|
Softpanorama
(slightly skeptical)
Open Source Software Educational Society |
May the
source be with you,
but remember the KISS principle ;-)
|
Classification of Corporate Psychopaths
Something is rotten in the state of DenmarkFrom
Hamlet (I, iv, 90)
|
Note: This is page devoted to all IT professionals
who suffer from psychopathic bosses. Only those who already suffered or still
suffering from one of those types can understand the level of pain as well as stakes
involved in dealing with such individuals.
Toxic managers is just a politically correct term for corporate psychopaths,
really dangerous predators of corporate jungles in general and IT jungles in particular.
Psychopaths cannot be understood in terms of antisocial rearing or development.
They are the "monsters" of the corporate world
not that different from ordinary criminals or, to be more precise, are "criminals
without crime". Psychopath is first of all the failure to recognize, much
less to empathize with, the personal human dignity and rights of others. In a deep
sense of this word they can be considered insane.
"Sanity" does not mean perfection; it merely means sufficient engagement with
the real world and society to allow us to survive both day-by-day and in the long
term – thus “sane” individuals usually tend to obey traffic laws, learn from their
mistakes and practical experience and, in the case of moral sanity, they recognize
in others their worth and their capacity for joy and suffering. Furthermore, sanity
implies an ability of introspection: capacity to critically evaluate one’s experience,
to distinguish fact from fiction, and to tune behavior, to adapt to the real world.
Insanity, by implication, suggests a significant level of detachment from reality.
For example, a psychopath can not recognize the human worth and the capacity for
pleasure and pain in others. In this sense he/she is living in an "unreal" world.
It can also be combined with other psychological disorders like
paranoia.
Psychopath is often defined as someone who displays several distinguishing characteristics,
such as deceitfulness, impulsivity and a lack of remorse. Such people often have
a superficial charm, which they exercise ruthlessly in order to get what they want.
In this sense women are more dangerous type of psychopath. That implies that working
women, especially in IT have an enemy more formidable than men. Female psychopaths
usually see everything in terms of competition and
female agression. They have no respect for their own gender. Just the opposite.
Statistics suggest that a woman is the target in eight of every ten cases of bulling.
But, paradoxically, in six of 10 cases, a woman is the bully. They despise and attack
female subordinates and try to undermine their more successful female peers. In
the latter case they assume that they have achieved their success by using charm/sex/chicanery.
They also use their gender as a bulletproof vest against males, claiming discrimination
when it is convenient to them. This dirty trick of "fake victim" works wonders in
modern bureaucratic organizations. Female to female aggression is also observable
in primates. Dominant female try to suppress reproductive success of competitor
females in various ways including subjecting them to constant stress via harassment
and intimidation and/or attacking offspring:
Holmstrom (1992) summarizes his review by saying that indirect strategies were
observed among female great apes during the following three circumstances:
- In the power struggle among females, by cannibalistically feeding on
the competitor's offspring;
- against the male, in sexual contexts by refusal of cooperation to sexual
access; also in competition for food, and feeding on the male's offspring;
- through the offspring, by rearing the young and transmitting models
of behavior from one generation to the next. The female thus prevents and
restrains certain kinds of action in the offspring,p ermittinga nd favoringo
thers. Accordingly, the social intelligenceo fhigher primates should not
be underestimated. As Byrne and Whiten (1987) haves hown, chimpanzees are
also fully capable of faking nonverbal signals, in order to deceive competitors.
See The psychopath in the corner
office page for the exploration of connection between corporate psychopaths
and ordinary criminals.
One needs to understand that being a target of a psychopath is a permanent position.
One horrifying detail in the definition of personality disorders is rigidility and
inflexibility of patterns of thought and action being a part of definition (Wikipedia
) :
Personality disorders form a class of
mental disorders that are characterized by long-lasting
rigid patterns of thought and actions.
Because of the inflexibility and pervasiveness of these patterns, they
can cause serious problems and impairment of functioning for the persons who
are afflicted with these disorders.
Personality disorders are seen by the
American Psychiatric Association as an enduring pattern of inner experience
and behavior that deviates markedly from the expectations of the culture of
the individual who exhibits it. These patterns are
inflexible and pervasive across many situations. The onset of the pattern can
be traced back at least to the beginning of adulthood. To be diagnosed as a
personality disorder, a behavioral pattern must cause significant distress or
impairment in personal, social, and/or occupational situations.
Related term Antisocial personality disorder is defined as:
Antisocial personality disorder (abbreviated APD or ASPD) is a
psychiatric
diagnosis
in the
DSM-IV-TR recognizable by the disordered individual's
impulsive behavior, disregard for social norms,
and indifference to the rights and feelings of others.
The World Health Organization's ICD-10 diagnostic manual uses [term]
dissocial personality disorder instead.
Such people distort and change meaning for the most ordinary social interactions:
A simple difference of opinion, for example, can quickly escalate into a major and
violent conflict.
There were several attempts to classify corporate psychopaths into various
categories. Most of them are naive and completely unscientific. Most of self-help
books represent
Cargo Cult Science
and vastly underestimate/misinterpret the danger. That actually is applicable to
this page too as by and large it is a summary interpreted through the prism of personal
experience. While the author has training as a psychologist he never worked in this
capacity.
It goes without saying that good books on this topic are pretty rare. I have
some book recommendations
but they are of course far from being absolute. Still several classification categories,
while being unscientific and overlapping, survived and represent at least what can
be called "popular urban mythology" in this area that like any mythology is better
then nothing if there is no science available.
Often the following non-orthogonal types (incarnations of a corporate psychopath)
are distinguished in the literature:
- Bullies or aggressive psychopaths.
Aggression in inherent in psychopath and to tell that a psychopath is a bully
is just to tell that the water is wet. But for some of them this pattern of
behavior serves as the most favorite tactics and they tend to use it more often
and more systematically. Those psychopaths have a distinct a tendency toward
sadism and derive perverse gratification from harming others. They like to hurt,
frighten, tyrannize. They do it for a sense of power and control, and
will often only drop subtle hints about what they are up to. At the
same time they polish their aggressive, domineering manner in such a way to
disguise any intimidation as legitimate corporate behavior. Such pathological
personalities always seek out positions of power, such as teacher,
bureaucrat, manager, or police officer. You can also distinguish several
subtypes. One not very convincing subtyping was developed by the Workplace Bullying
& Trauma Institute. It includes for subtypes:
- The constant critic who uses put downs, insults, name-calling,
and makes aggressive eye contact.
- The two-headed snake who pretends to be nice while sabotaging
you.
- The gatekeeper is also known as the micromanager and control
freak
- Screaming Mimi is emotionally out of control and explosive.
Often bulling behavior is combined with paranoia tendencies (paranoiac self-defense).
Again this category is fuzzy.
- Many if not all corporate bullies can simultaneously be classified as
paranoid managers.
- Many of them are also belong to the category of micromanagers.
- Dominant part also falls into the category of narcissists.
I would like to stress it again that direct or indirect aggression is inherent
in psychopath and to tell that a psychopath is a bully is just to tell that
the water is wet.
US National Center for Education Statistics suggests that bullying can be broken
into two categories:
- Direct bullying,
- Indirect bullying which is also known as social aggression.
The latter is characterized by forcing the victim into
social isolation. This
isolation
is achieved through a wide variety of techniques, including refusing to socialize
with the victim and criticizing the victim's communication manner or other socially-significant
markers.
Indirect bullying is more subtle and more likely to be verbal, such as the
silent treatment, arguing others into submission, manipulation,
gossip, staring,
and mocking. While women can be as aggressive or even more aggressive then men
they usually are more indirect. I would like to stress that gender differences
in aggression are subject to review; human society is too complex and direct
projection from animal world, for example, from great apes is of limited value.
See important paper by Kaj Bjorkqvist
Sex
Differences in Physical, Verbal, and Indirect Aggression: A review of recent
reseach
Accordingly, one should not expect women to develop and use exactlyt
he sames trategiesfo r attainingt heir goals as men do. If strategies for
aggression and conflict resolutiona relearned, not innate, then women are
likely to learn different methods than men. Important aspects are power
and capacity, not only physical, but also verbal, and social. Human beings
have nonphysical powers which are far beyond those of any other animal.
Accordingly, human aggression has faces and forms, inconceivable within
the realm of animal aggression. Extrapolations from animal studies are,
therefore, misleading. Aggressive styles are also subject to developmental
change during the life course. As indicated, animal aggression is mostly
physical. Also among young children lacking verbal skills, aggression is
predominantly physical. Verbal skills, when they develop, are quickly utilized
not only for peaceful communication, but also for aggressive purposes. When
social skills develop, even more sophisticated strategies of aggression
are made possible, with the aggressor being able to harm a target person
without even being identified: Those strategies may be referred to as indirect
aggression (Lagerspetz, Bjorkqvist, and Peltonen, 1988; Bjorkqvist, Lagerspetz,
and Kaukiainen, 1992).
There are good reasons to believe that, as
far as adult interpersonal conflict is concerned, physical aggression is
really the exception, not the rule. Other means are more likely to be used.
Burbank (1987) reviews anthropological research on female aggression.
She finds females of different cultures having a large potential of aggressive
means to use in order to get even with their husbands, such as, e.g., locking
them out of the house for the night: she regards this as an act of aggression.
Burbank (1987) found females seldom to resort to physical aggression against
their husbands, but they did so, occasionally. The most common reason was
that their husbands had committed adultery. Burbank found, however, that
women are much more often aggressive towards
other women than towards men.
