The first two parts in this series examined techniques people use to cause others to "lose it" — to lose control of their emotions — in meetings. This part and the next examine other abusive tactics that are more narrowly focused on wearing down a target by introducing into the target's life a continuous sense of fear, anxiety, or stress. The immediate objective of these tactics might differ from the immediate objective of the tactics discussed earlier. For these tactics, emotional breakdown of the target is the primary goal — it need not be witnessed by anyone. If emotional breakdown occurs when witnesses are present, that's just a bonus from the abuser's perspective, rather than a primary objective.
Intentionally trying to "break" someone makes little sense to most of us. But many abusers do have purposes in mind, ranging from deeply unhealthy to politically cynical. Abusers might feel driven to engage in abuse, compelled by internal forces that most emotionally healthy people can't even grasp — thank goodness. Or abusers might be seeking revenge for some real or imagined offense by the target or by someone the target cares about. Or the abuser might be trying to motivate the target to leave the company or transfer elsewhere within it. Or the abuser might have been ordered to abuse the target by someone else who has the power to derail the abuser's career if the abuser doesn't cooperate. Purposes vary, and conjuring dozens more examples would not be difficult.
To create Intentionally trying to "break"
someone makes little sense to
most of us. But many abusers
do have purposes in mind.in the target a continuous sense of fear, anxiety, or stress, the abuser (whom I'll call Alpha) must persuade the target (whom I'll call Theta) that Alpha can substantially degrade Theta's quality of life at work and maybe even life at home. Persuading Theta of this is relatively easy if Alpha is Theta's supervisor, or if Alpha is even higher in Theta's supervisory chain. Or perhaps Theta believes that Alpha is capable of organizational blackmail, as might be the case if Alpha knows something about Theta's background or situation that Theta would rather Alpha not disclose. Whatever the circumstance, such an imbalance of power is assumed in the set of tactics Alpha can use to create in Theta's life a sense of fear, anxiety, or stress.
Let me begin with the most obvious tactic: threatening termination or disciplinary action. In this scenario, Alpha indicates to Theta that termination procedures — or other procedures that could lead to disciplinary action of some kind — are either underway or about to be underway.
In most organizations, actually invoking such procedures is a laborious, bureaucratic process. For this reason, Alpha might prefer not to do so for real, but might instead choose to persuade Theta that such procedures have been invoked, when in fact they have not. For example, Alpha might require Theta to sign an official looking but totally fake document that states that Theta understands that these procedures have been invoked.
To defend themselves against such subterfuge, targets can educate themselves about formal termination and disciplinary procedures. Then when their abusers try these fraudulent tactics, targets can recognize them and avoid the stress and anxiety that abusers are trying to induce. Avoiding the stress and anxiety helps targets think clearly and avoid "losing it."
Thinking clearly can be a significant advantage in such situations. For example, when presented with such an official-looking document to sign, Theta might say to Alpha, "OK, I'll sign, but I'd like to read it first. And I'd like a representative of Human Resources to be here in case I have any questions. So call Marty please. Oh yeah, and I'd like a copy for myself signed by you if you don't mind."
Such an approach would help screen out the fake-document ploy described above. It would compel Alpha to follow the formal procedure, which would probably be safer for Theta than whatever Alpha had in mind. The ultimate outcome might still be termination or a disciplinary action, but at least Theta would know that the rules would be in force.
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 welcomeWould you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenuQKLUMsVubCpqOpqner@ChacCCvpZbzKGsgliMGNoCanyon.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 Conflict Management:
- Saying No
- When we have to say "no" to customers or to people in power, we're often tempted to placate
with a "yes." There's a better way: learn how to say "no" in a way that moves the
group toward joint problem solving.
- Social Safety Margins
- As our personal workloads increase, we endure more stress and more time pressure. Inevitably, we have
less time for the social niceties that protect us from accidentally hurting each other's feelings. When
are we most at risk of incidental harm, and what can we do about it?
- Workplace Bullying and Workplace Conflict: II
- Of the tools we use to address toxic conflict, many are ineffective for ending bullying. Here's a review
of some of the tools that don't work well and why.
- Impasses in Group Decision-Making: I
- Groups sometimes find that although they cannot agree on the issue at hand in its entirety, they can
agree on some parts of it. Yet, they remain stuck, unable to reach a narrow agreement before moving
on to the more thorny areas. Why does this happen?
- Impasses in Group Decision-Making: III
- In group decision-making, impasses can develop. Some are related to the substance of the issue at hand.
With some effort, we can usually resolve substantive impasses. But treating nonsubstantive impasses
in the same way doesn't work. Here's why.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming July 8: Multi-Expert Consensus
- Some working groups consist of experts from many fields. When they must reach a decision by consensus, members have several options. Defining those options in advance can help the group reach a decision with all its relationships intact. Available here and by RSS on July 8.
- And on July 15: Disjoint Concept Vocabularies
- In disputes or in problem solving sessions, when we can't seem to come to agreement, we often attribute the difficulty to miscommunication, histories of disagreements, hidden agendas, or "personality clashes." Sometimes the cause is much simpler. Sometimes the concept vocabularies of the parties don't overlap. Available here and by RSS on July 15.
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenuQKLUMsVubCpqOpqner@ChacCCvpZbzKGsgliMGNoCanyon.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 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info
- The Power Affect: How We Express Our Personal Power
Many people who possess real organizational power have a characteristic demeanor. It's the way they project their presence. I call this the power affect. Some people — call them power pretenders — adopt the power affect well before they attain significant organizational power. Unfortunately for their colleagues, and for their organizations, power pretenders can attain organizational power out of proportion to their merit or abilities. Understanding the power affect is therefore important for anyone who aims to attain power, or anyone who works with power pretenders. Read more about this program.
- Bullet Points: Mastery or Madness?
Decision-makers in modern organizations commonly demand briefings in the form of bullet points or a series of series of bullet points. But this form of presentation has limited value for complex decisions. We need something more. We actually need to think. Briefers who combine the bullet-point format with a variety of persuasion techniques can mislead decision-makers, guiding them into making poor decisions. Read more about this program.