'13' Reasons Why People Are Jerks At Work

Everyone has a bad day now and then.  There are people, however, who don’t simply have a bad day. They have a bad decade.  Where does this come from?  Sue Pivetta of Professional Pride has identified 13 instances that if not addressed can lead to perpetual negative behavior.

Take a look at the list below. The first element is the cause followed by the behavior.

Do any of these stand out to you?   Do co-workers or management suffer from these pernicious feelings?  The first step to improvement is identifying the problem.  Let the games begin….

1. Lack of control causing people to exert control in inappropriate ways or hold on with a death grip to any areas of control that they believe that they have.
2. Inability to set boundaries resulting is others feeling steam rolled or violated by comments that are personal attacks.
3. Feelings of abandonment causing people withdraw and not share information.
4. Feelings of dependence resulting in people unable to make independent decisions or act without first getting permission-not matter how minor the action.
5. Need to be liked or listened to causing people to avoid conversations, agree with whomever is in the room. OR repeating, repeating, repeating, repeating the same story or complaint over & over & over again.
6. Authority and power Issues causing individuals to take actions on either side of a broad spectrum. On one end, if they love power and authority they will try and make people bow down to their ideas, proposals, ways of doing things because “I am the boss” or “you have to pay your dues” or “this is the way it was for me, it will be the way it was for you.”  Alternatively, there are folks who HATE people who have authority over them. They will be contrary simply to assert their own independence as a way to say “You are not the boss of me” even if you are.
7. Need for excitement and chaos.  Yes, there are drama queens and kings out there. They will create drama to show how valuable they are. They need something to focus on.  They need to create a driving force to stir up the daily routine.
8. Loyalties and protectiveness. Resulting in coalition building and backing individuals or ideas simply to back the person.
9. Low professional or personal self-esteem causing individuals not to contribute, take calculated risks and become the “go along, get along” lump.
10. Disappointment over being unfulfilled resulting in individuals withdrawing emotionally and physically from the work. Increase absenteeism. No participation in meetings. Work pace slows & performance suffers.
11. Personal professional needs not met resulting in frustration and job/life dissatisfaction.  May become shorter tempers, time on the internet searching for new jobs, push back on new initiatives at work or statements that “it doesn’t matter anyway!”
12. Personality type, learned behavior causing individuals to play the role of victim or bully.  Increased complaints & water cooler conversations.
13. Follower personality, lack of personal power resulting in minimal amount of engagement. Follower characteristics are good.  This situation is bad because the follow is completely overshadowed the leader who may be a handful themselves.  The follower will not take any action against or contradict the leader.  The follower is assimilated into a coalition and voiceless.

Comment (0)

There is something delicious about sitting in judgment of others.

I was having coffee with someone last week and the subject  of judging others came up.

It got me thinking....why do we sit in judgment of others?

Is it because it is part of our job description?

Is it because we like being "right" and telling others that they are "wrong" or at least "not as right as we are?"

More importantly, what is the impact on us, the workplace, and our peers when we sit in judgment of others AND do so inappropriately?

What I mean by "inappropriately"?

Let me paint a picture...You are working hard.  Someone says something to you that YOU find dumb, insensitive, or whacked.  You make a determination about that person's character and competence BUT you never check it out to see if the person INTENDED to mean, insensitive or whacked.

As a result, your working relationship changes for the worse.

I will bet for those people with whom you have a poor working relationship that you can point to an exact moment when the relationship went downhill.

Now take 5 seconds to evaluate if you ever checked in with the person to verify if they did indeed INTEND to damage you or the working relationship.  If you didn't verify their intention then you may have inappropriately sat in judgment.

Comment (1)

I am always amazed of people’s need to be “Right” and how the need to be “Right” impedes the process of problem solving. So why is it that we want to resolve conflict but hold on so tightly to being “Right” and explaining the “Rightness” of our position with so much righteousness that we escalate the argument?

Comment (0)

Danger, Will Robinson! Danger! Some of you may know that there are a ton of new federal laws going into effect. Americans with Disabilities Act has been amended. COBRA -the law impacting insurance coverage once someone leaves a job- has new provisions.

I spent the better part of the last two weeks attending seminars to get up to date-me and a whole bunch of Human Resource folks. We were the lucky ones. I have heard through the grapevine that employers are no long paying for HR to attend these seminars in an effort to manage costs. The consequence is that the key people within the organization don’t know what is going on or the best practices to implement the changes.

Here is the really scary part…

Employees rely on other employees or a trusted adviser such as a parent, spouse or union shop steward to learn about “the way things work.” unfortunately, the advise they get is often outright wrong or misapplied.

The reality is that employees-at all levels-get a little bit of information then “fill in the gaps” with a “common sense approach.” This spells danger for both the employer and the employee. First, the law does not care about common sense. The law cares about how a particular provision can be universally applied. Thus, the laws are written to apply to large corporations as well as smaller organizations. So one employee’s definition of “the common sense thing to do” is rarely what the law requires.

The scarier reality is that most employment discrimination claims- in my experience- arise from mid-level managers not knowing or understanding the intersection of the law and company policy. Most employees will not go to Human Resources with questions about ADA or FMLA leave. They will go to their lead or direct supervisor. If the employee misinterprets or the the lead/supervisor misinforms, what the respective obligations are under the law-there will be trouble.

Trouble = more filings with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission or State Human Rights Agencies.

So what to do? Have a campaign to make everyone smart on the rights and responsibilities of both sides of the employment relationship. If your are an employee-you should know what you are entitled to AND where that entitlement stops.

If you are an Employer-Tell the employees what you expect of them and what you will and will not do.