Here is one type from popular literature that fits the pattern:
The Fearmonger Boss. People do what a “fearsome” boss
says because they’re afraid of him, which actually encourages further intimidation.
He always has a threat, and he constantly follows through with that threat
in order to keep his employees acquiescent.
- Paranoids. Paranoid managers
are psychopaths for whom continual mistrust and misjudgment of environment dominates
other (often no less pathological) personality features. Wikipedia
defines paranoia in the following way:
Paranoid personality disorder is a
psychiatric
diagnosis that denotes a
personality disorder with
paranoid
features. It is characterized by an exaggerated
sensitivity to rejection, resentfulness, distrust, as well as the inclination
to distort experienced events. Neutral and friendly actions
of others are often misinterpreted as being hostile or contemptuous. Unfounded
suspicions regarding the sexual loyalty of partners and loyalty in general
as well as the belief that one’s rights are not being recognized is stubbornly
and argumentatively insisted upon.
Paranoid managers are suspicious, touchy,
humorless, quick to take offense and
slow to forgive, self-righteous, argumentative,
often litigious. They seldom show tenderness and may avoid intimacy;
often they seem tense and brusque.
Paranoid personalities find causal connections everywhere; for them nothing
is coincidental.
They are constantly on guard and are hypersensitive
to critique. They may take offense where none is intended. Often
have problems with understanding humor. They appear cold and, in fact, often
avoid becoming intimate with others. Often pride themselves on their rationality,
objectivity and fairness. Paranoid managers rarely come forward to seek help
from subordinates.
Often paranoia combines with "toxic incompetence" as they cannot make decision
on time (analysis paralysis), insists of creating tons of useless documentation
and due to this skip important project milestones, etc.
Fear of exposure of paranoid manager is blended
into a pattern of pervasive distrust and suspiciousness. An inability
to trust, doubts about others' loyalty, distortion and fabrication of personal
histories, qualifications and facts, misinterpretation, and bearing grudges
unnecessarily are generally hallmarks of the disorder. Pathological and instinctive
aggressive counter-attack, the need to control others is also a prominent feature.
They like to collect evidence of subordinates.
Paranoid managers often can be classified as "raw bullies" as
in relations with subordinates prefer to rely on brute force.
- Micromanagers. Tendency to micromanages
is often combined with paranoia and bulling but often demonstrate additional
disorder: obsessive-compulsive disorder (OSD).
It is often connected with pathological neatness, especially in women. Especially
dangerous are paranoid incompetent micromanagers (PIMM)
that we will study in more detail on a separate set of pages that include but
not limited to (remember that micromanager are just an incarnation of corporate
psychopaths that got a special status in corporate mythology):
Micromanagers
is one of the few areas were gender stereotyping might provide some survival
benefits. Women tend to be more detail oriented, and female corporate
psychopaths more often tend to behave like micromanagers. Female PIMM
can be mean, evil, vindictive and quite petty.
If a female boss is insecure about her skills and abilities she is more likely
to exhibit PIMM behavior.
Female PIMM
are usually more skilled and use more often indirect aggression.
Often micromanagers are simultaneously can be classified as paranoid managers.
Among common traits are complete absence of trust in the staff, pathological
need for control, pathologic dissatisfaction with results, and recurring
"tantrums."
Many of PIMM can be also classified as bullies but again they, especially
female PIMM, prefer indirect aggression to direct. Usually, female
PIMM encourage "little birds" to rest on their shoulders and whisper all forms
of gossip. This, these minions believe, ingratiates them to their bosses.
- Narcissists. Narsisstic managers
are not that different from other types and also suffer from compulsive need
for control ("control freaks"). Narcissistic behavior (aka inventive personality
type) is compulsive desire to project positive image and resulting in volatile
unstable behavior with emotional outbursts caused by insecurity and weakness
rather than any real feelings of confidence or self-esteem. Very sensitive to
criticism and do not accept slightest criticism from below. They often can be
simultaneously classified both as bullies and micromanagers. As they need to
steal all the achievements of subordinates to built their image they are typically
"gatekeepers" who try tightly control all the communications channels with the
superiors'. Can be quite paranoid and react inadequately on any threat
to their projected image.
The narcissistic bosses are characterized by "a pervasive pattern of grandiosity,
need for admiration, and lack of empathy," often evidenced as envy, taking advantage
of others, an exaggerated sense of self-importance and entitlement, and arrogant
or haughty behavior. There is not much hope for the poor shmacs toiling for
the narcissistic personality-disordered boss who demands perfection, absolute
loyalty, and 24/7 devotion to the job.
- Manipulator bosses or Machiavellian
boss ("wolfs in sheep closing"). Manipulative psychopaths are probably
the smoothest of corporate psychopaths. Here we will mean a class of corporate
psychopath who excels in manipulative behaviors including but not limited to
flattery and seduction. All psychopaths use this to a certain extent but for
this type this is a preferred tactic.
When this feature is prominent their features typical for corporate psychopath
are usually present too. They are very similar to paranoid managers in their
behavior toward subordinates but unlike paranoids are capable sometimes using
flattery and seduction.
Also they prefer indirect aggression to direct. Often they have tendency
to break rules and exposit "grey" area in their favor. This distinguishes
them from paranoids, who other wise are very similar. They fear becoming less
valued if their underlings get any recognition for exemplary work. Manipulator
bosses are backstabbers who'll go to frightening lengths to look good to their
superiors.
Typically have a dual personality syndrome and behave completely differently
with superiors then with subordinates. Here is how they are described
in one of Monster career self-help
articles:
The Manipulator Boss
Also known as the Machiavellian boss, this type is extremely intelligent
and one of the most dangerous. The manipulator boss is highly focused, very
motivated, and always has a secret plan. He looks at people as a means to
an end. The world is a giant pyramid and the apex is his. People he touches
or runs over on the way to the top are casualties he writes off. If you
work for a manipulator, watch your back. Your best bet is to be open and
honest with him. Volunteer information. Your boss, who has long forgotten
what truth is, will be left impressed by it.
Again this typology and characteristics listed ad defining each type are imprecise
and unscientific; psychopath are very variable and it is often difficult to fit
your particular psychopathic boss into any of those classes. And you generally should
not. This is exercise better reserved for modern "factories of illusion" (self-help
books publishers) who are producing tons of low quality staff each year describing
particular types although they are just facets of a generic psychopathic personality.
In no way it should be blindly trusted either books or Web pages (including this
one) in important career-affecting decisions.
Although you see manifestation of this personality disorder on your own skin,
precise diagnostics is pretty difficult and you need to do
your own leg work and collect evidence to understand what makes particular
psychopath tick what are his favorite tactics.
You probably are better off consulting specialist and asking for a competent
advice. At least you can enroll in community college and take course in criminal
psychology: criminals and corporate psychopaths are just two sides of the same coin.
Both this this page and relevant books should all be taken with a grain of
salt. The author have spend more then seven years working as senior research
associate in the psychology but like in programming that was a different area
and this experience just ganatee the knowledge of jargon and certain enough
of classic book read and courses taken and paper written, but does not guarantee
talent or insight needed for this area.
Also few people have skills of clinical psychologists to correctly identify
often complex blend of features in toxic manager. But you should try you best. Mistakes
are unavoidable though. For example sometimes it was clear from the beginning that
the manager is a bully, but more precise analysis of behavior can suggest that you
are dealing with paranoid incompetent micromanager (PIMM) and the most prominent
feature is not open aggression (bulling) but deep paranoia and obsessive control.
Documenting the psychopath behavior helps as analyzing historic behavior you start
to see patterns in attacks, outbursts and intimidation tactics used. Proper
methods are well described in literature for psychological research. Limited amount
of materials related to PIMM can be found at
Documenting Micromanager
Behavior page on this site. All you can while staying is learn to cope. That's
why you should stay only as long as absolutely necessary. Remember you can't change
this type of individual. Among possible defense moves we can mention to stick to
your agenda, documenting every step and pointing abrupt changes of direction as
well as providing feedback about projects you involved with.. Try to avoid getting
sucked into his or her unreasonable demands. You don't want to end up being emotionally
blackmailed.
No matter what is precise classification all toxic managers are cruel with
subordinates and created out of the work environment "living hell".
Incompetent, dishonest but scheming they charm the higher ups and climb on the back
of others to achieve power. But it is important to understand that toxic managers
would never achieves their goals and climb up the ladder without the disorganization
and willful ignorance of his supervisors typical for some large corporations (Enron
is a typical example here). Fish rots from the head.
As insightful page
The toxic
manager in the office a guide to toxic managers and toxic management in a toxic
work environment states "We've all encountered them. Moody, aggressive, unpredictable,
incompetent, always blaming other people. A compulsive liar with a Jekyll and Hyde
nature, the individual, male or female, is always charming and plausible when management
are around." Unpredictable outbursts of hostility, conflicting demands, inconsistent
orders, random decision-making, inability to plan strategically, inability and unwillingness
to communicate and co-operate, obstructive ... the list goes on.
Psychopathic managers prevent subordinates doing their jobs and prevent employees
fulfilling their duties. Most employees in IT are competent and have both the desire
and ability to do good work. What is missing in some organizations is an environment
that encourages and enables the expression of that competence. In his book, Hall
(1988a) states,
If we are to achieve excellence in our organizations and communities, we
must be willing to reorient
We must make a presumption of competence in the workplace rather than
incompetence, for high-level performance rests on the simple, yet not
widely accepted, premise that people will
behave competently if we will but let them. (pp. 29-30)
After some conversations with corporate psychopath you feel like you left the
ring after facing opponent twice heavier then you and not playing by the rules.
