Thursday, May 20, 2010
Monday, May 3, 2010
In the workplace
Toxic Waste: The Narcissistic Employee
It’s highly likely that during your career you’ll come into contact with what’s called the destructive narcissist. Now that’s bad if it’s a co-worker, but if it turns out to be your manager then you have a big problem.
Narcissism is defined as a personality disorder by the National Institutes of Health, where there is an inflated sense of self-importance and an extreme preoccupation with one’s self. Now that’s a bit of a medical mouthful, but to me the destructive narcissist is simply the worst form of arrogant, controlling and manipulative bullying that occurs in the workplace.
So first of all, how do you spot a destructive narcissist and what traits do they exhibit in the workplace? It’s not hard:
- Destructive narcissists can be flamboyant, charismatic and extremely articulate. In many cases, co-workers and reports are initially won over by their charismatic power.
- They are arrogant and self-centered, expecting to have the floor during meetings and needing special treatment and privileges.
- The narcissistic is patronizing and critical of co-workers but is unwilling to accept any form of criticism. When challenged, the narcissistic can even get into fits of rage.
- They are masters at setting up peer level managers up for failure and will even pit workers against each other.
- In many cases they can be just darn right cruel to their reports, often targeting weakness and harassing people until they quit their jobs.
- They crave what’s called the “narcissistic supply”, that is the supply of workers who can be easily manipulated and pander to their every whim. If you were ever bullied at school, you’ll know these people; they follow the bully around, doing everything to seek favour.
On a personal level, having to deal with destructive narcissists can be bad enough, but if left unchecked by the organization (and in particular HR / personnel) they can create such a traumatic and toxic environment that talented people are forced to leave. Eventually the repeat behaviours of the narcissistic may be called into account and that person may be fired, but this does nothing to protect the business from other narcissists working across the organization. In some situations I’ve even seen such destructive behaviors encouraged by an organization, with narcissists rampant in senior level management and executive positions. I’ll be writing more about these situations in a future blog, but for now if you find yourself working in such a toxic organization I can only advise you to do one thing – leave (and do it quickly).
But enough of the doom and gloom, what can we do at a practical level to address toxic employee issues in the workplace. Well, it’s not easy, since any form of toxic waste is harmful. Moving it to another department won’t remove the problem, it just spreads the poison to another area. Diluting it, my adding more talented folks to the mix doesn’t work either because they’ll eventually succumb to the poison themselves or the productivity of the department will fall dramatically.
Many councillors and psychologists suggest good strategies for dealing with a narcissistic (as a manager or as a report), but to me these are defensive. Narcissists can remain in organizations for years, so it’s not up to a co-worker to just ‘deal with the problem’, but rather the onus is on management and HR to systematically document their behaviors and assess their contribution before they disrupt things dramatically. Remember, narcissistic behavior can cost an organization mega $’s due to stress related illness, absenteeism and rising staff turnover.
This is where talent and performance management can play a key role. As a manager if you suspect one of your team is a destructive narcissist then use the system to document goals, objectives and achievements. Look to set and measure progress based on attributes like inclusion and team work, rather than one off tasks. Once you have a thorough and documented chart of their behaviors and shortfalls, be prepared to work with HR to enact the appropriate strategies. Remember, the destructive narcissist is adept at ‘working around the system’, so make sure the systems you have in place can accurately record and measure their behaviors and any complaints received. At all times ensure swift action is taken, bearing in mind that many talented victims of the destructive narcissist will leave the organization if nothing is done to improve their situation in the short term.
So how do you as a employee, manager or HR professional deal with the toxic employees in the workplace? I’d love to hear from you!
Zapeteo
Living in a land far-far-away, Zapeteo writes about anything and everything related to the management and mentoring of really talented people. As such, he frowns on wooden phrases like ‘human capital management’ and ‘performance-based culture’. Instead preferring to discuss real issues, involving real people and especially what can help them build fruitful and rewarding careers.
It’s highly likely that during your career you’ll come into contact with what’s called the destructive narcissist. Now that’s bad if it’s a co-worker, but if it turns out to be your manager then you have a big problem.
Narcissism is defined as a personality disorder by the National Institutes of Health, where there is an inflated sense of self-importance and an extreme preoccupation with one’s self. Now that’s a bit of a medical mouthful, but to me the destructive narcissist is simply the worst form of arrogant, controlling and manipulative bullying that occurs in the workplace.
So first of all, how do you spot a destructive narcissist and what traits do they exhibit in the workplace? It’s not hard:
- Destructive narcissists can be flamboyant, charismatic and extremely articulate. In many cases, co-workers and reports are initially won over by their charismatic power.
