Four Bay Staters on eBossWatch’s 2011 “America’s Worst Bosses” list

Four denizens of the Bay State have been named to eBossWatch’s “America’s Worst Bosses” list for 2011. Each year, eBossWatch assembles a panel of workplace experts who evaluate leading candidates for the distinction, basing their selections largely on publicly available records and news reports.

In addition to the personal hurt inflicted by their actions, some of these bosses are costing their employers a lot of money. eBossWatch reports that as “of December 2011, the 2011 America’s Worst Bosses have cost their employers over $145 million in monetary damages and lawsuit settlement payments.”

Jay Severin’s “grateful” interns

Former WTKK-FM talk show host Jay Severin finished No. 6 in this year’s listing after he bragged about his conquests of young interns and employees (link here):

Jay Severin, a controversial talk radio host at WTKK-FM, was fired after admitting on air that he slept with his interns and that they should be grateful for it.

Severin said, “I slept with virtually every young college girl I hired to be an intern or an employee for my firm.

“That’s not the purpose for which they were hired but it certainly was an ancillary dimension of the job.

“Those girls that got to sleep with me got to know their boss better, they got to go on trips, they got to travel in some cases to various parts of the world, to see things and meet people that they never would have seen or done.

Sexual harassment and sewing assignments at the Hull P.D.?

The Hull Police Department seems to be stuck in another era — the Neanderthal Age, perhaps? — when it comes to how it treats women, at least according to a lawsuit alleging harassment inflicted by top brass Richard Billings, Robert Sawtelle, and Dale Shea, who collectively ranked 51st in the 2011 list (link here):

A female police officer in Hull has filed a scathing harassment lawsuit against the department’s chief and two top commanders, alleging the men regularly demeaned her with sexist slurs, and forced her to mend other officers’ uniforms while off duty.

Wendy Cope-Allen, an officer on the Hull force since 2003, is accusing Police Chief Richard Billings and two other supervisory officers, Captain Robert Sawtelle and Lieutenant Dale Shea, of “pervasive and severe’’ sexual harassment, and contends they routinely denigrated other female employees in the department.

Organizational cultures

I appreciate eBossWatch for its annual list and other ways in which it informs us about gruesome workplaces. The annual list, in particular, serves as a stark reminder of how people can be mistreated, even when laws exist that address the offending behavior.

In addition, as I’ve said before, we must remember that dysfunctional organizational cultures often play a huge role in encouraging or enabling these behaviors. Changing those cultures is as important as dealing with individual bad apples and the damage they inflict.

What does ABC’s “Revenge” teach us about workplace injustice?

I’ve never been a fan of soap operas, but a very soapy new primetime drama, ABC’s “Revenge,” has been a lock on my DVR this fall.

About “Revenge”

“Revenge” is the title, philosophy, and practice of this weekly guilty pleasure. The story features a young woman, Emily Thorne (played by Emily VanCamp), who mysteriously appears in the Hamptons, New York’s refuge for the ultra wealthy.

Emily is not who she says she is. She’s really Amanda Clarke, and years ago, when Amanda was still a girl, her rich, cutthroat neighbors framed her father for a horrific act of terrorism and essentially destroyed their lives. Emily/Amanda now has returned home to exact revenge on them, in brutally cool and calculated ways. (“Revenge” is said to be loosely patterned after Alexander Dumas’s The Count of Monte Cristo, but believe me, you don’t have to be familiar with the book to get into the show!)

Each new episode features intrigue, manipulation, and carefully planned acts of payback. It also highlights an ongoing cat fight, nay, death battle of the tigresses, between Emily and leading Hamptons socialite Victoria Grayson (played by Madeleine Stowe), a key operative in her father’s disgrace and demise.

This could be a giant recipe for an early series cancellation but for the pitch perfect performances by the lead actresses. VanCamp is the ideal cold-blooded avenger masquerading as the sharp, pretty, sweetheart-next-door. Stowe pulls off her Ice Queen of the Hamptons role — one that easily could become a caricature in the hands of a less-gifted performer — with just the right touch. And when Emily and Victoria are in the same room, well, if looks could kill…

Revenge vs. schadenfreude

Are fans of “Revenge” frustrated avengers pining for a chance to inflict payback on those who have hurt them? If so, then there are millions of us waiting in the wings.

