Work Matters

  • Good Boss, Bad Boss On New York Times Bestseller List

    We're Number 9! That is, Good Boss, Bad Boss is #9 on The New York Times "Advice, How-To, and Miscellaneous" list, which will be published on Sunday, September 26th.  Don't ask me why they release this so far in advance, I don't understand it — indeed, even after five books, I remain bewildered by the publishing industry. I have a zillion people to thank, but for this post, I will stick to my wife, Marina Park, to whom the book is dedicated to; Marina was not only was enormously supportive while I wrote it, she also taught me much about being a boss because while I mostly just study and write about the craft, she has been practicing it for a long time.  In addition, I was pleased to learn that the new paperback of The No Asshole Rule is #15 on the "extended" paperback bestseller list.  "Extended" means they only list the top 10 in the newspaper, but add five more online and in the pdfs they send around.  Here is the hardcover list.. sorry it is a little awkward looking, but I am not great at this cropping thing!

    Bsl_092610_Page_6

  • CEOs Love Their iPads

    A couple months back, I wrote a blog post reporting I had bought an iPad and was trying to love it, but couldn't bring myself to do it.  I am pretty much in the same place with the gizzmo as I write this post.  It sits next to the bed, and I occasionally use it to read The New York Times or do a quick web search — but I still find it awkward for reading or watching movies as it gets heavy in my hand and the glare is bad enough that I have trouble getting it in the right position.  I also wonder about its intrinsic appeal because neither my wife nor kids seem interested in borrowing it from me.

    But clearly there are many others who love the thing, and if my experience in recent months is any guide, CEOs especially love them. I have done a couple workshops on Good Boss, Bad Boss for CEOs in the last few months (for small groups, 12 or so in each case), and was rather surprised to see that iPad's seem to be the tool of choice for these folks.  In June, at the session I did for CEOs, about half of them had iPads.  And at the session I did this week, about 75% of them had them.  I asked one CEO why he had one, and then a a few more jumped in to add comments.  They really did seem to love them.  The reasons I heard included:

    1.  They boot faster than a PC or a mac.

    2. They have much longer battery life than a PC, Mac, or iPhone — which was better for meetings, planes, and home use as they don't have to deal with running out of power all the time.

    3.  They are a lot better to type emails on or read emails on than an iPhone or Blackberry. 

    4.  Related to point 3, because the screen is bigger than a phone, you can more easily glance at emails during meetings than on a phone.

    5. They are much better than a phone for surfing the web — important during meetings as you can do it more quickly and more discreetly than on a phone.

    6. They are less intrusive to use during a meeting than a laptop because you don't have the screen up in front of you, which is borderline rude.

    7. It is almost as good as laptop yet much lighter, and has a lot longer battery life to compensate. 

    If you take these comments as a set, one interpretation is that CEOs spend A LOT of time in meetings and on planes, and it is a better device than a phone or laptop for both settings when you balance all the competing demands. 

    I wonder, how do others who own iPads, or who have considered getting them, react to this apparent pattern?  (The sample I have is very small, but I find their arguments in combination with the prevalence in these meetings to be suggestive and intriguing).  Do any of you do work where the iPad fits in beautifully too?  Or is it just for elites like CEOs?  Given the millions that have been sold, they clearly are not just being bought by CEOs.

  • “Name two great bosses and two bossholes Pink Blog readers might recognize. Don’t be shy.”

    My last post was about the review and interview with me that
    Dan Pink posted earlier in the week about Good Boss, Bad Boss.  I thought it would be fun to
    repeat the last question that he asked me and my answ    er. 

    Here is my answer to the question in the title. Do you agree or disagree?  Who would you add to lists of bossholes and great bosses?