- They are arrogant and self-centered, expecting to have the floor during meetings and needing special treatment and privileges.
- The narcissistic is patronizing and critical of co-workers but is unwilling to accept any form of criticism. When challenged, the narcissistic can even get into fits of rage.
- They are masters at setting up peer level managers up for failure and will even pit workers against each other.
- In many cases they can be just darn right cruel to their reports, often targeting weakness and harassing people until they quit their jobs.
- They crave what’s called the “narcissistic supply”, that is the supply of workers who can be easily manipulated and pander to their every whim. If you were ever bullied at school, you’ll know these people; they follow the bully around, doing everything to seek favour.
On a personal level, having to deal with destructive narcissists can be bad enough, but if left unchecked by the organization (and in particular HR / personnel) they can create such a traumatic and toxic environment that talented people are forced to leave. Eventually the repeat behaviours of the narcissistic may be called into account and that person may be fired, but this does nothing to protect the business from other narcissists working across the organization. In some situations I’ve even seen such destructive behaviors encouraged by an organization, with narcissists rampant in senior level management and executive positions. I’ll be writing more about these situations in a future blog, but for now if you find yourself working in such a toxic organization I can only advise you to do one thing – leave (and do it quickly).
But enough of the doom and gloom, what can we do at a practical level to address toxic employee issues in the workplace. Well, it’s not easy, since any form of toxic waste is harmful. Moving it to another department won’t remove the problem, it just spreads the poison to another area. Diluting it, my adding more talented folks to the mix doesn’t work either because they’ll eventually succumb to the poison themselves or the productivity of the department will fall dramatically.
Many councillors and psychologists suggest good strategies for dealing with a narcissistic (as a manager or as a report), but to me these are defensive. Narcissists can remain in organizations for years, so it’s not up to a co-worker to just ‘deal with the problem’, but rather the onus is on management and HR to systematically document their behaviors and assess their contribution before they disrupt things dramatically. Remember, narcissistic behavior can cost an organization mega $’s due to stress related illness, absenteeism and rising staff turnover.
This is where talent and performance management can play a key role. As a manager if you suspect one of your team is a destructive narcissist then use the system to document goals, objectives and achievements. Look to set and measure progress based on attributes like inclusion and team work, rather than one off tasks. Once you have a thorough and documented chart of their behaviors and shortfalls, be prepared to work with HR to enact the appropriate strategies. Remember, the destructive narcissist is adept at ‘working around the system’, so make sure the systems you have in place can accurately record and measure their behaviors and any complaints received. At all times ensure swift action is taken, bearing in mind that many talented victims of the destructive narcissist will leave the organization if nothing is done to improve their situation in the short term.
So how do you as a employee, manager or HR professional deal with the toxic employees in the workplace? I’d love to hear from you!
Zapeteo
Living in a land far-far-away, Zapeteo writes about anything and everything related to the management and mentoring of really talented people. As such, he frowns on wooden phrases like ‘human capital management’ and ‘performance-based culture’. Instead preferring to discuss real issues, involving real people and especially what can help them build fruitful and rewarding careers.
Saturday, April 10, 2010
Observing the Narcissist
Ah, yes. The mouth opens and a fiery of hurtful words come rushing out. They are spread to every ear in sight. And the world must join the hateclub that the narcissist is the leader of.
The remarkable amount of followers keeps multiplying, and I'm amazed. People deal with this poison and maybe try to avoid being the next victim. Stay low under that radar or you might be next.
But with each explosion and new topic of the hateclub comes the opportunity for one brave soul to call "bullshit" on the whole thing.
We will see how this pans out.....
The remarkable amount of followers keeps multiplying, and I'm amazed. People deal with this poison and maybe try to avoid being the next victim. Stay low under that radar or you might be next.
But with each explosion and new topic of the hateclub comes the opportunity for one brave soul to call "bullshit" on the whole thing.
We will see how this pans out.....
Mommy Meanest?
Mommy meanest? The dark side of mom blogs
News Type: Event — Fri Apr 9, 2010 9:55 AM EDT
health, web, parenting, bloggers, moms
TODAYMoms
"Those who don't vaccinate deserve to have their children take away."
"Stop taking care of your husband's issues and get a real job."
"You still breastfeed your 18-month old, that's weird!"
