I just got a most interesting email about how one
guy stopped some rude and loud people at a movie theatre. Here it is (with his name removed):

‘Last night I went to see "Live
Free or Die Hard" (which, by the way, is probably the shortest path to
post-traumatic stress disorder). There were a bunch of people behind me,
talking through the movie, making fun of things, generally being distracting. I
did the usual thing where I turn around and look at them to let them know that
I’m right in front of them and that I can hear them really well, but that
didn’t work. I was starting to get pretty frustrated.

During one longer, quiet stretch, I turned to my friend next to me and said,
pretty loudly, "So, what do you want to talk about?" and he
said, also loudly, "I don’t know, why don’t we wait until later?"

It worked, the people behind us remained silent through the rest of the
picture. The best part was that it wasn’t blatantly confrontational, was kind
of funny, and didn’t lead to any escalation or anything.

One of my prouder moments as a reformed asshole.’

I find this story to be most enlightening because
it suggests three more general lessons about “asshole management.”

1. The distinction between “intentional” and
“clueless” asshole is important. This
little story implies that these rude people were sufficiently self-focused that
they weren’t aware how much they were upsetting other people in the theater.

2. The trick
with “clueless” assholes is to find some way to help them realize the impact
that they are having on others, without being an asshole yourself.  The
fellow who wrote this email wasn’t having much luck with more subtle tactics;
but simply imitating these noisy people proved to be enough to help them
realize that they were blowing it.

I should point out, however, that some people are
so deeply clueless that subtle tactics may not work and, of course, there are
some people who are perfectly aware of what they are doing, but really don’t
care.  (For example, I went to a nice
restaurant in Berkeley last week with my daughter, and there was a woman
sitting a few tables away who spent the entire meal talking into her cell phone
at decibel level that was twice as loud as anyone else in the place… we all
gave her lots of subtle hints, but it was pretty clear that she realized what
she was doing, but just didn’t care.)

3. Finally,
I suspect that the above tactic worked for two reasons. The first, as implied, is that it helped
these temporary assholes realize that they were, in fact, ruining the
experience for others. The second is
that is provoked mild embarrassment among the rude theater-goers. Economists and many psychologists focus
heavily on the power of rewards and incentives for motivating human
behavior. But this little story suggests
that, as any good micro-sociologist can tell you, the desire to avoid
embarrassment (and to maintain “face”) is a powerful, and often overlooked,
motivator of human behavior.  The classic
work here was done by the late sociologist Erving Goffman, notably in his classic book
“The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life.”

Thanks to this anonymous e-mailer for sending in
this enlightening story. If you have any other ideas about effective – but
civilized – ways to stop rude people at the theater (or other public places),
please let use know. As this e-mailer
implies, finding effective tactics that don’t carry a big risk of making the
problem even worse can be difficult.

The San Francisco Bay Guardian is a serious, if at times irreverent, weekly paper, a "free alternative newspaper" that has been around since 1966.  You can check out the online version here.  The paper’s alternative spirit is reflected in the plug that they published for my talk next week at the Commonwealth Club, which is not your standard dull announcement:

MONDAY (9th)

"Putting an End to Jerks and Bullies at Work and in Society"
Commonwealth Club, 595 Market, SF; www.commonwealthclub.org. 6pm, $18.
If only I’d read Robert Sutton’s The No Asshole Rule before receiving my
one and only wedgie in the first grade, things might’ve been different. I might
have grown up well-adjusted instead of becoming a misanthropic calendar editor
with a freezer full of severed heads. Damn you, Sutton, for writing your book 30
years too late! Who’s the asshole now?*

P.S. John R. Bolton, former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, speaks at the Commonwealth Club about a week after me, on July 17th.  Note that (if the press reports and congressional record are accurate), Bolton appears to qualify as a certified asshole.  According to the Los Angeles Times, for example, former subordinate and fellow Republican Carl  Ford Jr. ‘described Bolton as a serial abuser of underlings and a
"quintessential kiss-up, kick-down sort of guy."‘    This argument is developed in The No Asshole Rule, but I was not the first to suggest in print that Bolton appears to qualify as a workplace asshole.  The Village Voice ran a story on April 14th, 2005 about Bolton under the headline "Wanted: Complete Asshole For U.N. Ambassador." 