    Let’s start with the bossholes.  My least favorite CEO in recent
    years was Carly Fiorina because I witnessed her lead changes that helped
    destroy one of the most constructive organizational cultures I have
    ever encountered.   I worked closely with a couple HP insiders during
    much her reign (and before that) and saw the spirit of that wonderful
    place die under her leadership – it wasn’t all her fault, other forces
    were in place.  But a CEO who does massive layoffs and then buys
    (actually leases) a very fancy new corporate jet for herself ought to be
    ashamed.  She was infamous for “shooting the messenger” and for being
    impatient with implementation – for example (very similar to President
    Bush’s infamous “Mission Accomplished” speech) Carly announced that the
    merger integration with Compaq was complete and successful to the horror
    of people on her senior team who still believed that it wasn’t nearly
    done. (Indeed, for example, Mark Hurd took out millions and millions of
    IT costs when he took charge that were created by the unfinished
    merger.)  Carly’s unfortunate experience shows that, to be an effective
    leader, you not only need some wisdom, you also need the right
    experience.  Note that she never had profit and loss responsibility in
    any prior job before coming to work at HP (this was reported by Fortune
    and I have confirmed it from other sources).  Right around the Compaq
    merger, a very knowledgeable Silicon Valley insider who knew Carly well
    said something I thought was a joke, something like “Carly ought to go
    into politics; she gives great speeches and there really aren’t any
    tangible deliverables.”   As most readers know, now Carly is running for
    Senate in California.

    To pick a second bosshole, I believe the current champion here might be Dov Charney, founder
    and CEO of the American Apparel clothing empire, which is the largest
    clothing manufacturer operating in the U.S.  He has done good things
    like paying employees high wages and providing them and their families
    health insurance, and sells hip clothing and developed a great brand. 
    They operate 260 stores in 19 countries.  But piles of evidence  of
    strange boss behavior and bad financial performance now hound him and
    the company.  Although several sexual harassment law suits against
    Charney were dropped, he admits holding a staff meeting naked except for
    the sock on his penis, walking around the office in just underpants and
    referring to fashion models as “sluts.”  The tales of such antics in
    combination with deepening financial losses,
    plummeting stock price, and Deloitte’s concerns about accounting
    irregularities have this once high flying firm in an apparent death
    spiral.   Apparently, among other flaws, Mr. Charney suffered from – or
    perhaps enjoyed – one of the most severe cases of power poisoning in
    recent times – especially the lack of inhibition and impulsiveness that
    are often part of the syndrome.

    To turn to the good bosses, I am a huge fan Pixar’s Brad Bird, Academy Award winning Director of The Incredibles and Ratatouille.  I was part of a group that interviewed him for the McKinsey Quarterly
    a couple years back, and was taken with him.  But I am in even bigger
    fan after talking to multiple people at Pixar and Disney studios about
    him last week.  They love him and love how he encourages open argument
    and makes it so fun – and as one executive who worked with Brad through
    these two films told me “Everyone who works with him once can’t wait to
    do it again.”  And people who work with him are simply blown away by his
    technical skill: John Walker, who was a Producer on both films, went on
    and on with examples of Bard’s amazing technical expertise.

    Finally, my favorite CEO of a large U.S. company in recent years was
    AG Lafley, who led Procter & Gamble for decade.  He is polite,
    persistent, and instilled constructive values throughout the company.
    Like Brad Bird, people loved working with him because he was so smart,
    supportive, and honorable.  And I love his management philosophy: “Keep
    thing Sesame Street simple,” especially in light of the contrast to the
    deeply complex business practices used by Wall Street firms that led to
    the meltdown.

    Again, please let me know your reactions — especially who should be added to the two lists.

  • Dan Pink’s Review and Interview:Good Boss, Bad Boss

    Images Dan Pink, author of numerous bestsellers including Drive and A Whole New Mind, wrote a very nice review of Good Boss, Bad Boss on his blog. I also think he did a great job of capturing the main point:

    The core point, at least as I read it, is that good bosses are adept
    at working both sides of the street. They improve people’s performance and they deepen their humanity.
    As Sutton says, good
    bosses “do everything possible to help people do great work,” yet they
    also “do everything possible to help people experience dignity and
    pride.”

     Dan also links to the answers that I gave to a series of interview questions that he  sent me.  I got carried away answering them — as Dan put it oh-so diplomatically — so they were a "tad long" for a reasonable post.   Dan decided it was best to just put the whole interview on separate link, which he did here.  For better or worse, it is the longest interview in print about Good Boss, Bad Boss.