While the online mommy community is generally of a positive, supportive nature, there are a few bad, judgmental apples in the bunch. Some criticize others on everything from their parenting style to their sex life. And for many, getting slammed on a blog feels like high school cattiness all over again. Several well-known bloggers, including Isabel Kallman of alphamom.com and Jen Singer of mommysaid.net, appeared on TODAY to discuss the dark side of mommy blogs, detailing the often bitter, super-critical and downright mean tones prevalent on popular blogs. They also shared smart advice on how to move forward after a negative experience.
News Type: Event — Fri Apr 9, 2010 9:55 AM EDT
health, web, parenting, bloggers, moms
TODAYMoms
"Those who don't vaccinate deserve to have their children take away."
"Stop taking care of your husband's issues and get a real job."
"You still breastfeed your 18-month old, that's weird!"
While the online mommy community is generally of a positive, supportive nature, there are a few bad, judgmental apples in the bunch. Some criticize others on everything from their parenting style to their sex life. And for many, getting slammed on a blog feels like high school cattiness all over again. Several well-known bloggers, including Isabel Kallman of alphamom.com and Jen Singer of mommysaid.net, appeared on TODAY to discuss the dark side of mommy blogs, detailing the often bitter, super-critical and downright mean tones prevalent on popular blogs. They also shared smart advice on how to move forward after a negative experience.
Wednesday, April 7, 2010
Friday, April 2, 2010
How to Spot Friends, Enemies, Frenemies and Bullies
Stop bullies and discover who's a friend, an enemy, or in-between.
Published on March 31, 2010
Have you ever been confused about whether to call a schoolmate, family member, coworker, employee, boss, partner, acquaintance, or social contact a friend, an enemy, even a bully, or something in between - a "frenemy?" It turns out that getting clarity, identifying the taxonomy, taking action to prevent sadness, harm or even tragedy is possible, as confusing as it looks on first glance.
We owe Phoebe Prince, Megan Meier, and so many others like them an immediate attempt at understanding and stopping bullying. In its place there needs to be the opposite - an understanding of exactly what makes for a friend.
Maybe you've been on Facebook, Twitter, online matchmaking sites, or had email exchanges with an acquaintance or business contact, or schoolmate and felt concerned about your privacy, being labelled, slandered, or objectified for lack being known personally, or worrying about their intentions?
There's actually a quick, practical way of assessing this.
It may be a more important time than ever to know not just who your friends and enemies are, but those confusing social interactions which, for lack of personal information, connection and in-person meeting, are somewhere in between.
Whether we are talking about women or men, I am sure you have been "crossed" in your time - betrayed, let down, cheated, used, disrespected, or at least turned off in your friendships or dating. It's never been as raw, painful, and as urgent to understand the roots of these as it is right now - in light of yet another suicide in a youth after being chronically bullied - the sad story of Phoebe Prince.
I've thought about this a lot over the past few months, taking people I know or have known, side by side, and wondering what the common factors are. What was the common element in someone who proves to be a friend, an enemy, a bully or a "frenemy" after all is said and done.
This word, "frenemy," is one of those wonderful, comic neologisms was first mentioned on the TV drama, Sex and the City and more recently joked about by Comedy Central host Stephen Colbert, and yet on further reflection, you may realize that it is an incredibly useful word. It addresses those situations where someone smiles to our face, but eventually proves true to have had ulterior motives toward us. Someone who gives us praise one moment, but spreads gossip unnoticed by us the very next. Someone we hire as a consultant, for a service, or for guidance, or whom we know collegially, but are never quite sure is on our side. Is it the money we pay them, the interests we share or differ on, or simply because they are mature enough to often do what's right by others?
Maybe you have noticed that it's very possible to "like" a person and yet not "love" them, or to "love" a person but not "like" them at the moment. This dual aspect of liking and loving in a friendship occurs because these states take place in different areas of the brain. Intellectually, we "like those who are like us," as Robert Cialdini states in his book, Influence: the Power of Persuasion. We like those who share opinions, beliefs, values, goals and common experience or background. Emotionally, we love each other because, simply, we make each other happy and raise each other's self esteem. (Both of these are different things from "desire" or "passion.")
So we have a constructive criticism for our friends, in which we advise, point out flaws, suggest and direct them toward maturity and right without causing offense. We "like those who are like us," and yet, reciprocal altruism is also present in which we "like those who like us." Which is much like being an advocate for each other.
Critical Advocacy
Whether looking at an auto mechanic, a doctor, lawyer, business partner, cosigner on a loan, journalist you are working with, member of a sports team, club, or even someone you are considering to marry, there is an especially useful way to look at people, their intentions toward you, and the quality and degree of friendship bonds you share.