Here is a link to a Seattle Law Firm that talks generally about the New ADA.

Comment (0)

No surprise. News of recession will have a negative impact on employee morale. Disheartened employees mean disengaged employees. In the current economic climate if a business is to survive, the work force must be fully engaged-emotionally, physically, even spiritually.

The unfortunate reality is that many companies will go under because of failure to motivate, empower, and acknowledge their employees.

Instead of deliberately and consistently communicating with employees, employers will go into “shut down” mode. The result will be increased fear among employees and mistrust of management.

According to the Respectful Workplace Blog:

“Communicate constantly to minimize uncertainty. Uncertainty arouses the fear circuits in the brain and is an absolute killer to employee productivity. When people are unsure about the stability of their organization, their standing with their boss or supervisor, or a clear understanding of what’s expected of them, most assume the worst. The ensuing stress decreases the amount of a chemical called dopamine in the brain, a chemical that is critical for clear thinking and reasoning by the prefrontal cortex. Continuous uncertainty can also increase the levels of cortisol in the body, too much of which can permanently damage both the brain and the circulatory system.”

The morale to this story is that survival in the current economy will depend on EVERYONE in the organization bringing their best selves to work.

Comment (0)

In the traditional models of male group dynamics the new members of the group undergo some form of hazing to “earn” their way into the group. Once “in” the group, the new guy is made the butt of jokes or “given grief” as a demonstration of his belonging.
Ask a women the last time, she felt “in” when she was made the butt of a joke. To the average female, being made the object of exclusion or ridicule is the exact opposite of belonging and a BIG BLINKING SIGNAL THAT SHE STOP TRYING TO BECOME PART OF THE GROUP BECAUSE-for whatever reason- SHE IS NOT WELCOME. In the workplace, the worst thing is to be viewed as disengaged or “not team player”.

In life, it is awful to feel purposefully excluded and have no control to “get back into the game.” What maybe intended as a sign of inclusion-kidding around, target of practical jokes-teasing maybe perceived as harassment, retaliation or purposeful exclusion. NOT what is desired in the workplace for full engagement.

Think about it. Then take a look around. How does your workgroup let individuals know that they are “Teamplayers”? How do you? Is this based on “the way we have always done it?” Is it possible that your method falls into either a “male” or “female” model?

If so, have there been any unintended consequences??

Comment (0)

In the traditional models of male group dynamics the new members of the group undergo some form of hazing to “earn” their way into the group. Once “in” the group, the new guy is made the butt of jokes or “given grief” as a demonstration of his belonging.
Ask a women the last time, she felt “in” when she was made the butt of a joke. To the average female, being made the object of exclusion or ridicule is the exact opposite of belonging and a BIG BLINKING SIGNAL THAT SHE STOP TRYING TO BECOME PART OF THE GROUP BECAUSE-for whatever reason- SHE IS NOT WELCOME. In the workplace, the worst thing is to be viewed as disengaged or “not team player”.

In life, it is awful to feel purposefully excluded and have no control to “get back into the game.” What maybe intended as a sign of inclusion-kidding around, target of practical jokes-teasing maybe perceived as harassment, retaliation or purposeful exclusion. NOT what is desired in the workplace for full engagement.

Think about it. Then take a look around. How does your workgroup let individuals know that they are “Teamplayers”? How do you? Is this based on “the way we have always done it?” Is it possible that your method falls into either a “male” or “female” model?

If so, have there been any unintended consequences??

Comment (0)

At work, humor can be used to build or break working relationships. Often men and women have the same intent -to build a sense of camaraderie -when joking or kidding around.

However, women jest. Men joust.

The Jester, if you will, will use self deprecating humor or feel good humor.

The Jouster will use humor to skewer or unseat the opponent and for the benefit of others. It is humor and one- ups-manship. And unless you are prepared to skewer back, it can be a demoralizing experience.

Not a big deal? Oh contraire! I hear of more women leaving male-dominated environments because of the Jousting Atmosphere.

As one woman put it “there was just too much testosterone! The men did not know when to dial it down!”

I am not saying that men need to become women with penises. Nor should women be men with breasts. What I am saying is that everyone should be conscientious of how they use humor in work groups.

So are you a Jester or a Jouster? Have you ever been a Jester in a group of Jousters? Or a Jouster in a group of Jesters? (For that second one, will anyone fess up if the Jouster with the Jesters might have led to complaints of bullying or harassment? Just wondering…)

Comment (0)

True story. A woman worked for a small business. Boss/owner was in the office everyday and hyper-viligilent about “customer service.” The company offices were small enough so that every phone call could be heard. More important for this story, the single-stall restroom was immediately off of the main work area. When a customer called and sales reps were in the restroom, the boss would stand–get this–outside the door and yell that “Your client is on the phone! Hurry up!”

Nice.

Now as a business owner and as a consumer, I am all about providing great customer service, but come on!!! What this boss did not appreciate was the signifcance of recognizing and honoring personal and professional boundaries. As a result, he created a very uncomfortable workplace.

Did the conduct rise to the level of illegal harassment or bullying. Probably not. Did it create uncomfortable situations in the workplace. You bet. Unfortunately, the problem of not repecting boundaries or too intrusive bosses is widespread.

Take a look at About.com’s workplace site or one of my favorate siteshttp://www.badbossology.com/

Each of us has a personal and professional boundary and if someone comes trespassing it is up to you to tell the offending party. No fair playing the “he should know” card. Maybe he should know. Maybe you should remind him (or her).

If you want some guidance on how to start or stay in the conversation, take a look at my website http://www.managingconflict.com/ for free articles.

Comment (0)