Everything will be your fault. You have a "negative attitude", you're a "poor performer",
you're "not up to the job", and so on. If you get as far as alerting personnel or
human resources management, it'll be a "personality clash". In truth, this is a
projection of the psychopaths own negative attitude, poor performance, and incompetence.
The problem is that "toxic managers" are really toxic: they
instantly destroy trust and tend to infect their departments with bad attitudes.
It's really like a disease: they spread despair, anger and depression, which show
up in lackluster work, absenteeism and turnover. They are also a major course of
workplace burnout: toxic burnout. Coping with a toxic boss can take
a severe toll on your life. It is like living with an abusive parent or husband;
there are periods of calm where they are happy and not picking on you,
but you always know that at some point it will start
again.
The price of putting up with it is high. Researchers
in Finland found that workers who felt they were being treated fairly on the job
had a lower incidence of coronary heart disease, the leading cause of death in Western
societies. [ABC,
Oct. 26, 2005]. Often there
is little you can do except to keep your head down and stay away from that manager
as much as possible.
The best is to understand your tradeoffs and work not so much for the company
as for improving your marketability for the next job. Forget about loyalty
in such situation: set strict limits for yourself and stick to them.
Stop working overtime, don’t take on extra tasks, never
work through lunch. Have outside confidant: a person outside
the company to listen to you, support you and, ultimately, to help you get out.
The fact that they severely cripple the organization to which they
belong is well known fact and does not require additional commentary.
Toxic behavior of superiors create level of anger when revenge became to sweet
and pain that strips people of their self esteem and that disconnects them from
their work too severe. Never go this road. Still for some people urge of revenge
proves irresistible. That's why toxic managers are probably the leading causes of
sabotage in modern organization (competing with outsourcing/Offshoring). "Fish
stinks from the head!" and the higher toxic managers is, the more widespread is
the damage he/she causes. Often large badly managed companies and government agencies
attract such managers as due to their incompetence they simply would not survive
out in the startup business community.
I would like to stress that psychopaths completely lack empathy for other people.
That means that their are oblivious to sufferings they courses. Absolutely oblivious.
They tend to be rigid and inflexible, have hidden agendas, and have an unusually
hard time recognizing or respecting boundaries. They're weighed down by
irrational beliefs such as "To be criticized means I'm a failure" or "If I follow
orders, I'm weak". Disturbingly, individuals with personality disorders not only
tend to dismiss the idea that they have a problem, but often see their unpleasant
traits as strengths and take pride in them. For this reason, many such individuals
respond poorly to therapy -- if they agree to seek treatment at all.
For example, do you have a manager who focuses so single-mindedly on rules, regulations,
and productivity to the extent that actual real work grinds to a halt? Is she unsatisfied
with any solution you proposed, work compulsively till all hours, avoid making decisions,
and insist that her way of doing things is the only way? If so, your boss
may be suffering from obsessive-compulsive personality disorder. This is
not the same as obsessive-compulsive illness -- you're not likely to see her obsessively
washing her hands. The best defense strategy: find a transfer or a new job. If you
need to stay avoid arguments, keep a low profile, and steer clear of conflicts that
you'll never win.
You also can shield yourself from your boss's unreasonable demands, the authors
say, by finding out exactly what he expects from you and wants you to do. They suggest
asking him what the most important project is (you may be surprised), and request
guidance with detailed questions such as "Would it be all right for me to write
out some ideas for you to review? Then you can let me know which ones to pursue
further." Emphasize that there are only so many hours in a day, so he stops
expecting superhuman achievements. And don't take personally your boss's
lack of praise for a job well done: The problem is with him, not you.
Keep up your guard. Nitpicking may not only drive you crazy but could be harmful
to your caeer as it expose to the treat of being fired for unsubordination.
To neutralize that threat, the authors advise that you set boundaries, making clear
when it's inappropriate for to intrude on your work. You also may need to remind
your boss of your accomplishments if you find an obsessive-compulsive boss is undercutting
your work. You may want to divide up your work, so your obsessive-compulsive
boss can obsess freely over their parts of the job and leave you free to concentrate
on the tasks at hand.
These white-collar psychopaths or sociopaths are "individuals who most often
do not act out in a criminal way, yet can be just as manipulative and cunning" as
a serial killer. Their personality attributes "typically include superficial charm,
unreliability, untruthfulness, and insincerity, [a] lack of guilt, remorse, or shame,
[and] a need to engage in thrill-seeking behavior," as well as pathological lying,
egocentricity, selfishness, and rejection of authority and discipline, according
to the authors. In short, they are corporate con artists. They're the tech administrators
who over-order company laptops and hawk them on eBay, or employees who sabotage
bosses' and coworkers' careers by appropriating their ideas and denigrating their
performance to supervisors. They're the outgoing employees who act friendly to their
colleagues only to stab them in the back at every opportunity. Middle management
may be the natural habitat of the white-collar psychopath: Sub criminal psychopaths
are known for their extroversion, their charm, and their polished social skills,
and it's not unusual for these traits to be rewarded within many organizations.
If you think you work for one of these individuals, the authors say,
don't be fooled by "props" like the ready smile and
good eye contact. Instead, watch your back. The authors advise setting
firm ground rules and picking your battles very carefully. Better yet, seriously
consider switching jobs. Lock your desk, secure your computer password, keep your
personal life private, and notify your coworkers and supervisors of any inappropriate
behavior on the part of this colleague. As the authors caution, "Anything you say
can and will be used against you." Keep notes of any indiscretions and don't
blame yourself or feel responsible for the sociopath behavior, the authors say.
This is certainly handy advice for anyone who is in danger of being victimized by
a white-collar con artist.
Corporate America is a veritable hive of white-collar crazies. Identifying, defining,
and diagnosing exact personality disorders your boss suffers from can be a tricky
business. Still one sign is universal: the workplace in such cases quickly becomes
overflowing with tension. Avoid taking the toxic bosses actions personally and remind
yourself that you are not stuck in a hostile work environment. Take actions for
self-protection and establish personal boundaries rather than to change the other
person.
Remember that all of them are "Mayberry Machiavelli" and are ready to stub you
in the back.
Summary
Psychopathic bosses are incurable
- World is far from being perfect. This trivial general observation
actually can really help. Consider this crazy jerk more of your maturity
test the God exercise on you in his infinite wisdom and withstanding him/her
became much more easy. That helps to treat each other more realistically and
thus in more psychologically mature way. Related behavior might include minimizing
unrealistic expectations, viewing disagreements less personally, holding grudges
more briefly, etc.
- Psychopathic bosses have significant differences from the normal human beings.
What is important they see the world differently and interpret many innocent
for normal people patterns as threatening. Absurd reactions/over-reactions
should be expected as they are "not normal" in a very profound way.
- Aggression in office environment is typically indirect. That's why female
psychopaths are probably the most dangerous type of corporate psychopaths as
they prefer and excel in indirect intimidation. Woman inhumanity to woman
in the working place often exceed anything done by men. A female psychopath
often treat her female subordinate as if they are despised indentured servants
-- hers to humiliate.
- The power of psychopathic bosses comes from the way they can isolate
you, intimidate you and/or can make you feel bad if you don’t give in to demands.
Please note that cliques are female instrument of bulling. Cliques offer security
to those who conforms and insecurity to those who don't. Indirect bulling can
be achieved via exclusion from a peer group. Female gossip server the same goals.
- The best defense is finding a new, better job. You should start working
in this direction immediately as this increase your psychological comfort.
If job market is good it might be easier then you think.
Psychopathic bosses are really dangerous to your health, but don't struggle alone.
Books, friends, church can help...
- Work harassment is a serious problem, severely affecting the lives of those
who are exposed to it. In Sweden, a country with 9 million inhabitants, it is
estimated that 100-300 people commit suicide yearly as a result of harassment
by colleagues. Every 6th to 8th suicide is directly related to work harassment
[Leymann, 1986]. Work harassment is thus a form of interpersonal aggression,
which is at least as harmful as violence in the traditional sense. [
Sex Differences
in Covert Aggression Among Adults ]
- It’s difficult and dangerous to fight back against psychopathic manager.
Make sure you get help from people who know about ways of outsmarting them.
- Buying a couple of books and systematically studying the issue might help
to fight psychopath. Especially helpful is the ability to detect the tricks;
that significantly diminishes the level of stress.
- Try to document the behavior of the psychopath and share the problem with
somebody whom you trust outside the office environment. Just periodic discussion
of your records improves understanding of the problem and your preparedness
to dirty tricks and intimidation
- Although everyone’s psychopathic manager is different on the surface,
their tricks are not. All of them are using fear and anxiety to make you feel
bad. Learn typical patterns of attack both from experience and literature and
soon you will notice that you recognize them. Here having daily log helps immensely
as the ability going back and analyze previous similar episodes speed up learning.
Try to set red flags for upper management and HR indirectly, otherwise be
ready that your boss will retaliate against you.
- Year questionnaires should be used to inform upper management about the
problem.
- Anonymous hotlines and email are helpful, as you can ask somebody to read
you message or use free anonymisers to send complains.
Protect your privacy:
- Lock your desk, secure your computer password, keep your personal life private.
Learn some elements of computer security. Encrypt sensitive files on your
harddrive using compressing program like rar or WinZip.
