Category: The No Asshole Rule

Dennis Howlett tells a great story
on his blog
AccMan Pro about a production director who had the courage – and skill –
stand-up to his asshole boss, and the long-term positive effects that it had on
the company. Here is an excerpt:

I recall one place I
worked where the weekly management meetings were little more than an excuse for
the MD to set traps for those he considered underperforming. It mattered not
what the target for the day said, they were ‘wrong’ in his eyes. It was what I
imagine to be hell on earth.

The most courageous
thing I witnessed was the production director –an able and articulate
gentleman – stand up part way through one such tirade and say in a quiet but
firm manner: “Excuse me but I don’t have to defend myself against this kind of
behaviour. If you wish to question the facts, then provide me with a basis for
argument and we’ll go from there. But if you choose to continue in this manner,
then you can accept my resignation right now.” You could almost hear the
unspoken ‘here-heres’ from the assembled team.”

That single
interjection changed things a lot around that company. What struck me at the
time was that I didn’t have the courage to do the same. I experienced shame –
one of the worst human emotions. What amazes me today is that I can still
recall the words, circumstances, weather for the day, the colour of everyone’s
suit and the fallout. Cathartic? Perhaps. Life changing – sure.

I would add two things to Howlett’s
inspiring story. The first is a warning about the risks of such action. I’ve
studied, worked with, and talked with many people over the years that have
challenged, or thought about challenging nasty, incompetent, or unfair bosses,
or about challenging a group of people in power. I always encourage people to act on their
convictions, to do what they believe is right. BUT I also suggest that they
consider and develop some exit options first. After all, the unfortunate fact is that – while we glorify successful
rebels, deviants, and revolutionaries – their typical fate is failure and often
banishment. If you are going to stand up
to those in power, it isn’t a bad idea to have a plan if you fail.

 My second point is that victories against
assholes like this that happen in a single, dramatic, moment are lovely to tell
and hear about. We all love the idea of chalking up a massive victory with a
single bold stroke. But the most
effective methods for undermining and reforming a nasty boss are often far more
subtle and take far longer. People who
are short on power but long on patience often triumph through a strategy of
small wins, piling up one seemingly trivial, gain after another until, until
the balance of power eventually shifts in their favor. So even if you are planning a dramatic moment
like the courageous production director in Dennis Howlett’s story, your chances
of a big victory will be higher if you do a lot of little things to set the
stage first, like having a series of conversations with everyone else who will
be in the room before you make your stand –- to find out who agrees with you
and who does not, to mobilize support, and to persuade people – one at a time
— that the time has come to take action. 

PS: I will eventually write a blog
about how people who feel oppressed by assholes can adopt a strategy of “small
wins” to fight back and sustain their mental health even when they are trapped
with demeaning jerks that they can’t escape (at least for the time being).  But this is just one place where small wins
can help. If you want to read a
compelling argument, track down a copy of Karl
Weick’s "Small Wins: Redefining the Scale of Social
Problems," which was published in the American Psychologist in
January, 1984. It is one of the most important and inspiring academic papers
that I’ve ever read. I’d create a link to it, but I don’t think that would be
legal! Also check Debra Meyerson’s Tempered
Radicals for a great application of Weick’s notion of small wins.

If you read German, you don’t have to wait for early next year to get a copy of The No Asshole Rule.  The German edition book comes out in October and can be pre-ordered on Amazon. It will be called Der Arschloch-Faktor, which I understand means “The Asshole Factor.” It will be published by Hanser and I’ll be doing a book tour in Germany in early October.

That is the message
that Diego of Metacool fame sent to
alert people at IDEO that my talk was
starting. I gave my first talk on The
No Asshole Rule there last week to 75 or so people, which included people who work at IDEO, and a bunch of "friends of IDEO" like family members and people from other companies. 