It sounds like a well-matched pair of talks!

There
have been some interesting, and as always, diverse bits of news about The No
Asshole Rule over the last few weeks:

1.
I published an article in The McKinsey
Quarterly a few months back on “Building the Civilized Workplace,” which is based on the book. The folks at McKinsey report that it was the
most frequently downloaded article last month, as it was the month before.  You can see
the rankings at The McKinsey Quarterly
site and also link to an abstract of the article, and register to download it.   

2. The No
Asshole Rule continues to hang around on some of the best-seller lists. In
particular, the current issue of BusinessWeek
lists it as #7 among
hardcover business books.   

3.
I am giving a talk on the book at the Commonwealth Club this coming Monday
night, July 9^th. There is a
wine and cheese reception starting at 5:30 and the talk is from 6 to 7. Admission is $18 for non-members and free for
members. Click here for more
information and to register in advance.

4.
Barry Ritholtz over at The Big Picture seems have used a picture
of The No Asshole Rule cover to ward off nasty people while he
is on vacation. (Another thanks to Dave
for pointing this one out). He never actually mentions the book, but has a large
picture of the cover next to a message that warns:

I
will leave the admin work to my able and trusty assistant Ginger. That includes
dealing with spammers, asshats, and trolls. 

She
has instructions to terminate with
prejudice:

Unpublish
any impolite or off topic comments;

Delete
anything that remotely looks like spam;

Suspend
anyone starting a flame war;

Ban
all trolls and asshats;

Show
no mercy to anyone;

If
you find yourself unpublished or banned this week, well, that means you are
prime proctological material. You have offended her delicate sensibilities, and
will have to wait until I return to file an appeal.

This
use of the cover reminds me of the attorney who reported that she was going to
display the book in her office to “remind” her colleagues to be nicer to her.

5. There is a new website called www.sendahole.com. I don’t quite have the
courage to put the picture of the product on my blog (I know, I know, I am
being a hypocrite… I talk about assholes, but don’t want to put a picture on my
blog. Don’t ask me to explain, I am not that rational).

For
$7.95 (includes shipping), here is the service they provide:

Sphincter Factory^TM
A-holes are made from the finest quality rubber. They measure approximately
3/4" in diameter and are 1/4" thick, and are pliable, just like the
real thing! Each A-hole comes packaged individually and has a pithey greeting
on the back. They are mailed in plain brown envelopes using only the Sphincter
Factory’s return address. YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS ARE NOT INCLUDED!

6. My friends over at SuccessFactors wrote me that “A gentleman by the name of Eldon
Romney e-mailed SuccessFactors earlier this week looking to create his own
"No Assholes" policy for Mensa. He mentioned that he heard about them
through your book.”   Mensa is an
organization for very smart people.  According to Wikipedia, “Mensa accepts individuals who score at or above the 98^th
percentile on certain standardized IQ tests.” 

I
guess – – just like every other organization that I know –- there are some
problems with demeaning members at Mensa. Eldon is proposing a list of 12 rules that he calls “Rules of Conduct
for “Enlightened Mensans.” Here they are:

As an “Enlightened Mensan”:

1. I will exhibit my passion for
Mensa membership by showing through my behavior that I value fellow Members.

2. I will demonstrate respect for
others: I will be nice, listen to others and respect myself, acting with
integrity.

3. While engaging in Mensa
activities, I will act within legal and ethical boundaries.

4. Mensa is nothing without other
members; I will treat others as part of a valued team, acknowledging each
member’s contributions.

5. I will strive to improve myself
and learn from my mistakes and from the suggestions of others.

6. I will attempt to communicate clearly and honestly when I have something
to say. When I do not have anything to say, I will feel free to listen.

7. I will attempt to have fun and
share my enthusiasm.

8. I will not be a jerk.

9. I will not talk negatively or destructively behind someone’s back; I
will attempt to discuss issues and concepts more than people and personalities.