- Expect you WEB browsing patterns be scrutinized, unless the company has
strict policy preventing managers from accessing this information without HR
approval. Be especially careful protecting your job searches independently whether
you are considering internal transferee or moving to the other company.
- If you need to speak by phone at the cubicle remember that walls have ears.
In somebody called you and the call in sensitive, excuse yourself and call back
later using cell phone or from a conference room. Never talk to recruiters from
your cubicle.
Create a plan to counter the damage to self-esteem:
- It's cool to be frugal. Even
if you lose some money leaving the current and finding other job the mere elimination
of stress will pay off in health benefits and part of the loss can be compensated
by more frugal life. It's actually
cool to be more frugal
as youth trends (and gas prices) in USA demonstrate...
- Start working on relevant certifications
- Attend night classes in college.
- Intensify your job search.
But never take the decision to change job "on-the spot" no matter how humiliating
the experience is. The best revenge is a better position in a different company
not the questionable pleasure of being unemployed.
"Too nice" people serve as a natural feeding ground for sociopaths. See
also Groupthink
- Paperback: 288 pages
- Publisher: Grand Central Publishing; Reprint edition (November 1,
2000)
- Language: English
- ISBN-13: 978-0446673860
- Product Dimensions: 7.9 x 5.1 x 0.8 inches
Niceness Mistakes-For Good!, June 11, 2003 By
Ilaxi S. Patel "Editor, kidsfreesouls.com &
A... (India) -
See all my reviewsHow oft we create a wave to spell trouble with our
own perfections being true and honest with good faith and intentions? We take
on too much not saying what we want and that's exactly what the book reveals
- the niceness mistakes that 'Damage' us! Unconsciously, we have planted strong
messages in the back of our minds and with good intentions by our mentors, follow
the moral code of conducts in life. Be good, be nice, be cool, share and care,
don't be selfish, be reasonable, don't hurt others, help friends, say yes and
so on. In real, trying to reach perfection and taking on too much lead us to
exhaustion and sooner or later the ship of our life start sinking. The author
gives an insight to the nine unconscious mistakes we often make daily and helps
us correct them and pulls a person out of frustration and stress.
In not saying what you want and taking on too much, it leads to suppressed
anger. Robinson provides healthy tips to express anger to orchestrate a balanced
life. Life itself is like riding a bike up and down roads that are bumpy, curvy,
hilly while juggling bananas, balloons and bowling balls says Robinson and so
this is when you have a fall, life needs balancing
back to pedal and steer with too much/too little, too rational/too emotional,
to fast/too slow, too cautious/too reckless, too strong/too weak, etc. and remain
upright empowering to get what you need and deserve. Irony is,
sometimes our niceness betrays us and this book is a key to understanding our
mistakes and bring about a 'change' in us. Robinson makes us a nicer person
making one realise the mistakes, why we make and how to give up.
In doing so, Robinson guides in:
1. Liberating from the bondage of other's expectations
2. Saying no and saving work overloads
3. Telling what we want and analyze what we receive is worth or not
4. Express anger that heal and maintain relationships too.
5. Face irrationality and criticism
6. Tell truth to friends when they fail us
7. Care for others but do no burden own trying to run their lives.
8. In pain and grief, feel competent enough
A change is always welcome even for the nice to be nicer and avoid the mistakes
that we keep making out of the blue. Our good intentions turn out to be damn-in-way
for others who often misunderstand or shrug off not appreciating your worth
as human being. This book is indeed a gem collection for every person who has
learned to live being 'Nice' and remain being so without being emotionally hung
up sometimes. Good Pick!
Former title was better., April 8, 2007
By
Geoffrey J. Barnes
"CyberBronco" (Miami, FL
United States)
The former title of this book was Good Intentions. From the information I gathered
in the first few pages it was first published in 1997. I am not sure if that
refers to the first publication under the current title or the previous one.
I say that because the text feels more dated than just 10 years old.
I bought this book at Borders. The title caught my eye and a scan of the first
few lines of each chapter confirmed I would like this book. As someone who is
always accused of being too nice a guy and winding up burned more than once
by relationships and employers, I thought I was on to something! Unfortunately
I feel burned again by being naive enough to buy this book. There are those
reading this that will say I should have done my homework first before making
a purchase. Well, I'm sorry but I am not one of those jerks who sits in Barnes
and Noble all day, taking up space and breaking in the backs of books I never
intend to purchase. I wish those chairs would run a few megawatts of electricity
through them every 10 minutes to get those creepy people out of the stores.
They never buy anything and they smell bad! When my cell phone rings in the
store, they have the nerve to "Shush" me. Hey people! This is a retail establishment!
Buy something or move back into the library!
To give an example of what I am referring to in this book go to page 201, Mistake
#8: Rescuing Others. The first page gives an example of a guy with a nephew
who is having trouble staying in school or keeping a job. This is actually the
chapter that made me buy the book. After getting a few pages into the chapter
you realize they are only referring to people who try to rescue addicts and
nothing else. My nephew is not an addict, but he otherwise fits the description
in the example. Too bad this book didn't stick to its original title: Good Intentions.
It is a better description of what is being preached here.
Mistake #7 is called Giving Advice. It tells you to never give advice, and lists
several reasons why you should not. Ironically advice is what this book is based
upon. The author is giving all of us poor "Nice" guys advice.
I believe the author had "good intentions" when he wrote this book. I believe
the publisher had a great money making idea when he re-released this book under
its new title.
What is Mobbing? Workplace Mobbing in Academe (2004).
Budget Cuts Are Not the Only Way Workers Are Forced from Jobs: Workplace
Abuse
“The mobbing syndrome is a malicious attempt to force a person out of
the workplace through unjustified accusations, humiliation, general
harassment, emotional abuse, and/or terror. “It is a ‘ganging up’ by the leader(s)
- organization, superior, co-worker, or subordinate - who rallies others into
systematic and frequent ‘mob-like’ behavior.“Because the organization
ignores, condones, or even instigates the behavior, it can be said that the
victim, seemingly helpless against the powerful and many, is indeed ‘mobbed.’
The result is always injury - physical or mental distress or illness
and social misery and, most often, expulsion from the workplace.”
-Mobbing: Emotional Abuse in the American Workplace, by Davenport,
Schwartz, and Elliott, 1999.
When a budget crisis hits a large institution, certain workers often seem to
be treated as though they are“expendable,” and are often the first forced
out. But this is not the only manner in which workers are driven out of the
workplace. Mobbing has been recognized for many years in
Europe, and it is also beginning to be identified as a serious workplace
problem in the United States. The authors above go on to say, “Mobbing
is an emotional assault. Through innuendo, rumors, and public discrediting,
a hostile environment is created in which one individual gathers others
to willingly, or unwillingly participate in continuous malevolent actions to
force a person out of the workplace.”“These actions
escalate into abusive and terrorizing behavior. The victim feels increasingly
helpless when the organization does not put a stop to the behavior or
may even plan or condone it... Frequently productivity is affected...
Resignation, termination, or early retirement, the negotiated voluntary or involuntary
expulsion from the workplace, follows. For the victim, death -
through illness or suicide - may be the final chapter in the mobbing
story.” -ibid
Much of the original research on mobbing was done by Swedish researcher
Heinz Leymann in the 1980’s. His findings have been slow in making it
to the United States. However a number of local statutes have been enacted,
and publications, conferences, and resources have surfaced recently in
the U.S. For example, Peralta Community College District in Oakland recently
established a regulation outlawing such behavior.
Often mobbing activities are directed at whistleblowers. Brian Martin,
in Whistleblowing and Nonviolencen (Peace and Change, Vol. 24,
No. 3, January 1999) describes attacks on whistleblowers this way:
Whistleblowing, in casual usage, means speaking out from within an organization
to expose a social problem or, more generally, dissenting from
dominant views or practices... The most common experience of whistleblowers
is that they are attacked. Instead of their messages being evaluated,
the full power of the organization is turned against the whistleblower.
This is commonly called the shoot-the-messanger syndrome,... The means of suppression
are impressive, nonetheless. They include ostracism by colleagues, petty
harassment (including snide remarks, assignment to trivial tasks and
invoking of regulations not normally enforced), spreading of rumors, formal
reprimands, transfer to positions with no work (or too much work), demotion,
referral to psychiatrists, dismissal, and blacklisting.
Whistleblowers often discover that formal channels for complaint or remedy
are ineffective or easily blocked. As Martin explains, “Appeal bodies
are part of the wider system of power and usually seek or reach accommodation
with other powerful groups. Hence such bodies are highly unlikely to
support a single individual against elites from a major organization, who usually
have links with elites elsewhere.”
Whistleblowers have other resources, according to Martin: “One strategy is
based on ‘mobilization,’ namely winning supporters by circulating relevant
documents, holding meetings and obtaining media coverage.” Howeve, such attempts
at mobilization are often met by more severe mobbing and harassment.
Kenneth Westhues, has identified academic institutions as a primary location
for mobbing attacks:“Ordinarily, colleagues in positions of
local power explain the situation in terms of failings of the targeted professor:
bad teaching, too few publications or the wrong kind, ethical misconduct, shirking
of duties, failure to live up to legitimate expectations of the job...