As Tom Kelley (author of The
Art of Innovation and The
Ten Faces of Innovation) and I were discussing before the talk started,
developing a talk about a book that holds the audience and makes sense usually
requires multiple iterations –-just because you write a book doesn’t mean you
can give a good talk about it. I was
lucky to have such a smart and forgiving audience for my first talk, as they
were supportive but kept oh so politely pushing the ideas
further.

I got dozens of
great suggestions and strange ideas. Several themes stick in my mind. The first – which my host Scott
Underwood and others raised several times – is that there is an important
difference between people who are “intentional” and “unintentional”
assholes. The consensus seemed to be
that more forgiveness, patience, and understanding is in order when people
travel through life in a clueless state, and need help learning how they make
other’s feel.  The consensus also was, in
contrast, that certified assholes who demean others on purpose, and who do it because they
believe it enables them get ahead at other’s expense, or to simply feel superior
to others, deserve little if any sympathy — and that such bullies ought to be
punished and banished. This sounds right
to me.

The second theme
was about the definition of “asshole.” We had a lot of discussion how these creeps are similar or different
from “narcissists,” “jerks,” “bitches,” “bullies” and other labels for people
who often leave a trail of damaged people in their wakes. I was a psychology major for 11 years, but I
confess, I wasn’t always able to explain exactly why – from a purely logical
perspective – I liked the word “asshole” best. I’ve been fretting about this, and I am taking at least temporary
comfort in two thoughts. The first is
that The No Asshole Rule –- although
evidence-based in many ways –- was really motivated by my first and deepest
reaction to people who treat me badly and make me feel worse about myself and
de-energized. I don’t think “Wow, what a
bully”  or “Wow, what a narcissist.”   I think
“Wow, what an asshole.” I am clearly
not alone in this initial sentiment. I
don’t think that Diego’s announcement would have been nearly as interesting –-
or as funny –- if it was “Narcissist talk in the now in café.”  So, in large part, I wrote the book to find
ways to reduce how often and deeply that gut reaction happens in every
workplace – including my own.

My other thought is
that –- although researchers in the behavioral sciences pretend that they can
come up with precise definitions of human traits and actions –- what humans do is so messy and varied that
there are always grey areas and overlaps with other terms.  I have no idea how to define “love” (although
I think I know it when I feel it) and am not quite sure I can define the word “organization”
either (even though I’ve spent much of my adult life studying and writing about them).
  I take some comfort that the opening
pages of the classic 1958 book Organizations
by James G. March and Nobel Prize winner Herbert Simon, which acknowledged how hard it
was to define the word “organization,” sidestepped the question, and provided a
list of examples of organizations like the Red Cross and General Motors instead. It is the same thing with assholes: Drawing
the firm dividing line between an “asshole” and a “non-asshole” isn’t easy, but
I know one when I see one. And although I do offer a definition of workplace assholes, I also realize that the
world is messy and that it will overlap with lots of other concepts. 

No matter what
concept I pick to describe these demeaning people, the definition will be
flawed, like all social science concepts. So at least I’ve picked a term that feels right to me, and apparently, a
lot of other people too.

The third theme was
about my assertion that assholes tend to focus their demeaning actions on
people with less rather than more power than themselves. People in the audience and at dinner pushed
me on this to the point quite intelligently, and presented examples of assholes
who were peers and even subordinates.  I’ve been thinking about this a lot. I still believe that the ways a person treats
powerless people is an excellent test of human character. And research on psychological abuse and
bullies does show that the majority of workplace assholes operate through the “kick-down
and kiss-up” approach.

 BUT it also makes sense that, in organizations
where there are lots of people with a medium amount of power (partnerships and
academia come to mind, along with any organization that has a “flat” hierarchy),
that the potential for “peer-on-peer” abuse rises. I am a huge fan of pushing control and decision-making authority down as
low into the organization as possible (see Jeff Pfeffer’s  Human
Equation for evidence to support the business case), but the fact is that
the more people you “empower,” the more potential there is for people to use
their authority to inflict evil against each other– including teasing and
putting-down others.