10. I realize I have tremendous
influence for both good and otherwise and that my actions can either help make
Mensa a wonderful experience or a dismal one. I will attempt to foster
goodness.

11. I will attempt to live by these
rules. If other Mensans fall short of these rules, I will try to speak up and help
them better themselves; in turn, I will do my best to be open to suggestions
and even criticism should I not live by these virtues.

12. I will do my best to be patient
and kind at Mensa events and elsewhere

I
find these all be fascinating, especially #10, as it makes clear how everyone
should take responsibility for how others experience the organization. This is an important element of implementing
the no asshole rule in its most effective form.

I checked
with Eldon about these rules and to make sure it was OK to talk about them here;
he replied:

Please feel free to post whatever you
would like; please also understand that while I am a member of Mensa and am the
American Mensa Ombudsman, my list of Rules is currently mine alone and holds no
official weight within Mensa (at least yet)!  Mensa as an organization holds no opinions,
but individuals and/or groups within Mensa can and do hold strong opinions. One
of my strong opinions is that your book is full of insight that Mensans need to
consider. Hopefully my presentation will help more to do just that!

7. I gave a talk in late May on “The No Jerk Rule” at
Stanford, at the Stanford Technology Venture’s weekly “Entrepreneurial Thought
Leader’s Seminar.” I was interviewed by
Stanford student and seminar organizer Mike Rothenberg and I fielded numerous
questions from the audience of about 100. You can listen to or download the seminar here.  In addition, there are many other free MP3’s of other seminars
on this website, as well as some great video that is organized into short clips. And if you are interested in attending these
seminars in person, they are held every Wednesday at 4:30 on the Stanford campus
and are open to the public. Check the STVP
website in late September to see who will be presenting this fall.

8. The Vatican released what one of my
correspondent’s described as “the no asshole rule for drivers.” According to the Associated Press, these "Ten
Commandments" for drivers, among other things,  “warned about the
effects of road rage, saying driving can bring out "primitive"
behavior in motorists, including "impoliteness, rude gestures, cursing,
blasphemy, loss of sense of responsibility or deliberate infringement of the
highway code."  If you have
ever driven in Italy ,
you will know that they need some of these rules, but I am not optimistic that
they will have much effect.  Indeed, the
AP reports that these “commandments” provoked substantial cynicism among Italians.

That
is it for now; I suspect that the next couple months will be slow with so many
of us taking vacations, but I will have another update when there are enough
tidbits for another round-up.

Last week, a reporter asked me if The No Asshole Rule was ever actually used in organizations.  That question motivated me to assemble a diverse list of places where the rule is used or has been used to help sustain civility.  (The picture to the left is CEO  Lars Dalgaard standing next to the "no assholes" sign at SuccessFactors). Finding and studying these examples is important, I believe, because they suggest a host of ways that people can install and spread the rule.   Check out my new post over at Huffington on Places
That Don’t Tolerate Assholes for details, but here is the list (many of which have appeared here in bits and pieces):

Barclays
Capital

The
Disbarred Lawyer

Lloyd Gosselink and Perkins
Coie

Sterling Foundation
Management

Gold’s Gym

van Aartrijk
Group

The Wine
Buyer

“Asshole-Free
Section” in a Bar

Washington Mutual

Texas Bible Studies Class

SuccessFactors

Arup’s
“No Dickhead Rule” 

If you have more examples, I would love to hear them.  I am especially interested in cases where once nasty places were transformed into civilized places.

I am always looking for examples of how people enforce The No Asshole Rule.  For regular readers of this blog, you’ve heard a lot about SuccessFactors no assholes rule.   In the last week, I’ve come across two other great illustrations, from dramatically different settings.

The first came in email from Robert Care (pictured to the left), the CEO of Australian and Asian operations of a multinational engineering consulting firm called ARUP. Mr. Care wrote me that he had ran into the book in Sydney Airport, and reported that his company has a similar rule:

"I work for a truly wonderful professional services company
that is truly extraordinary and that is doing really well in many many
ways.  Three years ago I became the CEO of our Australasian
operation.  It occurred to me that there was an issue (not just in the
Australasian part of our operations) that needed to be dealt with."