Fortunately, I don’t think this is the case. It boils down to the difference between exacting revenge — i.e., taking an active part in the retribution — and experiencing schadenfreude, the German loanword defined as deriving joy or satisfaction from another’s misfortune. The former involves planning and participation, while the latter represents an emotional response.

For some, a successful act of revenge can result in schadenfreude. For others, schadenfreude is more comfortably experienced as the result of a misfortune visited upon someone by another party or initiative.

I believe that most viewers enjoy “Revenge” because it allows us to revel in a fictional version of the latter variety. After all, cutting through the soap, “Revenge” reminds us that plotting real-life payback easily becomes an all-consuming and blackhearted passion. It often requires the same overheated emotion as the act that inspired it, not to mention a heckuva lot of care and attention to detail if one does not want to get caught.

Furthermore, the vast majority recognize that carrying an unyielding need for vengeance can be a dark, heavy, and unhealthy burden. Even if we struggle to forgive our trespassers, we nevertheless understand the personal costs of devoting ourselves to visiting retribution upon them.

And yet, “Revenge” may satisfy some inner craving for schadenfreude, which allows us to eat our cake but not have to answer for the calories. When one of Emily’s brilliantly designed acts of payback succeeds, it’s hard not to say, hah hah, gotcha!

Workplace revenge fantasies

No doubt that when some viewers are relishing Emily’s latest success, they’re thinking about specific bosses or co-workers who treated them poorly or unfairly.

Indeed, some of the “bad boss” books that I’ve paged through over the years are full of revenge fantasies, imagined and realized. People construct, and occasionally act out, these fantasies because they lack the power to use organizational resources to make things right. And when institutions do not embrace fairness and accountability, those on the receiving end of perceived injustices are left to their own devices and coping skills.

These are no trifling concerns, as I hope this blog has demonstrated. Perceptions of organizational justice impact productivity and individual well-being. Careers, livelihoods, and paychecks are at stake, not to mention personal health and dignity.

“Revenge” doesn’t get into the institutional ripple effects; it’s all personal, either in-your-face or behind-your-back. Ultimately, it isn’t psychologically deep enough to teach us anything more profound than the costs of being obsessed with retribution. But that in itself is a valuable lesson, and it’s delivered in marvelously entertaining fashion to boot.

***

Go here to watch full episodes of “Revenge.”

Fresno school superintendent Larry Powell gives up salary, seeks to protect kids from bullying

This story sounds too good to be true, but I’ll run with it anyway: It’s about a public school superintendent who (1) gave up most of the remaining $800,000 on his contract; (2) serves as a leader in the anti-bullying movement for kids; and (3) earns praise from a leader of a union that negotiates with the school district.

Meet Larry Powell, age 63, the Fresno County (CA) School Superintendent. Tracie Cone of the Associated Press files this story about him (link here):

Some people give back to their community. Then there’s Fresno County School Superintendent Larry Powell, who’s really giving back. As in $800,000 — what would have been his compensation for the next three years.

Until his term expires in 2015, Powell will run 325 schools and 35 school districts with 195,000 students, all for less than a starting California teacher earns.

“How much do we need to keep accumulating?” asks Powell, 63. “There’s no reason for me to keep stockpiling money.”

Cone further reports that Powell “serves on the board of a national anti-bullying group that sprang from the Columbine shootings” and “is so popular he even counts among his friends his contract bargaining nemesis, the former head of the employees’ union.”

Early adversity

It has been a recurring theme on this blog to tout the impact of personal resilience and overcoming adversity in creating society’s difference makers. As Cone adds, Powell fits the bill:

He even sees as an asset his childhood contraction of polio, which left him with a limp and a brace, and now a lingering post-polio syndrome.

“It’s the most spectacular thing that has happened to me in all my life,” he said. “People stepped up to help me be successful.”

Giving back

News accounts indicate that Powell and his wife are secure for retirement and that he’s already reached the maximum pension under the California system. So it’s not as if he’s taking a vow of poverty by giving up most of his remaining salary.

But that doesn’t mean we should dismiss the significance of this gesture.