Sometimes, however, the target's failings have little to do with why he or she
is in trouble. The evidence may point to a sharply contrasting explanation:
that colleagues and/or administrators have ganged up on the targeted
professor for no good reason, to the point that collectively shunning, shaming,
and tormenting the target bolsters the group's solidarity, its esprit
de corps.” - Workplace Mobbing in Academe (2004)
Westhues also tracks the trajectory of mobbing, and its consequences
for victims and perpetrators. Here are more of his comments:
“Mobbing ... is an impassioned, collective campaign by co-workers to
exclude, punish, and humiliate a targeted worker. Initiated most often
by a person in a position of power or influence, mobbing is a desperate
urge to crush and eliminate the target. The urge travels through the
workplace like a virus, infecting one person after another. The
target comes to be viewed as absolutely abhorrent, with no redeeming qualities,
outside the circle of acceptance and respectability, deserving only of
contempt. As the campaign proceeds, a steadily larger range of hostile ploys
and communications comes to be seen as legitimate.”“Not infrequently,
mobbing spelled the end of the target’s career, marriage, health, and
livelihood. From a study of circumstances surrounding suicides in Sweden,
Leymann estimated that about twelve percent of people who take their
own lives have recently been mobbed at work.... By Leymann’s and others' estimates,
between two and five percent of adults are mobbed sometime during their
working lives. The other 95 percent, involved in the process only as
observers, bystanders, or perpetrators (though occasionally also as rescuers
or guardians of the target), mostly deny, gloss over, and forget the
mobbing cases in which they took part. That is one reason it has taken
so long for the phenomenon to be identified and researched.
“Workplace mobbing is normally carried out politely, without
any violence, and with ample written documentation. Yet even without
the blood, the bloodlust is essentially the same: contagion and mimicking of
unfriendly, hostile acts toward the target; relentless undermining of
the target’s self-confidence; group solidarity against one whom all agree
does not belong; and the euphoria of collective attack.
“The worker most vulnerable to being mobbed is an average or high achiever
who is personally invested in a formally secure job, but who nonetheless
somehow threatens or puts to shame co-workers and/or managers. “Ironically,
it is in workplaces where workers’ rights are formally protected that the complex
and devious incursions on human dignity that constitute mobbing
most commonly occur. Union shops are one example... University faculties
are another, on account of the special protections of tenure and academic freedom
professors have...Mobbing appears to be more common in the professional
service sector, where work is complex, goals ambiguous, best practices
debatable, and market discipline far away. Scapegoating is an effective if temporary
means of achieving group solidarity, when it cannot be achieved in a
more constructive way. It is a turning inward, a diversion of energy
away from serving nebulous external purposes toward the deliciously clear, specific
goal of ruining a disliked co-worker's life. Less time, skill,
and energy are required to write off a persistent critic as a "difficult professor"
than to rebut the critic's arguments. Chalking up dissent to the dissenter's
real or imagined flaws of character relieves overworked administrators
of uncertainty and ambiguity. It lets them feel good about themselves.
Westhues (and others) point out that the best way to deal with mobbing
is to nip it in the bud. Organizations not able to do this are at least
as much at fault as the perpetrators of the attacks. To stop it requires an
open atmosphere at the very beginning: “The basic priority for
constructive resolution of workplace conflict, namely to keep the conversation
going, to let competing positions be expressed and the evidence for them
reviewed, to listen to what opponents say, to respond honestly and respectfully,
to try not to silence anyone.”Westhues lists three points for a strong
academic institution which has vaccinated itself against mobbing:
- Protect freedom of speech.
- Keep academic organization loose. A tight ship cannot be a university.
It has to be full of contradiction and brimming with debate in order
to fulfill its public purposes.
- Focus attention on these purposes, like educating youth, producing useful
knowledge, and above all seeking truth.
These quotes on mobbing were collected and prepared by Karl Schaffer(schafferkarl@fhda.edu,
x8214), as a public service to the DeAnza College community. In
addition to the sources cited above, google “mobbing” or “workplace
abuse” for more info.
If you think that cannot leave job because you cannot take the pay cuts, think
again. There might be some compensating factors which you overlooked. A better
health is definitely one factor that should be entered into the equation...
Also kid might understand your decisions better that you think...
Changes in behavior begin with changes in attitudes. And there's no better place
to build a proper attitude than in the youth of America.Cool to Be Frugal
Professor Depew was once again on top of the changing attitudes story with
point number 5 of
Monday's Five
Things.
We ran across an interesting piece in USA Today this morning playing right
into our theme of a growing wave of resentment against consumption and a
disassociation from luxury goods and symbols of wealth.
According to the article, "Teens
Turn to Thrift as Jobs Vanish and Prices Rise," rising costs of typical
teenage indulgences are causing teens to do something they rarely do: be
thrifty. As the article notes, "It's even becoming cool to be frugal."
Let's take a closer look at the article.
The stalwart retailers of teen apparel, such as Abercrombie, based in the
Columbus, Ohio, suburb of New Albany, and American Eagle Outfitters Inc.,
are reporting sluggish sales, defying the myth that teen spending is recession-proof:
It holds up longer, but can eventually fold.
It's even becoming cool to be frugal.
Last week,
Ellegirl.com, the teen offshoot of Elle magazine, launched a new video
fixture called Self-Made Girl, which shows teens
how to make clothes and accessories. The first video offers
tips on how to create a prom clutch.
"It's a little tacky in the economic unrest to tote a big logo bag," said
Holly Siegel, the site's senior editor. She said it's no longer about teens
"one-upping each other," but rather where they can get it cheap.
Economists say this teen spending slump could be the worst in 17 years,
when teen frugality led to the demise of once-hot Merry-Go-Round Enterprises
Inc. and ushered in an era of flannel shirts and torn jeans.
Sales at teen retailers open at least a year averaged a 0.5% decline last
year, compared to a 3.3% increase in 2006 and a 12.1% gain in 2005, according
to a UBS-International Council of Shopping Centers tally. Among the few
bright spots is Aeropostale Inc., whose jeans are about 30% cheaper than
Abercrombie & Fitch. Candace Corlett, principal at consulting firm WSL Strategic
Retail, said low-price chains like H&M and Steve & Barry's should do well.
"It is way cooler to get a super deal on that shirt rather than being able
to spend the most money on something," said Anna D'Agrosa, director of Consumer
Insights at The Zandl Group, a market research company focusing on teens.
"Kids are becoming really aware of what is happening to their economy and
to their families."
Teen Awareness
"Kids are becoming really aware of what is happening to their economy and to
their families."
Every teen is going to have a friend or classmate whose parents lost their home.
Walking Away Will Be The Next Mortgage Crisis. And as foreclosures skyrocket
and parents lose their homes, these kids will remember it for the rest of their
lives.
Secular changes in behavior start with secular changes in attitudes. That secular
change in attitudes is now underway and it's not just with teens either. Many
baby boomers facing retirement are half scared to death.
Greenspan had the wind of spendthrift
consumers at his back. Bernanke has
the wind of increasingly frugal consumers blowing briskly in his face. The implications
should be obvious. Those who think
Deflation In A Fiat Regime cannot happen, need to think again.
Mike "Mish" Shedlock
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com
Human imaging studies have for the first time identified brain circuitry associated
with social status, according to researchers at the National Institute of Mental
Health (NIMH) of the National Institutes of Health.
They found that different brain areas are activated when a person moves
up or down in a pecking order – or simply views perceived social superiors or
inferiors. Circuitry activated by important events responded
to a potential change in hierarchical status as much as it did to winning money.Our
position in social hierarchies strongly influences motivation as well as physical
and mental health,” said NIMH Director Thomas R Insel, M.D. “This first glimpse
into how the brain processes that information advances our understanding of
an important factor that can impact public health.”
Caroline Zink, Ph.D., Andreas Meyer-Lindenberg, M.D., Ph.D., and colleagues
of the NIMH Genes Cognition and Psychosis Program, report on their functional
magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) study in the April 24, 2008, issue of the
journal Neuron. Meyer-Lindenberg is now director of Germany’s Central
Institute of Mental Health.
Prior studies have shown that social status strongly predicts health.
Animals chronically stressed by their hierarchical
position have high rates of cardiovascular and depression/anxiety-like syndromes.
A classic study of British civil servants found that the lower one ranked, the
higher the odds for developing cardiovascular disease and dying early.
Lower social rank likely compromises health through psychological effects, such
as by limiting control over one’s life and interactions with others.
However, in hierarchies that allow for more upward mobility, those
at the top who stand to lose their positions can have higher risk for stress-related
illness. Yet little is known about how the human brain translates such factors
into health risk.
To find out, the NIMH researchers created an artificial social hierarchy
in which 72 participants played an interactive computer game for money. They
were assigned a status that they were told was based on their playing skill.
In fact, the game outcomes were predetermined and the other “players” simulated
by computer. While their brain activity was monitored by fMRI, participants
intermittently saw pictures and scores of an inferior and a superior “player”
they thought were simultaneously playing in other rooms.
Although they knew the perceived players’ scores would not affect their own
outcomes or reward –and were instructed to ignore them –
participants’ brain activity and behavior were highly
influenced by their position in the implied hierarchy.
“The processing of hierarchical information seems to be hard-wired, occurring
even outside of an explicitly competitive environment, underscoring how important
it is for us,” said Zink.
Key study findings included:
- The area that signals an event’s importance, called the ventral striatum,
responded to the prospect of a rise or fall in rank as much as it did to
the monetary reward, confirming the high value
accorded social status.