"I then heard something in September 2005 that started me thinking, and
then talking to my close colleagues.  They encouraged me to speak more
widely in my organisation and eventually we evolved a ‘no dickhead policy’.
"

Mr Care sent me some of the documentation that they use to support the rule,
notably a memo that he wrote in July 2006, called Let’s Talk, which explains
what the rule means.  He started by explaining how he get the idea:

"On ‘that day in September’ 2005, the Sydney Swans won the Australian
Rules Football League (AFL) flag for the first time in 72 years. In the
euphoria that followed one clear story emerged for me above all else. The
Swans, in describing how they came to win, captured it with two words: ‘no
dickheads’. They did not say what it meant, but everyone understood or had
their own ‘take’ on it. Later statements made it clearer – ‘they played for
each other’, ‘team spirit’, ‘knowing your role and doing it’ and ‘helping each
other when that doesn’t work’.."

Then he goes onto explain what the rule means at ARUP:

"To me ‘no dickheads’ refers to recruiting and retaining people who
support and enhance our culture rather than weaken it; it means getting square
pegs into square holes and round pegs into round holes – the right people for
the right jobs; it means that we are team players working for each other not
ourselves; it means that it is not alright to be a bully or abuse people who
are in less powerful positions; it means that if it doesn’t feel right it
probably isn’t.

By the way – the problem is not about being a ‘dickhead’; it is about behaving
like one. And it is not even about behaving badly on the odd occasion – we’re
all guilty of that. The real problem is about systematic and continual bad or
inappropriate behaviour. It is damaging to the people who work with these
‘dickheads’, and for the firm as a whole.

So how do you know if you are behaving like a ‘dickhead’? How about considering
the impact you have on others? Do other people walk away from interactions with
you feeling good about themselves, or at least that they have been treated
fairly, or do they try to avoid interacting with you? Are you understanding
about other people’s strength and weaknesses and realistic in your
expectations? Do you enhance others’ self esteem? This is what being a team is
all about! And we want a team, a very successful team."

Mr. Care also makes the critical point that the rule is especially important to
apply to top performers, an essential element in enforcing such rules, as I
have emphasized many times:

"OK, so we have said this is how we want it to be. But it is not enough to
say it, we have to uphold it – and it might be painful. If the ‘dickhead’ is
also a poor performer then the solution is obvious. The real challenge is when
an otherwise good or exceptional performer has the problem. What do we do? I
would argue that we have a duty and obligation to make sure the person knows
the effect they are having on others. But beyond that, it is only the person
themselves that can make the change, and they may not try, or may not succeed.
If that’s the case I believe we should go our separate ways."

I believe that Mr. Care completely "gets it," and he has a huge
amount to teach other big companies.  But it also seems that the rule can
be useful in very small organizations, notably bars and pubs where all that
alcohol consumption can turn people into (at least temporary) assholes.
Pam over at Writing,
Work and Weasels (a funny and most insightful blog) described how a
customer applied the rule one night:

"Once, at my father’s pub, we had a
particularly raunchy crowd of drunken, loudmouth idiots. One of our regulars
took a piece of cardboard from a beer delivery box and a magic marker, and
scrawled “Asshole-Free Section.” He stuck it on the corner of the bar where we
were sitting, and we entertained ourselves for an hour or so saying “hey,
didn’t you bother to read the sign?” to anyone who came to sit with us.

Too bad we can’t do that at work.

In a bar, everyone calls everyone else an asshole. That’s because if you spend
enough time there, you will become one at some point. Your friends will love you
for it, and everyone else will be glad they’re not you.

But I’ve always said that in spite of the drunkenness and the mooning, the
quarrels and brawls and stuff people say that would never have come out of
their mouths before that third shot, I’ve met more bona-fide assholes at work
than in the bar. An asshole in a suit and tie is still an asshole, just one
without an excuse."

I love the contrast between these two stories. It
makes me realize that — although jerks may always be with us — so will the urge
to expel them and drive them away from us!