Right now we’re witnessing a mini-debate over whether America’s super rich should pay higher income taxes, sparked by Warren Buffett’s recent op-ed piece positing that he and other billionaires should be taxed at a higher rate for the betterment of society. By comparison, Larry Powell — a well-compensated public servant — has taken an immediate action route, opting to forgo most of his remaining salary. Bingo. Done.

We need such role models in visible positions, and it appears that Powell is one of those rarities. Take a look at Cone’s article and see if you don’t feel a little bit better about the ability of individuals to inspire others and serve as positive examples.

Why so many managers are mediocre or bad: They weren’t promoted because they are good leaders

This has been a recurring observation, repeated by different individuals in different circles, in person and online: So many people who are in positions of authority were put there for reasons other than their leadership ability.

Good at this, but not necessarily at that

They may have been named to the job because they were very good at what they did: A managing partner of a law firm who was a first-rate trial lawyer. A nurse supervisor who was an excellent ER nurse. A dean who was an inspiring professor.  A foreperson who was a highly productive shop floor worker. A coach who was a standout player.

Unfortunately, what they did well often has little to do with the skill set needed in their new leadership positions. Many of these folks crash and burn, or simply bumble along, because they were ill-prepared for the job ahead and didn’t quite understand the human side of their new responsibilities.

No threat to the puppet masters

Others may have been promoted because the folks who put them there didn’t want a good leader. Instead, they sought a feckless crony, puppet, or weakling they knew they could control. As writer William Deresiewicz said in his superb speech about leaders and leadership to West Point cadets:

Why is it so often that the best people are stuck in the middle and the people who are running things—the leaders—are the mediocrities? Because excellence isn’t usually what gets you up the greasy pole.

(Go here for the full speech and here for my blog post commenting on it.)

Leadership 101 training

For those who have the personal qualities to be effective leaders but lack the background and experience, leadership and management training programs emphasizing the so-called “soft skills” would help sensitize them to the human aspects of their jobs.

In fact, it’s arguable that basic management training should be part of all professional degree programs, such as medicine, education, law, and business. This initial exposure can be augmented by continuing education offerings for those elevated to leadership positions.

Nevertheless, if someone plainly lacks the personal qualities to be a good leader (e.g., the crony, puppet, or weakling), then all the training in the world likely won’t make much of a difference. That person will fold like an accordion when it’s time to make a tough, principled decision.

In any event, until promotions to leadership and management positions are based upon, duh, leadership and management skills, too many organizations will fall well short of reaching their potential and building an engaged, high-morale workforce.

It’s “movie night” for WBI University: A short review of “Horrible Bosses”

Attendees of the latest WBI University — the intensive, small group, 3-day training and education seminar about workplace bullying led by Drs. Gary and Ruth Namie — took the night off to screen the opening of “Horrible Bosses,” the new comedy about three hapless guys who conspire to kill their bullying and harassing bosses.

“Horrible Bosses” stars Jason Bateman, Charlie Day, Jason Sudeikis as the unhappy office workers, Jennifer Aniston, Colin Farrell, and Kevin Spacey as the horrible bosses, and Jamie Foxx as the would-be assassin.

I’d say this is our general consensus review: “Horrible Bosses” is funny, clever, and unexpectedly raunchy. It is not, however, a particularly brilliant or insightful send-up of workplace bullying and related behaviors.

Some of us in the workplace bullying movement had hoped that this movie — with its mega-publicity and star power — might serve as a humorous consciousness-raising vehicle. Alas, the movie is too over-the-top in a Hollywood, R-rated sense to serve that purpose.

Especially if you don’t mind crude language and overgrown fraternity house humor (okay, I found myself howling with laughter at times), you may find this movie a fun diversion. It won’t teach you a lot about the complex dynamics of workplace bullying, but it will make it easier to forget a lousy day at the office.

More (and perhaps more and more) on bad bosses

The theme of bad bosses is popping up a lot these days in the popular media, and the trend appears likely to continue.

Five types of bad bosses

For example, Amy Levin-Epstein, writing for CBS MoneyWatch (link here), identifies five types of bad bosses:

“The Vague One”

“The Micromanager”

“The Bully”

“The Narcissist”

“The BFF”

I’ll quarrel a bit with her categories and suggest that narcissistic bosses often are among the worst bullies.