- Just viewing a superior human “player,” as opposed to a perceived inferior
one or a computer, activated an area near the front of the brain that appears
to size people up – making interpersonal judgments and assessing social
status. A circuit involving the mid-front part of the brain that processes
the intentions and motives of others and emotion processing areas deep in
the brain activated when the hierarchy became unstable, allowing for upward
and downward mobility.
- Performing better than the superior “player” activated areas higher
and toward the front of the brain controlling action planning, while performing
worse than an inferior “player” activated areas lower in the brain associated
with emotional pain and frustration.
- The more positive the mood experienced by participants while at the
top of an unstable hierarchy, the stronger was activity in this emotional
pain circuitry when they viewed an outcome that threatened to move them
down in status. In other words, people who felt more joy when they won also
felt more pain when they lost.
“Such activation of emotional pain circuitry may underlie a heightened risk
for stress-related health problems among competitive individuals,” suggested
Meyer-Lindenberg.
In collaboration with other NIMH researchers, Zink and colleagues are planning
follow-up studies to explore brain activity in response to the experimental
social hierarchy in patients with mental illnesses like schizophrenia or autism,
which are marked by social and thinking deficits. The researchers will also
be exploring whether particular gene variants might differentially affect brain
responses in similar experiments.
Source: National Institute of Mental Health
Comment
Posted by superhuman
20 minutes ago Provide size of the samples and how
other possible explanations were ruled out, theres to many idiotic social 'science'
to take such articles seriously without being able to at least verify the assumptions
and statistics behind them.
For example where is the proof that subjects really interpreted results in terms
of social hierarchy? What authors think was associated with social status can
simply be an anticipation of difficulty of the game - since player rank is linked
to gaming ability if you see a player higher ranked you know he won more games
therefore you anticipate tougher game and enjoy victory more, loosing to inferior
player is also more frustrating.
While this case has nothing to do with toxic managers, it demonstrates an interesting
mechanism at work in positions of power:
-
“Sex and power are extremely connected, because they’re basically
an expression of this huge energy that these people have.” '.
-
..when you get into a position of power, you
think you’re above the law.”
-
... "There’s no tenure. It’s
often hard to know what the criteria for success are. It’s either all or nothing
— you either win or you lose. And so it inspires
a risk-taking person to go into that line of work. But on the public side, they’re
supposed to show stability and responsibility, and so this risky nature may
show itself more on the private side.”
NYT | March 11, 2008
It keeps happening. Recklessly, shamelessly, cavalierly — as if this time
they’re the ones who will somehow manage to get away with it all.
But many of them don’t.
Congressmen, senators, governors, presidents, mayors — politicians at all
levels keep starring in this familiar and non-partisan soap opera rerun. They
engage in clandestine sexual entanglements, commonly cloaked in the tawdry textures
of hotel pseudonyms and airport bathrooms and pay-by-the-hour copulation. All
too often, their stealthy frolics then poison their political careers.
And now add to the lengthening list Gov.
Eliot Spitzer, husband, father of three teenage daughters, who authorities
on Monday said had been involved with a ring of prostitutes.
“I think biologists could tell you this has something to do with natural
selection — the person who acquires power becomes the alpha male,” said Tom
Fiedler, who teaches a course in press and politics at
Harvard’s Kennedy School. He was involved in reporting
Gary Hart’s notorious fling with Donna Rice in 1987 that terminated the
senator’s presidential bid.
Politics and sex is an old story, and as Mr. Fiedler and others point out,
it simply reinforces the lessons of the aphrodisiac of power taught in Shakespeare.
Its prime characters constitute a crowded society.
Governor Spitzer’s startling appearance with his wife, Silda, at his side
is itself something of a contrapuntal answer to New Jersey’s 2004 entry in this
dubious catalog of political misbehavior, Gov.
James E. McGreevey’s relinquishing office after disclosing a gay affair.
By now, many of the more publicized escapades have become embedded in political
lore, from President
Bill Clinton encounters with
Monica Lewinsky to Senator Bob Packwood and his unwanted advances on women
to Representative
Mark Foley and his lewd e-mails to House pages.
Who can forget the late Wilbur D. Mills, the one-time powerful head of the
House Ways and Means Committee, and his dalliances back in 1974 with the stripper
Fanne Foxe? She’s the one who barreled out of Mr. Mills’s car and waded into
the Tidal Basin in Washington when the park police stopped them. Enterprisingly,
she went and changed her name from the Argentine Firecracker to the Tidal Basin
Bombshell, and got a book out of her adventures.
There was, as well, Representative Gary Condit, whose career imploded when
it came out that he had been involved with
Chandra Levy, an intern who was murdered. And Wayne Hays, the Ohio representative,
who quit in 1976 after it was revealed that the job requirements of Elizabeth
Ray were less as a secretary than as his mistress. In her famous words: “I can’t
type. I can’t file. I can’t even answer the phone.”
Sexual missteps among politicians are nothing peculiar to the United States,
having firm grounding in England, for instance, and turning up with good regularity
throughout the world. But they seem to reach more absurdist proportions in this
country, and have almost the quality of a catch-me-if-you-can game at a time
when private borders have gotten extremely porous.
“There is a broader anxiety about what is private anymore,” said Paul Apostolidis,
a political science professor at Whitman College and the co-editor of the book
“Public Affairs: Politics in the Age of Sex Scandals.”
“It’s not that politicians are behaving more badly. We’re just learning
about it more often.”
But why does it go on repeatedly when the ramifications can be so dire?
“I don’t see why we would expect politics to be more free of the psychological
contradictions of other humans beings,” Mr. Apostolidis said. “People do self-destructive
things that are not rational.”
Psychologists mention the sense of entitlement felt by those who attain political
standing that blinds them to the consequences of their actions. And they say
that ambitious politicians are invigorated by risk and feel impervious.
Dr. Frank Farley, a psychologist at
Temple University, said that many politicians are what he calls Type T personalities,
with T standing for thrill-seeking. “Politics is an uncertain business,” he
said. “You’re at the whim of the electorate. There’s no tenure. It’s often hard
to know what the criteria for success are. It’s either all or nothing — you
either win or you lose. And so it inspires a risk-taking
person to go into that line of work. But on the public side, they’re supposed
to show stability and responsibility, and so this risky nature may show itself
more on the private side.”
Despite the intensified scrutiny of politicians in recent times, and the
ongoing parade of those who do get caught, Dr. Farley said public officials
keep acting recklessly because their nature is hard to restrain. “It’s deep,”
he said. “It’s very hard to throttle back.”
Dr. Judy Kuriansky, an adjunct professor of clinical psychology at
Columbia University’s Teachers College, said that
“sex and power are extremely connected, because they’re basically an expression
of this huge energy that these people have.”
Not uncommonly, she said, politicians speak out vigorously against the very
behavior that they then indulge in, as is the case with Governor Spitzer. “You
project wrong onto others that is symptomatic of your own behavior,” she said.
“It’s called a defense mechanism. Basically, it’s unconscious.”
Moreover, she added, “Even though Spitzer is
a lawyer, when you get into a position of power, you think you’re above the
law.”
Some secrets do in fact have long lives. Not until 2004, three decades afterward,
did it come out that Neil Goldschmidt, who became governor of Oregon in the
1980s, had sexually abused a 14-year-old babysitter while he was mayor of Portland.
Well, what could Oregon legislators do at that point? They took his official
portrait and hung it in a less visible spot in the state capitol.
Not always, of course, are political careers ruined by sexual irregularities.
Rep.
Barney Frank continued to win re-election in Massachusetts even after it
was disclosed in 1989 that he had hired a male prostitute who ran a brothel
out of his apartment.
It is sometimes speculated that certain politicians, at least subconsciously,
want to be caught and have their careers upended. But do they?
“I’ve never seen it,” said Dr. Farley. “I don’t believe it’s a factor with
these people. It’s just in their nature to push
things. I don’t think they have a death wish. I think they have
a life wish. They just love all aspects of life — some of it too much.”
Workplace bullying, such as belittling comments, persistent criticism of work
and withholding resources, appears to inflict more harm on employees than sexual
harassment, say researchers who presented their findings at a conference today.
“As sexual harassment becomes less acceptable in society, organizations may
be more attuned to helping victims, who may therefore find it easier to cope,”
said lead author M. Sandy Hershcovis, PhD, of the University of Manitoba. “In
contrast, non-violent forms of workplace aggression such as incivility and bullying
are not illegal, leaving victims to fend for themselves.”
This finding was presented at the Seventh International Conference on Work,
Stress and Health, co-sponsored by the American Psychological Association, the
National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health and the Society for Occupational
Health Psychology.
Hershcovis and co-author Julian Barling, PhD, of Queen’s University in Ontario,
Canada, reviewed 110 studies conducted over 21 years that compared the consequences
of employees’ experience of sexual harassment and workplace aggression. Specifically,
the authors looked at the effect on job, co-worker and supervisor satisfaction,
workers’ stress, anger and anxiety levels as well as workers’ mental and physical
health. Job turnover and emotional ties to the job were also compared.
The authors distinguished among different forms of workplace aggression.
- Incivility included rudeness and discourteous verbal and non-verbal
behaviors.
- Bullying included persistently criticizing employees’ work; yelling;
repeatedly reminding employees of mistakes; spreading gossip or lies; ignoring
or excluding workers; and insulting employees’ habits, attitudes or private
life.
- Interpersonal conflict included behaviors that involved hostility, verbal
aggression and angry exchanges.