Fortune columnist Stanley Bing (that is a pseudonym, his real name is Gil Schwartz) has just come out with an updated version of his 1992 book Crazy Bosses, which is is about " The crazy boss in all his guises: the Bully, the Paranoid, the Narcissist, the Wimp, and the self-destructive Disaster Hunter." 

I was amused and delighted by the online test that he has developed to assess "Is Your Boss a Crazy Boss?." Consider the first of the ten questions:

Bing casts his net beyond asshole bosses.  But he talks a lot about different forms of jerks and bullies. So if you combine Bing’s test with the ARSE (Asshole Rating Self-Exam), the checklist that we developed with Guy Kawasaki, and Linkedin to assesses if your future boss is an asshole, and ARSE Mail, there is a growing battery of asshole assessment and management tools out there.  Perhaps the next step is to apply a bit of evidence-based management to these tools, and to figure out when and if they are useful.

P.S. As I reported earlier, The ARSE Test is now over 100,000 completions! Aaron at Electric Pulp tells me 102,123 this very minute!

A fellow academic alerted
me to an article in the American Sociological
Review by Rene Almeling of the University
of California at Los Angeles. It is called “Selling
Genes, Selling Gender: Egg Agencies, Sperm Banks, and the Medical Market in
Genetic Material.”
To quote the abstract, “Drawing on interview and observational data from two egg
agencies and two sperm banks in the United States, this article
compares how staff recruit, screen, market, and compensate women and men donors.”  

The article’s main focus is on the difference
between how male and female donors are seen and treated by agencies. Although
all donors are paid, egg agencies focus on how female donors can help families
and provide them a “gift,” while sperm banks “portray
donation as a job” for men.  A press
release from the American Sociological Association went on to explain: ‘The application process for donors also favors
what Almeling called “gendered stereotypes of selfless motherhood and distant
fatherhood.” Although egg donors stood to be handsomely compensated, women who
indicated there was a financial motive behind their participation were
routinely rejected in favor of applicants who expressed more altruistic
motives, such as the desire to “help” infertile couples.’

Here
is where The No Asshole Rule comes
in; note this long quote from a sperm bank manager, who rejected sperm from
otherwise healthy donors that he disliked. This is the earliest application screening-out of possible assholes I
have ever encountered:

Aside from personality, the other thing that makes me fall in
love with a donor is someone that’s responsible. It is so rare to get someone
that’s truly responsible, that comes in when they’re supposed to come in, or at
least has the courtesy to call us and say, “I can’t make it this week, but I’ll
come in next week twice.” Then of course the second thing that makes him ideal
is that he has consistently very high [sperm] counts, so I rarely have to toss
anything on him [i.e., reject his sperm sample]. And then, I guess the third
thing would be someone that has a great personality, that’s just adorable,
caring, and sweet. There are donors,
that their personalities, I think ugh. They have great [sperm] counts, they come in when they’re supposed to, but I just don’t
like them. That’s a personal thing,
and I think, huh, I don’t want more of those babies out in the world (emphasis
added).

I
guess it is never too early to start enforcing rule! Although I worry that this manager – and others
who screen out donors they dislike – are acting on arbitrary rather than
meaningful differences among donors.

P.S
The complete citation is Almeling, Rene, “Selling
Genes, Selling Gender: Egg Agencies, Sperm Banks, and the Medical Market in
Genetic Material.”  American Sociological Review, 2007, VOL. 72 (June: 319–340), You can read the press release from the American
Sociological Association here .

The Asshole Rating Self-Exam (Or ARSE test) started as a 24-item self-test in Chapter 4 of The No Asshole Rule.  This chapter is about ‘How to Stop Your Inner Jerk from Getting Out."  It emphasizes that any of us, in the wrong setting, can turn into assholes — in particular, following research on emotional contagion and the behavior changes that occur among people who work for nasty bosses, it emphasizes that if you join a group or company that is knee-deep in assholes, odds are that you will become just like the rest of th jerks around you. The chapter also proposes that — while settings are powerful — there are some people who are more prone to act like jerks regardless of their group or company.  And it makes the point that, if you are worried about being a certified asshole, the first step is realizing that you are an asshole. So, with help from my wife Marina, I developed the 24 item self-test in the book.