 Finally, one person described an
organization that he had worked at where, although management had the power –- in
theory – to discipline and fire demeaning subordinates, they were simply too
afraid of these “asshole underlings” to take them on. I guess the upshot is
upshot is that, if you have the power to get rid of assholes, but don’t have
the courage to use it, it is the same as having no power at all.

Check it out. As Gretchen puts it, “I’m working on a book, THE HAPPINESS PROJECT–a
memoir about this year, during which I’m testing every principle, tip, theory,
and scientific study I can find, whether from Aristotle or St. Therese or
Martin Seligman or Oprah.”  She has great
and diverse tips – starting with her 12 Commandments – – for traveling through
life doing good things for herself and others. On the surface, her quest sounds a lot different than driving out and
reforming demeaning workplace jerks. But
as I read through her blog, I realized that we are both chasing a similar dream
(although her language is much nicer than mine). When I looked at Gretchen’s 12 commandments,
I realized that these are means that we can all use to stop our “inner jerk”
from rearing its ugly head. Her “let it go” reminds me of my call for learning
when and how to practice indifference. Feeling more passionate about the people you work with and your
workplace can backfire at times. Unfortunately, there are times when becoming
emotionally detached from nasty people and places that you can’t escape can
help you avoid turning into demeaning jerks like them.

I’d also add to her list that it is important to
view nastiness as a contagious disease, and one of the most effective ways to
avoid catching such asshole poisoning is to stay away from – or quickly exit –
gatherings, groups, and organizations where the “pro-asshole” rather than the
“no asshole” rule reigns. And, in terms
of happiness, since that is contagious too, seeking and surrounding yourself
with sweet and energetic people is an evidence-based path to happiness.

Perhaps it is my bias, because I am married to an
attorney who has worked at a large law firm for over 20 years, but I think it
is no accident that so many lawyers get interested what it takes to be a happy
person and what it takes to drive out and reform nasty people from workplaces.  Gretchen was a clerk for Justice Sandra Day
O’Connor on the U.S. Supreme Court; one of the wisest living Americans, and by
all accounts, one of kindest judges. But even the nicest lawyers see the worst of
what human beings do, it is one of the few occupations where clients sometimes
hire you to act like an overbearing jerk on their behalf, and major law firms –
which are ranked largely by “profits per partner,” the amount of money earned
by the average partner – can turn into hotbeds of distress as people work far
longer hours than is healthy for any human being and too often engage in
dysfunctional competition over their share of the partnerships profits. Indeed, it is no surprise that Aric Press,
editor of the American Lawyer proposed
that law firms institute “jerk
audits” after reading my essay about the no asshole rule in the Harvard
Business Review.

I am going to follow Gretchen’s blog closely – and
show it to my wife as well. Learning how to be happier isn’t just good for
ourselves, it is good for everyone around us.

Today’s “Cubicle Culture” column in the Wall Street Journal
is on “Office Tormentors.” Jared Sandberg points out that, because public
humiliation has become taboo at work, it has been driven underground, but it is
still plenty horrifying. I agree that some of it is going underground, but there
is still plenty of public humiliation too – as my last post showed.  Or if you want to see some systematic
evidence, read the research on nurses, who are among the most consistently
oppressed workers. One study of 175
registered nurses found that approximately 60% had been verbally abused, yelled
at, and insulted by a physician at least once every two months. A larger study
of 1100 American nurses found that 97% were victims of verbal abuse.

But Sandberg’s point about subtle humiliation is well taken.
Sometimes it happens when people treat you as invisible. Other times
humiliation “goes underground” when people use teasing rather than blatant
insults. The best description I’ve ever seen of the damage done by “friendly” teasing
is in the late Gordon Mackenzie’s masterpiece Orbiting
the Giant Hairball.  When I was writing
Weird
Ideas That Work, I read this little gem over and over again, for general inspiration,
and to quote little gems like this one. Gordon MacKenzie was known as the “Creative
Paradox” during his years at Hallmark Cards and he often ran creativity works. In
Hairball, he describes a woman who, “with a bashful eagerness,”  began a sketch that showed how she felt about
herself, the Management of Information Systems group she was part of, and
Hallmark. As I said in Weird Ideas, ‘Her
co-workers reacted with a “rowdy taunting” about her lack of drawing skills;
she quickly changed from looking eager to looking hurt, and then “After an
apologetic explanation of her drawing, she scurried, eyes down, back to her
seat.”’