  • Hitting the Delete Button: “I gave a copy to my (former) asshole boss with my resignation letter tucked inside.”

    I am mostly focused on the launch of Good Boss, Bad Boss as it was just published last week (I am sitting in a hotel room in New York right now as I am here doing some book PR).  But, as the new chapter in the paperback emphasizes, I am and will always be "the asshole guy."  And when I get emails like this one (reprinted with permission) from an attorney, it still makes my day:

    I just wanted to thank you for your blog and The No
    Asshole Rule    .  Your wisdom helped me finally escape a terrible job
    that was sucking my soul and making me miserable.      I started my own solo
    law practice and am happier than I've ever been    .  Thank you so much for
    helping me salvage my career and, frankly, my life.  I tell everyone who
    will listen about your book.      I gave a copy to my (former) asshole boss
    with my resignation letter tucked inside. 🙂

    I hope she has great success in her new practice.  And this note, and so many others like it, show how destructive bossholes can be to those around and, ultimately to themselves.


    Button_bigger P.S. As my tips for surviving assholes suggest, this woman is doing what I believe — and the research shows — is the best solution if you are stuck with an asshole boss that you can't get fired: escape as fast you can.



  • Bad Is Stronger Than Good: Why Good Bosses Eliminate the Negative First

    The Sunday New York Times just published a piece I wrote for their "Preoccupations" section called "How Bad Apples Infect the Tree."  This post digs into the arguments that I made about rotten apples in more detail.

    Of all the tunes in the Johnny Mercer songbook, the most generally beloved must be "Accentuate the Positive" — whether your favorite cover is Bing Crosby's, Willie Nelson's, or someone else's. Chances are that you yourself could summon up the chorus word for word (and click here if you want accompaniment).

    You've got to accentuate the positive
    Eliminate the negative
    Latch on to the affirmative
    Don't mess with Mister In-Between

    It trips off the tongue so easily that you might not even notice that Mercer is telling you to do two things, not just one. Eliminating the negative, as any skilled leader can tell you, is not just the flipside of accentuating the positive. It's a whole different set of activities. For someone with people to manage, accentuating the positive means recognizing productive and constructive effort, for example, and helping people discover and build on their strengths. Eliminating the negative, for the same boss, might mean tearing down maddening obstacles and shielding people from abuse.

    Certainly, every leader should try to do both. Yet, given that every boss has limited time, attention, and resources, an interesting question is: which should take priority? A growing body of behavioral science research provides a pretty clear answer here: It's more important to eliminate the negative.

    The seminal academic paper here is called "Bad is Stronger Than Good" [pdf]. Roy Baumeister and his colleagues draw on a huge pile of peer-reviewed studies to show that negative information, experiences, and people have far deeper impacts than positive ones. In the context of romantic relationships and marriages, for example, the truth is stark: unless positive interactions outnumber negative interactions by five to one, odds are that the relationship will fail.

    Scary, isn't it? Yet it was confirmed by several studies that, among relationships where the proportion of negative interactions exceeds this one-in-five rule, divorce rates go way up and marital satisfaction goes way down. The implication for all of us in long-term relationships is both instructive and daunting: If you have a bad interaction with your partner, following up with a positive one (or apparently two, three, or four) won't be enough to dig out of that hole. Average five or more and you might stay in his or her good graces.

    Studies on workplaces suggest, along similar lines, that bosses and companies will get more bang for the buck if they focus on eliminating the negative rather than accentuating the positive. For some time, I've been campaigning for a certain form of this, urging companies to eliminate the worst kind of colleagues from their workplaces. Research by Will Felps and his colleagues on "bad apples" is instructive. (You can hear him talk about it on This American Life). Felps decided to look at the effect of toxic colleagues on work groups, including what I would call deadbeats ("withholders of effort"), downers (who "express pessimism, anxiety, insecurity, and irritation," a toxic breed of de-energizers), and assholes (who violate "interpersonal norms of respect"). His estimates that a team with just one person in any of these categories suffers a performance disadvantage of 30% to 40% compared to teams that have no bad apples.