Then Guy Kawasaki and the folks from Electric Pulp took the 24-item test and put online on February 5th, 2007 — just a couple weeks before The No Asshole Rule — was released.  Since then, people have been filling out like the ARSE Test like crazy. I have since received several hundred emails from people bragging that they weren’t assholes, bragging that they were assholes, and expressing concern that — when they took it for a boss or co-worker — that they realized that they were working a flaming asshole. In  a couple recent cases, I had managers write me to ask if i did executive coaching because, after taking the test, they realized that their inner jerk was rearing its head too often. And I have had at least two people write me to say that, after taking the test "for" a boss, they started searching for another job, and were happy to report that people were more civilized in their new workplace.

I was delighted to get an email from Aaron Mentele of Electric Pulp this morning announcing that ARSE completions had passed 100,000 (100,446), with the final push coming from a post I put up on Huffington.  So the self examination continues!

Finally, on a serious note I am wary of instant cures of any kind, and the ARSE Test isn’t a scientifically validated test, So please be cautious about putting too much weight on it — use it as just one piece of information.  But I am glad that it has helped some people out there think more deeply about their own behavior and the settings where they work. 

And I would also caution that, if you do decide that you are a certified asshole and want to stamp out such behavior in yourself and your organization, beware that "recovering assholes" are not always well-suited to this task.  As my teenage son likes to say, "Just because you suffer from an affliction does not make you an expert on it."

The Quill Book Awards are sponsored by Publisher’s Weekly and NBC Universal Television Stations. The nominees for books published between July 1, 2006 and June 30th, 2007 were announced last week at BookExpo America (the national trade show for the book industry). The winners in 18 different categories will be announced on September 10th and the awards will be presented on October 22nd at a "gala ceremony" in New York City.  Winners will be determined by "a Voting Board consisting of more than 6,000 booksellers and librarians." I am pleased that The No Asshole Rule is one of the five finalists in the business book category.  The other four are:

Small Is the New Big: and 183 Other Riffs, Rants, and Remarkable Business Ideas
Seth Godin; Portfolio

Women & Money: Owning the Power to Control Your Destiny
Suze Orman; Random House/Spiegel & Grau

Send: The Essential Guide to Email for Office and Home
David Shipley and Will Schwalbe; Alfred A. Knopf

Chocolates on the Pillow Aren’t Enough: Reinventing the Customer Experience
Jonathan M. Tisch, Karl Weber; John Wiley & Son

I am honored to be on this list of great books.  I would also add that, in my biased opinion, the best business book published during this period isn’t on the list: Chip and Dan Heath’s Made to Stick. 

A few days ago I put up a post on Southerners, Civility, and Cultures of Honor, which pointed to research showing that, although men raised in the Southern United States are generally more polite than those raised in other parts of the country, they are more prone to respond with aggression when they believe that there has been some kind assault on their "honor."   I reviewed a lab experiment from The University of Michigan showing that men from South were far more likely to turn aggressive than men from the North when they were bumped and called an "asshole." 

This post prompted a dozen comments of all kinds, including at least one Southern man who agreed that it described his behavior.  And it prompted one yesterday from Professor Thomas Timmerman of  Tennessee Technological University. Timmerman just published a study of nearly 30,000 "hit by pitch" events during Major League Baseball Games (drawn from a sample of nearly 5 million at bats) that occurred between 1960 and 1992 and between 2000 and 2004. This research produced some fascinating findings, which are consistent with prior work on the culture of honor .  As Professor Timmerman described it in his comments:

"Pitchers from the South are not more likely, in general, to hit
batters; but they are more likely than non-southerners to hit the
batter who follows a home-run hitter. They are also more likely to hit
a homerun hitter the next time he comes up to bat. They are also more
likely to hit batters in retaliation for a hit teammate. Interestingly,
though, southerners are more likely to hit White batters in these
situations, not African Americans."   

