information. Rude Person, I appreciate your interest, but I will not
expose you to our nice, talented people I have worked so hard to find.
Rude Person, if you speak to us that way, how will you treat your contractor? Their subs?"

They also added a new item to their terms of service: " Are you cranky? This may not be the company for you."  The folks at Green Modern Kits might enjoy the ACHE (Asshole Client for Hell Exam) or have their clients do some self-examination with the ARSE.

Here
is a little story about a driver who would score very high on the Asshole
Rating Self-Exam (ARSE):

An Officer stops a driver for running a red light.
The guy is a real jerk and comes running back to the officer demanding to know why he is being harassed by the Gestapo! So the officer calmly tells him of the red light violation. The "Motorist" instantly goes on a tirade, questioning the officer's ancestry, sexual orientation, etc., in rather explicit terms.

The tirade goes on without the officer saying anything. When he gets done with writing the ticket he puts an "AH" in the
lower right corner of the narrative portion of the ticket. He then hands it to the "Violator" for his signature. The guy signs the ticket angrily,
and when presented with his copy points to the "AH" and demands to know
what it stands for.

The Officer says, "That's so when we go to court, I'll remember that you're an Asshole!"

Two months later they're in court. The "Violator" has such a bad
driving record he is about to lose his license and has hired a lawyer to represent him. On the stand the officer testifies to seeing the man run the red light. Under cross examination the defense attorney asks; "Officer is this a reasonable facsimile of the ticket you issued my client?"

Officer responds, "Yes sir, that is the defendants copy, his signature and mine, same number at the top.

Lawyer: "Officer, is there any particular marking or notation on this ticket you don't normally make?"

Officer: "Yes sir, in the lower right corner of the narrative there is an "AH," underlined."

Lawyer: "What does the "AH" stand for, officer?"

Officer: "Aggressive and Hostile Sir."

Lawyer: "Aggressive and Hostile?"

Officer: "Yes Sir?

Lawyer: "Officer, Are you sure it doesn't stand for Asshole?"

Officer: "Well Sir, You know your client better than I do!"

P.S. Les, thanks for sending the story.

I argued in The No Asshole Rule that, even in organizations that routinely breed, tolerate, and even celebrate assholes — where run-of-the-mill assholes are barely noticed — there can come a point where a person has become such a flaming asshole or the damage has become so evident, that the rule is applied and the person is sent packing.  I wrote the No Asshole Rule to encourage organizations to have higher standards, but it is interesting to see that, in the case of Dallas Cowboys wide receiver Terrell Owens — a superb individual talent, but a selfish and difficult player — that he has been sent packing by his employer. This happened because — apparently — he was undermining teamwork and distracting coaches and the quarterback from the bigger picture.  Owens was sent packing by the Philadelphia Eagles a few years earlier for pretty much the same reasons.   You can see a kind of similar pattern with Indiana University basketball coach Bob Knight, who got away with a lot nastiness (including, apparently, choking a player at practice).  The same thing happened with Steve Jobs, when he was forced out of Apple — although it is interesting that in his second tour there were far fewer signs that he was acting like a jerk (now he is trying to recover from some awful illness of course).

So, it might be that most organizations will eventually enforce the rule if someone is out of control or damaging enough.  Perhaps time does wound all heels, but it sure takes a long time before it happens in some places.

I have heard managers describe themselves as "toxic handlers" or "in charge of asshole management," but I heard a new job title this morning that I will now use when talking about The No Asshole Rule:  Asshole Wrangler.  It came in this charming note from a manager:

"I had planned to do
some therapeutic reading while recovery from surgery and didn't get to your
book until the day I came back to work..  Unfortunately I have been
anointed the a*hole wrangler from my senior management team and three days out
of work leaves plenty of mess to clean up.  Therapy came in an all
nighter, finishing your bulk in one sitting.  The TCA list will definitely
be shared with my HR director; we haven't found a good way to quantify behavior
and your example will be invaluable."