    Similarly, another study by Andrew Miner and his colleagues tracked employees' moods, and found that the impact on an employee's feelings of a negative interaction with the boss or a coworker was five times stronger than that of a positive interaction.

    So, negative interactions (and the bad apples that provoke them) pack a real wallop in relationships at work and elsewhere. They are distracting, emotionally draining, and deflating. When a group does interdependent work, rotten apples drag down and infect everyone else. Unfortunately, grumpiness, nastiness, laziness, and stupidity are remarkably contagious.

    My chapter in Good Boss, Bad Boss on "Stars and Rotten Apples" opens with the story of how I got to know a CEO named Paul Purcell. It was after his company, Baird, had landed on Fortune magazine's list of the "100 Best Places to Work". Fortune briefly explained, "What makes it so great? They tout the "no-a**hole rule" at this financial services firm; candidates are interviewed extensively, even by assistants who will be working with them." Having written an entire book on that topic, I immediately contacted Leslie Dixon, their HR chief, and she introduced me to Paul Purcell. As I wrote in Good Boss, Bad Boss:

    Paul told me that he had seen and suffered destructive assholes in past jobs, so when he got to Baird, he vowed to build a jerk-free workplace. When I asked how he enforced the rule, Paul said that most jerks were screened-out via background checks and interviews before they met him. But he did his own filtering too, 'During the interview, I look them in the eye, and tell them, "If I discover that you are an asshole, I am going to fire you."' He added, "Most candidates aren't fazed by this, but every now and then, one turns pale, and we never see them again — they find some reason to back out of the search." When I asked Paul what kinds of jerks are most poisonous, he said: "The worst assholes consistently do two things: 1.Put their self-interest ahead of co-workers and 2. Put their self-interest ahead of the company."

    Clearly this is someone who didn't need any research to tell him that "bad is stronger than good." By refusing to tolerate selfish jerks, Paul Purcell gives us a great model of eliminating the negative. And the fact that he doesn't seem to procrastinate when it comes to doing the unpleasant work of dealing with destructive people and poor performers is another benefit backed up by research. Consider a classic study [pdf] by Charles O'Reilly and Barton Weitz on how supervisors handled "problematic" sales employees (in which category they placed salespeople guilty of bad attitudes as well as other problems like low productivity and lack of punctuality). Bosses of the most productive groups confronted problems directly and quickly, issued more warnings and formal punishments, and promptly fired employees when warnings failed. The words and deeds of these no-nonsense bosses inspired performance because they made crystal clear that they would not tolerate crummy work. Related studies of punishment in the workplace show that employees respect bosses more when they punish destructive characters more swiftly and intensely – so long as they are fair and consistent.

    The upshot is, if you are the boss, doing such "dirty work" is part of your job — and although you might not enjoy playing the heavy, doing it doesn't make you the jerk. If you can't or won't do it, either you ought to be in another line of work or, at least, you ought to team up with someone who can.

    With further apologies to Johnny Mercer, sure, as boss you should spread joy up to the maximum, but your main task is to bring gloom down to the minimum. Get that priority straight, and set the stage for your people to do their best work. Or pandemonium is liable to walk upon the scene.

    Note: I originally posted this over at HBR.org as number 10 of my list of 12 Things Good Bosses Believe.  Some of the comments over there are from people who don't quite buy this perspective, and think that accentuating the positive is job one for a boss.  Part of me agrees with these concerns, as in some ways, asking what is more important — accentuating the positive or eliminating the negative — is a silly question.  It is akin to asking "what is more important, your heart or your brain?"  But an evidence-based perspective suggests that step 1 for leading a great team is getting rid of (or repairing) bad actions, procedures, and people and step 2 is amplifying and importing "good" stuff.