Both bullying and sexual harassment can create negative work environments
and unhealthy consequences for employees, but the researchers found that
workplace aggression has more severe consequences. Employees who
experienced bullying, incivility or interpersonal conflict were more likely
to quit their jobs, have lower well-being, be less satisfied with their jobs
and have less satisfying relations with their bosses than employees who were
sexually harassed, the researchers found.
Furthermore, bullied employees reported more job stress, less job commitment
and higher levels of anger and anxiety. No differences were found between employees
experiencing either type of mistreatment on how satisfied they were with their
co-workers or with their work.
“Bullying is often more subtle, and may include behaviors that do not appear
obvious to others,” said Hershcovis. “For instance, how does an employee report
to their boss that they have been excluded from lunch? Or that they are being
ignored by a coworker? The insidious nature of these behaviors makes them difficult
to deal with and sanction.”
From a total of 128 samples that were used, 46 included subjects who experienced
sexual harassment, 86 experienced workplace aggression and six experienced both.
Sample sizes ranged from 1,491 to 53,470 people. Participants ranged from 18
to 65 years old. The work aggression samples included both men and women. The
sexual harassment samples examined primarily women because, Hershcovis said,
past research has shown that men interpret and respond differently to the behaviors
that women perceive as sexual harassment.
Source: American Psychological Association
This one is by OldVet...”Scheming your way
from riches to rags”

This seems an opportune time for Angrybears to gird up their loins financially.
For those who have not already succumbed to the lures of the “greater fool”
theory of housing markets, please be aware that in declining economies the clever
may turn to other schemes to part you from your cash. Ponzi operators such as
hedge funds, private equity funds, Nigerian con artists with “special opportunites”
and other wickedly complex characters will importune you to “invest” for quick
returns. Pyramid scheme operators will urge you to “invest in yourself and your
future” with the promise of riches and income streams in perpetuity by recruiting
friends and neighbors to buy and sell inventories of overpriced crap.
Wikipedia’s definition of a Ponzi scheme and a pyramid scheme distinguish
them from financial “bubbles” thusly:
- A pyramid scheme is a form of fraud similar in some ways to a Ponzi scheme,
relying as it does on a disbelief in financial reality, including the hope
of an extremely high rate of return. However, several characteristics distinguish
pyramid schemes from Ponzi schemes:
- In a Ponzi scheme, the schemer acts as a “hub” for the victims, interacting
with all of them directly. In a pyramid scheme, those who recruit additional
participants benefit directly (in fact, failure to recruit typically
means no investment return).- A Ponzi scheme claims to rely on some
esoteric investment approach, insider connections, etc., and often attracts
well-to-do investors; pyramid schemes explicitly claim that new money
will be the source of payout for the initial investments.
- A pyramid scheme is bound to collapse a lot faster, simply because
of the demand for exponential increases in participants to sustain it.
By contrast, Ponzi schemes can survive simply by getting most participants
to "reinvest" their money, with a relatively small number of new participants.
- A bubble. A bubble relies on suspension of belief and an expectation
of large profits, but it is not the same as a Ponzi scheme. A bubble
involves ever-rising (and unsustainable) prices in an open market (be
that shares of a stock, housing prices, the price of tulip bulbs, or
anything else). As long as buyers are willing to pay ever-increasing
prices, sellers can get out with a profit. And there doesn't need to
be a schemer behind a bubble. (In fact, a bubble can arise without any
fraud at all - for example, housing prices in a local market that rise
sharply but eventually drop sharply because of overbuilding.) Bubbles
are often said to be based on "greater fool" theory.
Armed with this knowledge and alert to these potential pitfalls, I would
only add that the operators of such schemes have identifiable
personality characteristics. From investigator Bill Branscum we learn:
His system makes it possible for him to pay incredible rates of return.
The elaborate office, exquisitely tailored suits, involvement with the church,
and generosity toward charitable organizations are all classic window dressing.
. . Ponzi or Pyramid - either way, the con artists who perpetrate these
scams are swindlers with sociopathic personalities who view everyone around
them as bit part players in their own personal play. These people are devious
beyond comprehension. Uninhibited by anything akin to conscience or remorse,
they have no mercy and feel nobody's pain. Charm and charisma can conceal
a lot. It is hard to imagine that one of the most likeable people you ever
met in your life, totally trusted by those you respect and admire, would
destroy everything you worked your entire life to build while looking you
in the eye and smiling in your face all the while.
Oh my!! Is there any way to protect yourself from these smooth operators?
Yes. Become a
psychopath. That’s your best shot, according to a study.
Wanted: psychopaths to play the stock market. The US team found that people
with certain brain injuries which suppress their emotions could make the
best stock market traders. They took a selection of 41 people of normal
IQ, 15 of whom had suffered lesions on the areas of the brain that affect
emotions, and made them play a simple investment game. Those with brain
damage significantly out performed those without, the researchers from Stanford
Graduate School of Business, Carnegie Mellon University and the University
of Iowa found.
Imagine - if you can - not having a conscience, none at all, no feelings
of guilt or remorse no matter what you do, no limiting sense of concern for
the well-being of strangers, friends, or even family members. Imagine no struggles
with shame, not a single one in your whole life, no matter what kind of selfish,
lazy, harmful, or immoral action you had taken.
And pretend that
the concept of responsibility is unknown to you, except as a burden others seem
to accept without question, like gullible fools.
Now add to this
strange fantasy the ability to conceal from other people that your psychological
makeup is radically different from theirs. Since everyone simply assumes that
conscience is universal among human beings, hiding the fact that you are conscience-free
is nearly effortless.
You are not held
back from any of your desires by guilt or shame, and you are never confronted
by others for your cold-bloodedness. The ice water in your veins is so bizarre,
so completely outside of their personal experience, that they seldom even guess
at your condition.
In other words,
you are completely free of internal restraints, and your unhampered liberty
to do just as you please, with no pangs of conscience, is conveniently invisible
to the world.
You can do anything
at all, and still your strange advantage over the majority of people, who are
kept in line by their consciences will most likely remain undiscovered.
... ... ...
Crazy and frightening
- and real, in about 4 percent of the population....
The prevalence
rate for anorexic eating disorders is estimated a 3.43 percent, deemed to be
nearly epidemic, and yet this figure is a fraction lower than the rate for antisocial
personality. The high-profile disorders classed as schizophrenia occur in only
about 1 percent of [the population] - a mere quarter of the rate of antisocial
personality - and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention say that the
rate of colon cancer in the United States, considered "alarmingly high," is
about 40 per 100,000 - one hundred times lower than the rate of antisocial personality.
The high incidence
of sociopathy in human society has a profound effect on the rest of us who must
live on this planet, too, even those of us who have not been clinically traumatized.
The individuals who constitute this 4 percent drain our relationships, our bank
accounts, our accomplishments, our self-esteem, our very peace on earth.
Yet surprisingly,
many people know nothing about this disorder, or if they do, they think only
in terms of violent psychopathy - murderers, serial killers, mass murderers
- people who have conspicuously broken the law many times over, and who, if
caught, will be imprisoned, maybe even put to death by our legal system.
We are not commonly
aware of, nor do we usually identify, the larger
number of nonviolent sociopaths among us, people who often are not blatant lawbreakers,
and against whom our formal legal system provides little defense.
Most of us would
not imagine any correspondence between conceiving an ethnic genocide and, say,
guiltlessly lying to one's boss about a coworker. But the psychological correspondence
is not only there; it is chilling. Simple and profound, the link is the absence
of the inner mechanism that beats up on us, emotionally speaking, when we make
a choice we view as immoral, unethical, neglectful, or selfish.
Most of us feel
mildly guilty if we eat the last piece of cake in the kitchen, let alone what
we would feel if we intentionally and methodically set about to hurt another
person.
Those who have
no conscience at all are a group unto themselves, whether they be homicidal
tyrants or merely ruthless social snipers.
The presence or absence of conscience is a deep human division, arguably more
significant than intelligence, race, or even gender.
What differentiates
a sociopath who lives off the labors of others from one who occasionally robs
convenience stores, or from one who is a contemporary robber baron - or what
makes the difference between an ordinary bully and a sociopathic murderer -
is nothing more than social status, drive, intellect, blood lust, or simple
opportunity.
What distinguishes
all of these people from the rest of us is an utterly empty hole in the psyche,
where there should be the most evolved of all humanizing functions. [Martha
Stout, Ph.D.,
The Sociopath Next Door] (highly recommended)
By
Flexo on Wednesday, October 24th, 2007 in
Career and Work |
12 Comments Many of us depend on our employers for our livelihood.
Even those not living paycheck-to-paycheck count on being employed to build
up savings, invest and insure for the future, and of course pay the bills. Here
are some things to look out for. If these apply to you, start hedging your bets
and planning for what life will be like without your job.Fewer responsibilities.
Are you being asked to train others on your job? If your responsibilities are
being transferred to someone else—and you are not receiving more responsibilities
to compensate—you may be on your way to being downsized, rightsized, or “made
redundant.”
Exclusion. If you are no longer included in the types of
meetings of which you were formerly a part, the group may be moving on without
you. It is entirely possible that your boss is recognizing that you have an
excessive amount of work to do and is excluding you to allow you to complete
other assignments, but if this is not communicated to you, your team is simply
getting used to working without you.
Blame for small mistakes. If your small mistakes — everyone
makes them—are becoming topics of conversation or your bosses are assigning
blame to you for other small problems, there are at least two things happening.
First, recognizing your errors will help your boss feel further justified for
letting you go. Also, once you are gone, it will be much easier to assign
blame to you. You will not be around to defend yourself.