More importantly, I’ll once again take issue with the common practice of offering one-size-fits-all advice on handling bad bosses. Each situation is different, and a miscalculation can have serious consequences. It’s not something easily reduced to a line or two in an advice column.

Coming to a theatre near you

In early July, the movie “Horrible Bosses” will be opening at theatres across the country. You can click the link to the trailer above. Here’s what the blog ReallyBadBoss is saying about it (link here):

Hollywood is banking on the fact that zillions of Americans hate their bad bosses enough to fork over the $10+ price of admission to see Jason Bateman, Jason Sudeikis and Charlie Day plot the ultimate demise of their respective bosses played by Kevin Spacey – a white color [sic] schmuck -, Jennifer Aniston  – a sexual predator – and Colin Farrell – a drug addicted, fiercely-combed-over pig.

With this type of movie, I think we’re looking at either a smash success or a soon-to-be-forgotten flop. If “Horrible Bosses” strikes the right chord with moviegoers’ experiences of work, it could join “The Devil Wears Prada,” “Office Space,” and “Nine to Five” on the list of leading cinematic portrayals of the joys of working in offices.

***

Related posts

Getting back at a bad boss

Website of the Week: eBossWatch

Most Bosses Think They’re Great (and How They COULD Be)

Getting back at a bad boss

Let’s say your boss sexually harassed a co-worker to the point where she quit her job to avoid further advances.

Is it acceptable for you to retaliate against the boss?

Charness/Levine study

Gary Charness (UC-Santa Barbara) and David Levine (UC-Berkeley) investigated that question. They conducted experiments to determine where people drew the line on retaliating against bad bosses, presenting hypothetical scenarios involving improper behavior by bosses and asking participants to indicate what types of retaliation might be acceptable.

Here’s a summary of their findings from strategy + business (link here; free registration may be necessary):

When is it okay to “get back at” a boss? It’s a thought that has occurred to many disgruntled employees, whether they have been discriminated against, believe they were passed over for promotion, or feel their work is unappreciated. According to this study, getting revenge against a supervisor is more acceptable to employees when the retaliation is an act of omission or inaction — essentially not doing something — than when it is an active attempt to cause harm.

Gender patterns

Just as we’re seeing evidence that women are more likely to use indirect means to engage in uncivil work behaviors, the Charness-Levine study also found that women were more likely to support passive forms of retaliation.

Shades of the 90s!

The Charness-Levine study echoes a spate of “bad boss” books, aimed at a popular readership, that appeared in the 1990s. For example, in The I Hate My Job Handbook: How to Deal with Hell at Work (1996), Ellen Tien & Valerie Frankel offer up (with big doses of humor) various strategies for striking back at bad bosses, including harmless pranks, anonymous pestering, selective vandalism, mockery & humiliation, and outright sabotage.

A darker take on getting back is Martin Sprouse, ed., Sabotage in the American Workplace: Anecdotes of Dissatisfaction, Mischief and Revenge (1992), which is loaded with purportedly true tales collected by the editor.

Norma Rae, meet Dilbert

In a 1998 law review article about freedom of speech at work (link here), I suggested that the appearance of these books and the popularity of the comic strip character Dilbert, the disgruntled cubicle dweller, indicated that workers were seeking “outlets for pent-up anger and frustration stemming from their work experiences.” Very few employees felt comfortable voicing their opinions and concerns openly at work, so they identified with expression that had gone underground.

Back to the future

Fifteen or twenty years later, not much has changed. Too many workers legitimately fear retaliation if they engage in responsible questioning or criticism of management decisions. And with the continued decline of the labor movement, fewer workers have the solidarity of a union to address concerns collectively.

In such a milieu, workers are more likely to engage in passive, indirect, and anonymous forms of retaliation than to risk their jobs by speaking openly and honestly. So long as too many employers choose to engage in command-and-control management practices, oppose labor unions, and retaliate against whistleblowers, this will remain the case.

***

For the full article, Gary Charness & David I. Levine, When Is Employee Retaliation Acceptable? Evidence from Quasi-Experiments, Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society (2010), go here.

Hat tip to eBossWatch for the strategy + business article.