  • 11 Signs You’re A Bad Boss: From AMEX OPEN Forum


    33fe1daf-b54f-4013-8791-28ea260b4b6f_detail

    Thanks to Guy Kawasaki and Matthew May, two posts have recently appeared at the American Express blog for small business, OPEN Forum.  Matt describes these as "yin and yang" posts because the first, by him, was a review and discussion called "How to be a Good Boss" (that cool sign above kicks off his post).  That was followed with an opposing post that I wrote (with a lot of guidance, coaching, and editing from Guy — he  amazes me with his ability to frame things and use language so that ideas are sound, fun, and sticky) on "The Top 11 Signs that You're a Bad Boss."  Here is a reprint of that post for readers of Work Matters:

    The
    most crucial test of a boss is self-awareness. The best bosses are in
    tune with how the little things they say and do impact people, and they
    are adept at adjusting to bolster both performance and dignity. Several
    studies, including one by the College Board, suggest that the more
    incompetent a boss is, the more out of touch he or she is likely to be. 

     

    Unfortunately,
    too many bosses think they are in tune with their employees, but live
    in a fool’s paradise. If you’re a boss, you should review this list of
    the top eleven attitudes to figure out if you’re acting like a bad boss.

     

    1.    “I am going to get mine.” Let’s face it, you deserve to get more goodies and get them first. After all, without you, your underlings would be nowhere.

     

    2.      Ride them hard. You keep a close eye on your people because, otherwise, they screw around and screw-up.

     

    3.      All transmission and no reception.
    You pretend to listen to others somtimes; but you are really just
    “reloading,” thinking of the brilliant thing you are going to say next.

     

    4.      No thanks.
    You don’t baby your employees with all that insincere manners crap.
    Saying “please” and “thank you” is overrated, wastes a lot of time, and
    makes you look like you kissing-up to your subordinates.

     

    5.      Do it right or don’t do it. When your people make mistakes, you make sure they pay a steep price.

     

    6.      Mistakes were made, but not by me.
    You are so good that you rarely mess-up. Anyway, a smart boss doesn’t
    display ignorance, admit mistakes, or apologize – that’s what doormats
    and wimps do.

     

    7.      Credit hog. After all, when your people do something good, it is because of you.

     

    8.      Kiss up or shut-up. You despise underlings who challenge your ideas and point out your mistakes.

     

    9.      Star lover.
    You focus your energy on hiring, grooming, and encouraging your very
    best employees. After all, the B players are far less important and a
    lot easier to replace.

     

    10.   Implementation is for the little people.
    Your job is to develop and talk about big ideas, not to waste time
    thinking about all the little steps required to make them happen.

     

    11.   I don’t how it feels to be you and I don’t care. It’s not my job to hold your hand or understand what it feels like to work for me. I am your boss, not your mommy or daddy.

     

    If you’re an employee with a boss, you should take my survey called the BRASS (Boss Reality Assessment Survey System).
    It will help you determine if your work for a bad boss. Or, as Guy
    Kawasaki likes to put it, if you work for a certified brasshole.

    P.S. As always, let me know what you think — what did I miss? What strikes you as especially important — or wrong?

  • A Rather Personal Interview With Gretchen Over at The Happiness Project

    The amazing Gretchen Rubin, bestselling author of The Happiness Project, posted a rather personal interview about what makes me happy — and unhappy — over at her blog.  Frankly, it was one of those things were she sent me the questions, I typed out the answers without censoring myself and did not think about it again until they appeared.  I winced a little when I read it because it has a bit more personal information than I probably should have revealed, but I think it is accurate.  She calls it "Be Yourself, But Keep Your Inner Jerk In Check."  Here is where the headline came from:

    Gretchen asked:

    Is there a happiness mantra or motto that you’ve found very helpful? (e.g., I remind myself to “Be Gretchen.”)

    I answered:

    There are three things that I say to myself:

    “Think about how others around you feel, not how you feel or what you want.” (This makes me less selfish)

    “Focus doing the best you can, not on doing better than others.”
    (This focuses me on intrinsic qualities and rewards, not social
    comparison and competition – I am much happier and nicer when I don’t
    see life as a contest… and as Dan Pink’s book Drive shows, focusing intrinsic rewards might make me creative too).


    Also, I use a variation of Be Gretchen, but because I have the capacity to be a jerk (this is certainly a reason I wrote The No Asshole Rule), I say to myself like “Be Yourself, but keep your inner jerk in check.

