Back when I was an engineer, if you hung around the cafeteria long enough, you'd hear the term "bean counter." It was a term of disparagement. Today, the Wiktionary defines it, quoting the Financial Times, as "A person, such as an accountant or financial officer, who is concerned with quantification, especially to the exclusion of other matters." They note that the term is "mildly derogatory." My own experience is that there was nothing mild about it, especially during layoffs, downsizing, or other resource squeezes. To be a bean counter, from the point of view of an engineer or other product-oriented employee, was to be a member of a pariah profession.
In more general contexts, a pariah is an outcast. (For the etymology of the term, again I refer you to the Wiktionary.) In organizations, we can define a pariah profession as an outcast profession. It might serve an important function organizationally (as financial experts certainly do), but its members are socially excluded from some circles, often solely on the basis of their professional affiliation. This exclusion applies not only to the professionals associated with the mission of that organizational function, but also to all members of that functional unit. For instance, in an enterprise in which the "Business" folks have little regard for engineers of IT (information technology), they would have similar views of the clerical and administrative employees associated with IT.
The costs of these enmities are enormous. Here are two mechanisms that affect collaborative behavior in organizational cultures that tolerate pariahdom for some of their professions.
- Distortion of contributions
- In meetings and exchanges of communications of all kinds involving pariah professionals, contributions from the pariahs can be distorted in two ways. First, the contributors might tend to structure and time their contributions so as to Disrupted collaborations involving
the pariah profession can
result in inferior outputmaximize the probability of acceptance. For example, they might threaten, temper, cajole, exaggerate, or invoke authority. Second, the recipients of contributions from pariahs tend to interpret those contributions in light of their sources. For example, they might discount, dispute, refute, or disregard those contributions. - These distortions affect the ability of members of pariah professions to contribute the benefit of their expertise to the organization.
- Disruption of collaborations
- When output of the highest quality requires collaboration among people from several professions, any mechanism that limits or distorts contributions from members of one of those professions can degrade the output. At times, to address this problem, collaborators will reject one member of the pariah profession in favor of another whom they regard as more compatible. Unfortunately, if the role of that profession entails acting as a check or modulator of the group's decisions, such substitutions themselves can degrade the output.
- Disrupted collaborations involving the pariah profession can result in output that's inferior, but whose weaknesses lie outside the awareness of the collaborators.
We'll explore pariah-related behaviors that involve information management next time. Next issue in this series Top Next Issue
Are you fed up with tense, explosive meetings? Are you or a colleague the target of a bully? Destructive conflict can ruin organizations. But if we believe that all conflict is destructive, and that we can somehow eliminate conflict, or that conflict is an enemy of productivity, then we're in conflict with Conflict itself. Read 101 Tips for Managing Conflict to learn how to make peace with conflict and make it an organizational asset. Order Now!
Your comments are welcome
Would you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenyrWpTxHuyCrjZbUpner@ChacnoFNuSyWlVzCaGfooCanyon.comSend me your comments by email, or by Web form.About Point Lookout
Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.
This article in its entirety was written by a human being. No machine intelligence was involved in any way.
Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.
Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.
Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.
Related articles
More articles on Conflict Management:
- Virtual Conflict
- Conflict, both constructive and destructive, is part of teamwork. As virtual teams become more common,
we're seeing more virtual conflict — conflict that crosses site boundaries. Dealing with destructive
conflict is difficult enough face-to-face, but in virtual teams, it's especially tricky.
- Dealing with Rapid-Fire Attacks
- When a questioner repeatedly attacks someone within seconds of their starting to reply, complaining
to management about a pattern of abuse can work — if management understands abuse, and if management
wants deal with it. What if management is no help?
- See No Bully, Hear No Bully
- Supervisors of bullies sometimes are unaware of bullying activity in their organizations. Here's a collection
of indicators for supervisors who suspect bullying but who haven't witnessed it directly.
- Unresponsive Suppliers: I
- If we depend on suppliers for some tasks in a project, or for necessary materials, their performance
can affect our ability to meet deadlines. What can we do when a supplier's performance is problematic,
and the supplier doesn't respond to our increasingly urgent pleas for attention?
- Bullying by Proxy: II
- Bullying by proxy occurs when A bullies B at the behest of C. Organizational control of bullying by
proxy is difficult, in part, because C's contribution is covert. Policies that control overt bullying
are less effective at controlling bullying by proxy.
See also Conflict Management and Conflict Management for more related articles.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming December 11: White Water Rafting as a Metaphor for Group Development
- Tuckman's model of small group development, best known as "Forming-Storming-Norming-Performing," applies better to development of some groups than to others. We can use a metaphor to explore how the model applies to Storming in task-oriented work groups. Available here and by RSS on December 11.
- And on December 18: Subgrouping and Conway's Law
- When task-oriented work groups address complex tasks, they might form subgroups to address subtasks. The structure of the subgroups and the order in which they form depend on the structure of the group's task and the sequencing of the subtasks. Available here and by RSS on December 18.
Coaching services
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenyrWpTxHuyCrjZbUpner@ChacnoFNuSyWlVzCaGfooCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.
Get the ebook!
Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:
- Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, )
- Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, )
- Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, )
- Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, )
- Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, )
- Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, )
Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500-1000 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info
Follow Rick
Recommend this issue to a friend
Send an email message to a friend
rbrenyrWpTxHuyCrjZbUpner@ChacnoFNuSyWlVzCaGfooCanyon.comSend a message to Rick
A Tip A Day feed
Point Lookout weekly feed