In small organizations, as in small towns, respecting others is essential to social survival. People who are consistently disrespectful of others are soon caught at it, and the rest of the population collaborates to either eject offenders or bring them to heel. Larger organizations are different. In larger organizations, those who disrespect others are able to move from place to place rapidly enough to avoid enforcement action and sometimes, even to avoid recognition of their pattern. Larger organizations can be fertile ground for narcissistic behaviors, especially behaviors that would be recognizable if exhibited repeatedly. In this sense, the organization plays a role in the genesis and incidence of narcissistic behavior.
For example, consider the condescending remark. Condescension is one way to elevate oneself by denigrating others. Used in private, it's nasty enough. But in public, it can be devastating, especially if the target of the condescension feels unable to respond in defense — or counterattack — perhaps because of lesser organizational status than the condescender, or some other constraint.
As a reminder, the behaviors and attitudes typically regarded as narcissistic are these:
- Expresses exaggerated self-importance
- Preoccupied with superiority fantasies
- Believes that he or she is special and that only special people or institutions can fully appreciate that specialness
- Constantly demands attention and admiration from others
- Expects and demands favorable treatment
- Exploits others for personal ends
- Displays ruthless disregard for the feelings of others
- Envies others or believes that others envy him or her
- Is off-the-charts arrogant
Let's now have a closer look at the seventh item above: ruthless disregard for the feelings of others. For convenience in this series, I've been referring to the person exhibiting narcissistic behaviors and attitudes as either Nick or Nora. This time it's Nora.
- Narcissistic behavior in children seems to adults to be harmless, though children do experience it more intensely. That might be why it provides such a useful template for understanding the adult pattern. Name-calling is one of its simpler forms, but it also includes bullying and cyber-bullying, deprecatory nicknames, condescending or patronizing remarks, insults, rumormongering, isolation tactics — anything that might make the target feel bad or defensive.
- Whether in Whether in adults or children,
the offender's objective is
inflicting pain on the target,
as publicly as possibleadults or children, the offender's objective is inflicting pain on the target, as publicly as possible.
- Although I (following many others) have described this behavior as disregard for the feelings of others, it's possible that disregard isn't quite the right term. To disregard would be to ignore. What actually happens is more like directed effort to eliminate a perceived threat, which requires focused attention, rather than inattention or ignoring. People who exhibit this behavior do so with consistency and passion to attain and then maintain the view of themselves that they seek.
- For example, suppose Nora encounters a confident and popular individual I'll call Cora. Assessing Cora's social status, Nora perceives Cora as a threat, most intensely if Cora challenges Nora or even if she simply declines to subordinate herself to Nora. To neutralize the threat, Nora begins with indirect or subtly dismissive tactics, but she'll escalate to whatever level is necessary to defuse the threat she perceives from Cora.
- Nora's targets sometimes regard these attacks as personal, in the sense that they believe that Nora might harbor some ill will toward them. That might be true in some cases, but the primary motivator for Nora's attacks is not animus; rather, it is the need to assuage her own concerns about the threats she believes these targets might represent.
- Organizational risks
- Nora's behavior has undesirable effects, both direct and indirect. Among the direct effects, her treatment of Cora (or anyone she perceives as a threat) creates or contributes to a toxic atmosphere. Teamwork and cooperation suffer. Among indirect effects, her treatment of Cora intimidates others, who then avoid Nora, or limit their interactions with her. They might even limit their contributions to avoid conflict with Nora. This withholding behavior deprives the organization of information and contributions that might at times be important. It can be just as destructive as any of the more common forms of holding back.
- Coping tactics
- As Nora's supervisor, recognize that her behavior could increase turnover among your more capable subordinates. Tolerating it is therefore risky. Because intervening to alter her behavior is unlikely to succeed, the most effective alternatives are termination, transfer, or isolation. Terminating Nora or transferring her must be done with care and advice from Human Resources representatives. Isolation might be more practical, because it need not be total. It's sufficient to isolate her from anyone she regards as a threat.
- As Nora's co-worker, your chances of being targeted are correlated with Nora's perception of your social status. In time, she'll either move on to another position voluntarily, or management will reassign or terminate her. But that time might not arrive soon. In the meantime, you must choose to either assume a less visible, less respected role, or accept her attacks, or counterattack so effectively that she will voluntarily exit. If she is especially adept, the choice to become less visible might be the wisest.
Is every other day a tense, anxious, angry misery as you watch people around you, who couldn't even think their way through a game of Jacks, win at workplace politics and steal the credit and glory for just about everyone's best work including yours? Read 303 Secrets of Workplace Politics, filled with tips and techniques for succeeding in workplace politics. More info
Your comments are welcomeWould you like to see your comments posted here? rbrendbTtLLSVlUPPCNkAner@ChacthFxWKdRwnLylOCDoCanyon.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.
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.
More articles on Workplace Politics:
- Hostile Collaborations
- Sometimes collaboration with people we hold in low regard can be valuable. If we enter a hostile collaboration
without first accepting both the hostility and the value, we might sabotage it outside our awareness,
and that can render the effort worthless — or worse. What are the dynamics of hostile collaborations,
and how can we do them well?
- How to Avoid a Layoff: Your Situation
- These are troubled economic times. Layoffs are becoming increasingly common. Here are some tips for
positioning yourself in the organization to reduce the chances that you will be laid off.
- Yet More Obstacles to Finding the Reasons Why
- Part III of our catalog of obstacles encountered in retrospectives, when we try to uncover why we succeeded
— or failed.
- Reframing Revision Resentment: I
- From time to time, we're required to revise something previously produced — some copy, remarks,
an announcement, code, the Mona Lisa, whatever… When we do, some of us experience frustration,
and view the assignment as an onerous chore. Here are some alternative perspectives that might ease
- Grace Under Fire: III
- When someone at work seems intent on making your work life a painful agony, you might experience fear,
anxiety, or stress that can lead to a loss of emotional control. Retaining composure is in that case
the key to survival.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming October 5: Downscoping Under Pressure: I
- When projects overrun their budgets and/or schedules, we sometimes "downscope" to save time and money. The tactic can succeed — and fail. Three common anti-patterns involve politics, the sunk cost effect, and cognitive biases that distort estimates. Available here and by RSS on October 5.
- And on October 12: Downscoping Under Pressure: II
- We sometimes "downscope" projects to bring them back on budget and schedule when they're headed for overruns. Downscoping doesn't always work. Cognitive biases like the sunk cost effect and confirmation bias can distort decisions about how to downscope. Available here and by RSS on October 12.
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrendbTtLLSVlUPPCNkAner@ChacthFxWKdRwnLylOCDoCanyon.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