One of my favorite former students wrote me an extremely thoughtful email over t he weekend about the dangerous role that "asshole lovers" play in organizations, arguing that there are people who aren't assholes, but who set the stage for them to be hired, succeed, and be rewarded for it.  It reminds me a little of the "toxic enablers" discussed in the late Peter Frost's lovely book Toxic Emotions at Work, but he is getting at something even more extreme and troubling in this story.  Here is what her wrote, and like him, I am especially curious to hear your answers to his question:

I had a quick random thought that I wanted to share with
you:  so the theory of "get rid of
assholes" in organizations makes sense for all of the reasons you have
studied.  However, how did the assholes
get into the org in the first place?  Is
there perhaps a second class of people, with unique properties, that are
"Asshole Lovers?"  That is, are
there reasonably identifiable properties of a person such that they aren't an
asshole themselves, but everyone they hire, everyone they work for, everyone they
enter personal relationships with, are going to turn out to be assholes?  In that sense, the Asshole Lover is just as
dangerous as the Asshole that follows behind them.

The motivation for my thought:  I went to one of these Silicon Valley
networking meetings recently where they had a "career coach" come to
speak.  This woman was unreal.  The seminar was basically a 2 hour rant on
her opinions – no evidence sited by any of the guidance she proposed – in fact,
some of the coaching she providing about online job searching, I knew to be
factually false.  Whenever a participant
questioned her guidance, she immediately said something to put the participant
down.  Over time, nobody questioned her,
for fear of how she would respond.

Midway through the seminar, a woman shows up about an
hour late.  When the coach welcomed her
into the room (in a snide condescending way), the woman apologizes profusely,
goes off on how she commuted all the way from Marin to come here and she
wouldn't miss it because she idolized the coach, read all of her books, saw all
her videos, and so on

Now if you're the incompetent asshole coach, what
incentive do you have to become better? 
The Marin woman idolized the ground that the coach walked on.  In fact, what little engagement and discussion
was happening in the class prior to the Marin woman entering just totally
unilaterally died afterwards.  It was
demoralizing enough to have the asshole in the room; it was 10 times worse to
have someone in the room that idolized and promoted the asshole too.

But the Marin woman wasn't an asshole herself – she was
an asshole lover.  She was the polar
opposite of an asshole – zero self-confidence, excessive obedience, etc. 

Is it a false assumption to believe that no one likes
assholes?  Does the "asshole
lover" actually create demand for assholes?  Can assholes get ahead in the organization
without asshole lovers propping them up?

So my basic
question is:  Can you really rid your
organization of assholes without also having to rid your organization of the
asshole lovers?

I was stopped in my tracks by the above picture in today's New York Times.  It was part of this article where the renowned psychologist Paul Ekman analyzed A-Rod's "micro-expressions" during a 2007 60 Minutes interview to glean hints of whether A-Rod was lying or telling the truth about his steroid use.   (Check-out Ekman's Telling Lies to learn about the impressive research methods and how he applies them; it is also the science beneath the — rather lame — Fox TV series "Lie to Me.")

I had such a strong reaction to the above picture of A-Rod (the middle of the three in the article) because I realized that it captured the exact expression displayed by one of the biggest — perhaps the biggest — asshole I have ever worked with in my life.  He flashed that look constantly to those around him, often mixing it with an even more explicitly hostile glare (Sorry, no more details… to protect both the innocent and the guilty).  Ekman's called this microexpression "unitlateral contempt,"  which he defined as "a tightening and raising of the corner of the
lip that can indicate arrogance or a feeling a moral superiority."   Ekman then adds "He does them very frequently … It doesn't fit with anything he says."   Ekman adds that more research is needed to determine if this is just a tic do to the stress of being on TV or something he does routinely and is a true indication of arrogance or a feeling of moral superiority.  But, following my earlier post, it appears there is some evidence to support the headline indicating the A-Rod is an A-hole in the New York Post. )

In other words, some of the most rigorous psychological research suggests that this is the look flashed by someone who is, at least temporarily, acting like an arrogant asshole.  And if people — like my former co-worker — do it across times and situations, it suggests that they are certified arrogant assholes.  I would love to see A-Rod's score on the ARSE by the way!

I am curious, do others have the same reaction this microexpression that I do?

There is a lot competition out there for asshole boss of the year, more than ever. But the peanut guy seems to be well in lead if this AP story is correct. I quote the lead:

WASHINGTON – The owner of a peanut company urged his workers to ship
tainted products after receiving test results identifying salmonella,
according to internal company e-mails disclosed Wednesday by a House committee.

The
company e-mails obtained by the House panel showed that Peanut Corp. of
America owner Stewart Parnell ordered the shipments tainted with the
bacteria because he was worried about lost sales.