    You can see the rest of the interview here; I have been focusing mostly on promoting Good Boss, Bad Boss these days, but Gretchen's questions made me stop and think about what matters most. So although I might have edited out a few things if I was to do it again, it was most constructive to be forced to stop and think about more important things during this rather crazy time in my life. 

    Thanks Gretchen!  As I have written before about her book, she wrote a great self-help book for people (like me) who in theory hate those kinds of books!

  • Being a Good Boss is Pretty Damn Hard: Reflections on Publication Day

    Today, September 7th, is the official publication day of Good Boss, Bad Boss.  I've got an hour or so before I need to run to the airport, and find myself looking back on what I've learned from writing the book, talking to people since the book was finished some months back, and all the blogging and comments (especially here at Work Matters and over at HBR Online where I have been developing my list of 12 Things Good Bosses Believe).

    The thing I've been fretting over most lately is how hard it is to be a good boss — the job is never done, it is amazingly easy to screw-up, and wielding power over others makes it all even harder because you are being watched so closely (and are prone to tuning-out your followers — the other half of the toxic tandem).  Yet, despite all these hurdles, the best evidence shows that many, if not most, people find their bosses to be competent and compassionate.  And most bosses I know work extremely hard and are dedicated to improving their skills.  Indeed, one of my main motivations for writing Good Boss, Bad Boss was that so many of the managers and executives who I spoke with and who wrote me in response to The No Asshole Rule were so concerned about becoming better at practicing their difficult craft.

    When I think of the bosses that I admire and want to be around versus those that I despise and want to avoid if at all possible, the main factor is not their skill at the moment.  Rather, it is whether or not they care and are working on core questions like:

    1. What does it feel like to work for me? 

    2. How can get more "in tune" with my followers, peers, bosses, customers, and other people who I deal with?

    3. What are my weaknesses and strengths?  What can I do to attenuate my weaknesses — what do I need to learn and who can I work with to best offset my drawbacks and blind spots?

    In contrast, people who are arrogant and suffering power poisoning — and never admit their weaknesses, let alone try to overcome or dampen them — are in my view, the worst of the worst, regardless of past accomplishments  Yes, as I emphasize on this blog and in Chapter 2, the best bosses need to act like they are in charge, to instill confidence in others and themselves.  But the bosses I want to be around  (and that I believe will triumph in the long run) have the attitude of wisdom, or as rocker Tom Petty put it, are confident but not really sure.

    That's what I am thinking about; I would be curious to hear your perspective on the kinds of bosses you want to be and be around.

  • Good Boss, Bad Boss Speeches in September

    Susan Angel Devil

    As Good Boss, Bad Boss is officially published this month — in fact, today is the official publication day — I am doing quite a few speeches on the book. Most are "closed," but three are open to the public, as indicated below.  I hope to see you at one of these events:

    September 8th: Disney Studios (Burbank, CA)

    September 8th: IDEO (Palo Alto, CA)

    September 9th: Pixar  (Emeryville, CA)

    September 10th: Google (Mountain View, CA)

    September 16th: Center for Corporate Innovation (Boston, MA)

    September 17th: Leading Strategic Execution (Stanford Executive Program, requires enrollment)

    September 20th: Commonwealth Club, San Francisco (Open to the public, admission is $20 and 7$ for students, sign up online)

    September 23: Learning Essence (Mexico City, Mexico).

    September 29th: Amazon (Seattle, WA).

    September 30th: Commonwealth Club, Silicon Valley, noon to 1pm (Santa Clara, CA. Open to the public, admission is $20; sign-up online)

    September 30th, Xerox PARC Forum (Palo Alto, CA, 6:00 PM.  Free and open to the public)

    3 P.S. Those beautiful angel and devil chairs at the top of the post above are by Susan Kare , who did them (and the rest of the design) for my Good Boss, Bad Boss PowerPoint deck, and who also consulted on the cover design for the book.  Susan has done many fantastic designs and is most famous for designing many of the icons on the original Macintosh, including the trash can and that frowning smiling face that Macs made when they booted.
    Susan-kare2