It turns out there are only two common factors to look at, and only one profile of another person absolutely guarantees they are on your side, on your team, and "with you" for the long haul.
I encapsulate it in a phrase I use now, called "Critical Advocacy."
Watching the latest celebrity scandals, political conflicts such as the atrocious harassment of Congressmen, or the ever shifting journalism landscape away from "just the facts" toward what they are calling "Advocacy Journalism," I looked at this term and wondered how it compared to the old view of the classical Critic - one who could be of either the constructive or destructive variety.
Add to this some thought about how important communication is in both our friendships and conflicts, and its inaccuracy when we don't really know others so well personally - that objectification of others that happens through electronic communication at times, and causes "spamming," "flaming," and the threatening, annoying, anonymous naysayers so known to clutter the internet with spiteful, hateful, childish comments.
Clearly, communication has two aspects - it conveys data on the one hand, but emotion on the other.
To read the actions and words of another through a filter for friendship, enemies, and everything in between - "frenemies" - we would need to address both parts. Both the "data" and the "emotion" in their behavior toward us.
"Critical Advocacy" fits that bill.
Your Critics
Someone who is a "critic" in your life - of the positive kind - has the three C's: Concern, Competence, and Constructiveness.
1. First, they are concerned about you enough to want details, and to speak in those details. They have the ability to pay attention to the world around them. They don't make flippant, sloppy, or thoughtless comments about you or in conversation with you. They are "present." They are self-aware, and observant.
2. They are competent to have an opinion on you, your life, and your actions. They aren't ill-informed about who you are, the issues at hand, and have some knowledge and experience with both. Not merely dependent on sheer intelligence, or necessitating it at all, they have a desire to learn and teach, have "lived in yoru shoes," or at least empathy about what it would be like to be you. Some of their expertise may be through formal education, but some through life's experience at the situations at hand. They know what they are talking about in other words.
3. And finally, they are constructive - positive and encouraging, not negative and destructive. They offer solutions and thoughtful suggestions, not merely a period at the end of a negative sentence. This necessitates having good boundaries and maturity, to be a collaborator and compromiser, willing to change their view with new information.
In other words, the Critic addresses the "data" - information about you and the friendship from a place of a mature intellect.
Destructive criticism is negative, opinion-based, and may even then be contaminated with a troubed personal history that has nothing to do with you.
Constructive criticism can be positive, but may be neutral, like a classical, admirable journalist of years past, and while the friend with critical skill may point out things to you that you could do better, need to change, or are even wrongful, they most often will also pair that with a suggested path to better living, solutions, and mutual happiness.
If you've ever had a friend, coworker or romantic relationship in which you knew the person was probably right in their opinion about you, but you left the interaction feeling shame, diminished self-esteem, or confused as to what to do next, you probably had just experienced destructive criticism from someone you can now be sure was other than a real friend.
In their communication to you, look for insight and competence, concern and attention, and the maturity that carries constructiveness with it. You need to know that they know what they are talking about - that they are a fit judge of you and your worth.
Published on March 31, 2010
Have you ever been confused about whether to call a schoolmate, family member, coworker, employee, boss, partner, acquaintance, or social contact a friend, an enemy, even a bully, or something in between - a "frenemy?" It turns out that getting clarity, identifying the taxonomy, taking action to prevent sadness, harm or even tragedy is possible, as confusing as it looks on first glance.
We owe Phoebe Prince, Megan Meier, and so many others like them an immediate attempt at understanding and stopping bullying. In its place there needs to be the opposite - an understanding of exactly what makes for a friend.
Maybe you've been on Facebook, Twitter, online matchmaking sites, or had email exchanges with an acquaintance or business contact, or schoolmate and felt concerned about your privacy, being labelled, slandered, or objectified for lack being known personally, or worrying about their intentions?
There's actually a quick, practical way of assessing this.
It may be a more important time than ever to know not just who your friends and enemies are, but those confusing social interactions which, for lack of personal information, connection and in-person meeting, are somewhere in between.
Whether we are talking about women or men, I am sure you have been "crossed" in your time - betrayed, let down, cheated, used, disrespected, or at least turned off in your friendships or dating. It's never been as raw, painful, and as urgent to understand the roots of these as it is right now - in light of yet another suicide in a youth after being chronically bullied - the sad story of Phoebe Prince.
I've thought about this a lot over the past few months, taking people I know or have known, side by side, and wondering what the common factors are. What was the common element in someone who proves to be a friend, an enemy, a bully or a "frenemy" after all is said and done.