Talk around the water cooler. Word travels fast. If you
hear a rumor that the company has it in for you, chances are it’s true. If not,
someone has a personal vendetta against you and is starting rumors to make you
crazy. I see that as a highly unlikely possibility. Either way, I wouldn’t want
to stay in either environment, so striking the first blow by quitting may keep
you sane.
Bad review. If your year has progressed well but you’re
surprised with low ratings at your annual or semi-annual performance review,
you could be on your way out. Bad reviews shouldn’t sneak up on you. If you
truly are performing poorly and the review is the first time you’ve received
negative feedback, then there are communication problems within your department.
But if you feel you’re doing well, there should be no disagreement. If those
negative reviews were unsuspected and undeserved, start looking for a new job.
It’s good to be prepared for losing your job even if there are no signs yet.
Anything can happen, and anything can happen quickly.
Dilemma: Bosses who sabotage your career
Solution: "Document for yourself what you do," Bond says. "Be politically
savvy in not out-shining the boss and showing the boss in a professional manner
how your contributions bring value to him/her, as well as to the bottom line
by which you all are measured."
Dilemma: Bullying
Solution: More than half of American workers have been the victim of,
or heard about, supervisors/employers behaving abusively by making sarcastic
jokes/teasing remarks, rudely interrupting, publicly criticizing, giving dirty
looks, yelling at subordinates or ignoring them as if they were invisible, according
to a 2007 survey by the Employment Law Alliance. Not to mention the 44 percent
who said they have worked for a supervisor or employer whom they consider abusive.
"Document and collect evidence of bullying incidents. If workplace violence
is an issue, do not delay in reporting concerns to your boss or HR," Bond says.
If it's a personality conflict, confront the bully one-on-one in private about
what was done and what's not acceptable, Bond adds. Seek legal counsel for strategy
support.
If some children seem like
they were born to be bad, new research suggests it may be true.
In a study of adult twins
and their children, researchers found that genes, rather than parents' own argumentative
behavior, seemed key in the children's odds of serious conduct problems — like
bullying, skipping school and shoplifting.
One of the most distinguishing feature of toxic managers is "humor impairment".
People tend to hold overly favorable views of their abilities in many social
and intellectual domains. The authors suggest that this overestimation occurs,
in part, because people who are unskilled in these domains suffer a dual burden:
Not only do these people reach erroneous conclusions and make unfortunate choices,
but their incompetence robs them of the metacognitive ability to realize it.
Across 4 studies, the authors found that participants scoring in the bottom
quartile on tests of humor, grammar, and logic grossly overestimated their test
performance and ability. Although their test scores put them in the 12th percentile,
they estimated themselves to be in the 62nd. Several analyses linked this miscalibration
to deficits in metacognitive skill, or the capacity to distinguish accuracy
from error. Paradoxically, improving the skills of participants, and thus increasing
their metacognitive competence, helped them recognize the limitations of their
abilities.
- [1] Suspect flattery. Sincere compliments from
a coworker or a boss are nice, but outrageous
flattery is often an attempt to draw you into a psychopath's snare.
If you feel your ego is being massaged, you may be dealing with a psychopath.
Be careful.
- [2] Take labels and titles with a grain of salt.
Just because someone is older, has a higher position or more degrees,
or is wealthier than you are does not mean his or her moral judgment
is better than yours.
- [3] Always question authority when it conflicts with your
own sense of right and wrong. This may be hard to do, but it
is crucial to your own career and well-being.
- [4] Never agree to help a psychopath conceal his or her
suspicious activities at work.
- [5] If you are afraid of your boss, never
confuse this feeling with respect.
- [6] Realistically assess the damage to your life.
If it's too great, you may have to leave.
Remember that living well is the best revenge.
Here are some things you should consider before taking any action:
1. Keep doing your job and don’t let your emotions get the best of you.
Remain professional and don’t do or say anything
you may later regret.
2. Document your work and any positive comments others in the company
have made about you in case you ever need to refer to examples of your track
record with the company should the need arise i.e. if you get fired and
your boss blames you for the problem(s).
3. Remember that when you start talking to others in the company about
the problems you have with your boss, your comments
could end up reaching your boss and causing even more trouble.
4. Depending on the actual problem with your boss, you might consider
speaking with them directly about it as they may not even be aware it is
a problem. First, make sure the problem is real and that you’re doing everything
you could be doing so that your boss can’t put the problem back in your
lap.
5. Consider approaching a member of Human Resources to confidentially
discuss the problem. If the treatment you are receiving is illegal (i.e.
harassment) you might consult directly with a labor lawyer especially if
you don’t feel comfortable going to HR.
6. Find examples (i.e. on Internet career
websites, from labor organizations) that specify options for handling your
specific problem. Dealing with a mean manager would be quite
different from dealing with a manager who doesn’t delegate properly so look
for examples of similar situations that other people have faced and how
they handled it.
7. Going above your manager’s head and speaking with someone above them
(ie. their manager) is probably not a good idea especially if it gets back
to your boss that you did this.
8. Keep your eyes open for opportunities to transfer somewhere else within
the company and short of that, look to see what jobs are available outside
the company just in case it comes to this.
Although you will ideally reach a positive conclusion without having to change
jobs, sometimes this is just not possible.
At the end of the day, no job is worth keeping if you have a bad boss who
is making your life hell and if it appears they aren’t going to change or leave
the company.
Carl Mueller is an Internet entrepreneur and professional recruiter who wants
to help you
find your dream career.Visit Carl's website to separate yourself
from other job searchers:
http://www.find-your-dream-career.com
Ezine editors/Webmasters: Please feel free to reprint this article in its
entirety in your ezine or on your website. Please don’t change any of the content
and please ensure that you include the above bio that shows my website URL.
If you would like me to address any specific career topics in future articles,
please let me know.
Article Source:
http://EzineArticles.com/?expert=Carl_Mueller
Here are some things you should consider before taking any action:
1. Keep doing your job and don’t let your emotions get the best of you.
Remain professional and don’t do or say anything you may later regret.
2. Document your work and any positive comments others in the company
have made about you in case you ever need to refer to examples of your track
record with the company should the need arise ie. if you get fired and your
boss blames you for the problem(s).
3. Remember that when you start talking to others in the company about
the problems you have with your boss, your comments could end up reaching
your boss and causing even more trouble.
4. Depending on the actual problem with your boss, you might consider
speaking with them directly about it as they may not even be aware it is
a problem. First, make sure the problem is real and that you’re doing everything
you could be doing so that your boss can’t put the problem back in your
lap.
5. Consider approaching a member of Human Resources to confidentially
discuss the problem. If the treatment you are receiving is illegal (ie.
harassment) you might consult directly with a labor lawyer especially if
you don’t feel comfortable going to HR.
6. Find examples (ie. on Internet career websites, from labor organizations)
that specify options for handling your specific problem. Dealing with a
mean manager would be quite different from dealing with a manager who doesn’t
delegate properly so look for examples of similar situations that other
people have faced and how they handled it.
7. Going above your manager’s head and speaking with someone above them
(ie. their manager) is probably not a good idea especially if it gets back
to your boss that you did this.
8. Keep your eyes open for opportunities to transfer somewhere else within
the company and short of that, look to see what jobs are available outside
the company just in case it comes to this.
Although you will ideally reach a positive conclusion without having to change
jobs, sometimes this is just not possible.
At the end of the day, no job is worth keeping if you have a bad boss who
is making your life hell and if it appears they aren’t going to change or leave
the company.
Carl Mueller is an Internet entrepreneur and professional recruiter who
wants to help you
find your
dream career.
Visit Carl's website to separate yourself from other
job searchers:
http://www.find-your-dream-career.com
Ezine editors/Webmasters: Please feel free to reprint this article in
its entirety in your ezine or on your website. Please don’t change any of
the content and please ensure that you include the above bio that shows
my website URL. If you would like me to address any specific career topics
in future articles, please let me know.
... In the years since, I've heard countless tales of bosses who rant and
rave, give their employees the silent treatment, ignore them, mock them, glare
at them, insult and belittle them in front of others, spread false rumors about
them, withhold the information they need to do their work -- and take credit
for everything they've done. Employees working in these conditions often find
their physical health, mental health, and confidence so destroyed that they
lack even the confidence to leave and instead find themselves trapped in a world
of psychological violence.
In talking to people about their work, it has been so hard to find people
without at least one such experience that it's made me wonder how systemic bullying
is in our business environment. The lowest estimate says that 12% of workers
are bullied; others put it as high as 50%. Women are as likely as men to be
toxic bosses -- but women are 80% more likely to be the targets. Men pick on
women -- and women pick on women. The abused are neither young nor thin skinned
but tend to be in their 40s, with years of experience behind them.
And toxic bosses don't work alone -- 77% of them
enlist others to help. So widespread is this phenomenon that
lawyers seeking some legal remedy have found that in many cases, people see
abuse and stress as simply intrinsic to employment."
Is a poor economy to blame? High unemployment combined with an increasing
dependence on temporary and contingent labor means that companies have more
vulnerable employees to pick on. But while the economic slump may exacerbate
bullying, it doesn't explain why it is so deeply embedded in our workplace culture.
... ... ...
A business culture that celebrates aggression, toughness, endurance, and
the ability to endure pain, as our does, runs dangerously close to endorsing
bully bosses. As long as we perpetuate the myth that business is not emotional,
we fail to develop the language we need to deal