In other words,white pitchers born in the South (about 30% of those in this sample) appeared more likely to hit batters on purpose in order to uphold their team’s honor — after one of two  kinds of "affronts:" a home run or a teammate who was hit by a pitch thrown by the other team.  I would also point out that hitting someone on purpose with a baseball (moving perhaps 90 miles an hour) clearly qualifies as an "asshole move" in my book as it is hurts like hell, and clearly is meant to intimidate the target.  And it can be dangerous. Timmerman starts out the article with an incident in 1920 when a pitcher named Carl Mays killed a shortstop named  Ray Chapman  with a pitch.  The quote that opens the article, attributed to Mays, is pretty interesting, as it indicates that intimidation, not injury, was Chapman’s goal: "I threw it at him not to hurt him but just to make him think. It wasn’t a beanball.  It was a thought pitch."

I wrote Professor Timmerman to ask WHY he thinks that these findings occurred, and his answers are pretty interesting in light of the culture of honor, and I would add, in light of some of the arguments I’ve made about situations where acting like an asshole can help people win through intimidation. Professor Timmerman (pictured to the left) said:

Here’s the way I interpret the three different situations I studied

1) A pitcher gives up a homerun – this threatens his social identity as a competent pitcher, so he hits the homerun hitter the next time he comes up. Southerners are more likely to do this than non-southerners, but mainly if the batter is white. To me this seems consistent with the culture of honor ideas that Southerners try to protect their honor and their social identities more so than non-southerners.

2) A pitcher gives up a homerun – the next batter is also at greater risk because of the identity threat and also because of the frustration. Again, Southerners are more likely to hit a batter in this situation.

3) A pitcher’s teammate his hit by the opposing pitcher – failing to retaliate might insinuate that the pitcher is weak and unable to protect his teammates. Again, Southerners are more likely to do this, but mainly if the batter is white.

He also added some interesting ideas about the racial differences:

If I had to guess why Southerners are less likely to hit African Americans in these situations, I would offer these two guesses:

1) Growing up in the South might make Southerners hyper-sensitive about "appearing" racist. Hitting a batter in these situations is more likely to seem intentional, so maybe Southerners don’t want to appear as if they are hitting African Americans on purpose.

2) Some early research on aggression shows that whites (in general) suppress aggression against African Americans out of fear (i.e., when they believe that African Americans can identify them and retaliate). Maybe Southerners are more afraid than non-southerners that African American batters will charge the mound if they get hit. This could happen if Southerners are more likely to learn stereotypes about African Americans.

Fascinating stuff, huh?  I guess the upshot, as my colleague (and native Southerner) Steve Barley has told me before, "We are the nicest people on earth until you piss us off."  Apparently that is an evidence-based statement. 

There is also an interesting footnote to all this; Professor Timmerman reports that he became interested in studying aggression in baseball after reading a study called "Temper and Temperature on the Diamond," which showed that Major League Pitchers pitchers appear more likely to hit  batters intentionally when it is hot outside.  This study is part of the vast literature on the "heat and aggression hypothesis," which shows that — when it comes to everything from horn honking to murder rates — human beings are more prone to turn nasty when it is hot.  So it isn’t just a myth, a hot day does turn people into assholes. Or, as my colleague Jane Dutton once commented  (I paraphrase, it was a long time ago) "I guess this means that if you are in a bad mood, you should stick your head in the freezer." I will dig up some of the research on heat and aggression, it is fascinating stuff.

To return to baseball, if you are interested in the implications of baseball for management and organizational life in general, check out Jeff Angus’s blog and his great book Management by Baseball.

P.S. Professor Timmerman was kind enough to provide me with  complete references for his study and and "Temper and Temperature on the Diamond."

Timmerman, T.A. (2007). "It was a thought pitch": Personal, situational, and target influences on hit-by-pitch events across time. Journal of Applied Psychology, 92, 876-884

Reifman, A.S., Larrick, R.P., & Fein, S. (1991). Temper and Temperature on the Diamond: The Heat-Aggression Relationship in Major League Baseball. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17, 580-585 (1991).