This word, "frenemy," is one of those wonderful, comic neologisms was first mentioned on the TV drama, Sex and the City and more recently joked about by Comedy Central host Stephen Colbert, and yet on further reflection, you may realize that it is an incredibly useful word. It addresses those situations where someone smiles to our face, but eventually proves true to have had ulterior motives toward us. Someone who gives us praise one moment, but spreads gossip unnoticed by us the very next. Someone we hire as a consultant, for a service, or for guidance, or whom we know collegially, but are never quite sure is on our side. Is it the money we pay them, the interests we share or differ on, or simply because they are mature enough to often do what's right by others?
Maybe you have noticed that it's very possible to "like" a person and yet not "love" them, or to "love" a person but not "like" them at the moment. This dual aspect of liking and loving in a friendship occurs because these states take place in different areas of the brain. Intellectually, we "like those who are like us," as Robert Cialdini states in his book, Influence: the Power of Persuasion. We like those who share opinions, beliefs, values, goals and common experience or background. Emotionally, we love each other because, simply, we make each other happy and raise each other's self esteem. (Both of these are different things from "desire" or "passion.")
So we have a constructive criticism for our friends, in which we advise, point out flaws, suggest and direct them toward maturity and right without causing offense. We "like those who are like us," and yet, reciprocal altruism is also present in which we "like those who like us." Which is much like being an advocate for each other.
Critical Advocacy
Whether looking at an auto mechanic, a doctor, lawyer, business partner, cosigner on a loan, journalist you are working with, member of a sports team, club, or even someone you are considering to marry, there is an especially useful way to look at people, their intentions toward you, and the quality and degree of friendship bonds you share.
It turns out there are only two common factors to look at, and only one profile of another person absolutely guarantees they are on your side, on your team, and "with you" for the long haul.
I encapsulate it in a phrase I use now, called "Critical Advocacy."
Watching the latest celebrity scandals, political conflicts such as the atrocious harassment of Congressmen, or the ever shifting journalism landscape away from "just the facts" toward what they are calling "Advocacy Journalism," I looked at this term and wondered how it compared to the old view of the classical Critic - one who could be of either the constructive or destructive variety.
Add to this some thought about how important communication is in both our friendships and conflicts, and its inaccuracy when we don't really know others so well personally - that objectification of others that happens through electronic communication at times, and causes "spamming," "flaming," and the threatening, annoying, anonymous naysayers so known to clutter the internet with spiteful, hateful, childish comments.
Clearly, communication has two aspects - it conveys data on the one hand, but emotion on the other.
To read the actions and words of another through a filter for friendship, enemies, and everything in between - "frenemies" - we would need to address both parts. Both the "data" and the "emotion" in their behavior toward us.
"Critical Advocacy" fits that bill.
Your Critics
Someone who is a "critic" in your life - of the positive kind - has the three C's: Concern, Competence, and Constructiveness.
1. First, they are concerned about you enough to want details, and to speak in those details. They have the ability to pay attention to the world around them. They don't make flippant, sloppy, or thoughtless comments about you or in conversation with you. They are "present." They are self-aware, and observant.
2. They are competent to have an opinion on you, your life, and your actions. They aren't ill-informed about who you are, the issues at hand, and have some knowledge and experience with both. Not merely dependent on sheer intelligence, or necessitating it at all, they have a desire to learn and teach, have "lived in yoru shoes," or at least empathy about what it would be like to be you. Some of their expertise may be through formal education, but some through life's experience at the situations at hand. They know what they are talking about in other words.
3. And finally, they are constructive - positive and encouraging, not negative and destructive. They offer solutions and thoughtful suggestions, not merely a period at the end of a negative sentence. This necessitates having good boundaries and maturity, to be a collaborator and compromiser, willing to change their view with new information.
In other words, the Critic addresses the "data" - information about you and the friendship from a place of a mature intellect.
Destructive criticism is negative, opinion-based, and may even then be contaminated with a troubed personal history that has nothing to do with you.
Constructive criticism can be positive, but may be neutral, like a classical, admirable journalist of years past, and while the friend with critical skill may point out things to you that you could do better, need to change, or are even wrongful, they most often will also pair that with a suggested path to better living, solutions, and mutual happiness.
If you've ever had a friend, coworker or romantic relationship in which you knew the person was probably right in their opinion about you, but you left the interaction feeling shame, diminished self-esteem, or confused as to what to do next, you probably had just experienced destructive criticism from someone you can now be sure was other than a real friend.
In their communication to you, look for insight and competence, concern and attention, and the maturity that carries constructiveness with it. You need to know that they know what they are talking about - that they are a fit judge of you and your worth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