In many organizations, people would be allowed to get away
with such nastiness. To his credit, MacKenzie
confronted the group with about the demeaning behavior. He said to them:

“Teasing
is a disguised form of shaming… I suspect that when you teased this woman, it
was an unconscious effort to throw her off balance – to stop her from risking,
which she was most clearly beginning to do. Why would you want to do that? …[B]ecause we don’t want to admit to
others or ourselves that we are trying to stop growth, we disguise our shaming
as teasing – ‘all in the spirit of good fun.’ ”

That is the title of an e-mail I got last week from a salesperson who had read about The No Asshole Rule.  Below is the text (with identifying information removed, to protect both the innocent and the guilty):

My boss told me I was "a wimp and a pussy" because I was tired and lacked energy after 6 months of chemotherapy.  He doubled my sales quota over a seven month period, and called about everyday tell me that I was a "fuck-up".  I finally had to leave.  I documented lots of the abuse, and presented it my superiors, they were very vague in their responses to me, but ultimately he was moved from manager to sales rep.

I think it is important to be reminded of stories like this one, which show the damage that assholes do. I list research showing the
psychological, physical, and financial damage that these creeps do in The No Asshole Rule.  But the stories behind the numbers are always far
more compelling.

I thought it was important to print this email because I’ve been seeing too many stories lately on the virtues of nasty bosses, on the upside of leaving a trail of demeaned and psychologically damaged people in your wake as you climb to the top.   In particular, I keep reading stories that portray the demeaning boss played Meryl  Streep in The Devil Wears Prada in sympathetic light; and this morning’s New York Times had column by David Carr that talks about the tough, smart, and effective — and sometimes toxic — Vogue editor Anna Wintour, who was the real-life inspiration for Streep’s character. I wonder, if David Carr had a superstar boss who treated him like our salesperson if he would express so much admiration for is or courage and accomplishments.

An AP story just came out on nasty bosses.  It was inspired by the "The Devil Wears Prada," the new Meryl Streep film (which my teenage daughter just loved). The story talks quite a bit about The No Asshole Rule, especially the chapter on "The Virtues of Assholes."  But they shy away from using the A-word itself, as you would expect. The story ends with a comment from my co-author Jeff Pfeffer, who claims that nasty bosses don’t do much damage.  I agree that asshole bosses do sometimes inspire hard work and prefectionism, but as much as I admire Jeff, the total cost of assholes (TCA) can be shockingly high in many cases — as I show in the book. In any event, check out Prada Movie Highlights Nasty Boss Phenom, it is good fun.

One of the weird things about writing a book on assholes is that I’ve spent a lot of time thinking about what the term means. I’ve decided that people who deserve to be branded as assholes “pass” two tests:

TEST ONE is: After talking to the alleged asshole, do their “targets” feel oppressed, humiliated, de-energized, or belittled by the person? In particular, do they feel worse about themselves?

TEST TWO: Does the alleged asshole aim his or her venom at people who are less powerful rather than at those people who are more powerful.

John R. Bolton, the controversial new United States Ambassador to the United Nations, meets both tests if the testimony to the U.S. Congress is correct. In his testimony to the Foreign Relations Committee, former Bolton subordinate Carl Ford Jr. (a fellow Republican) described him as a “kiss-up, kick down sort of guy.” If the media reports are true, they also indicate that Bolton qualifies as a certified (rather than a temporary) asshole because his abuse is part of a persistent pattern, not just something out-of-character, which happened once or twice because he was having a bad day.  I am not alone in this opinion. Check out this story from the Village Voice, Wanted: Complete Asshole for U.N. Ambassador.