Exploitation and Conversational Narcissism at Work: II

This exploration of conversational narcissism began with "Self-Importance and Conversational Narcissism at Work: I," Point Lookout for October 4, 2023, with some definitions and examples. Briefly, conversational narcissism is the set of behaviors a conversation participant uses to direct the focus of a conversation from the topic at hand onto that participant or along directions favored by that participant. Conversational narcissism is a threat to organizational wellbeing because it distorts the outcomes of discussions — biasing them in ways preferred by individuals whose personal agendas might not align with organizational interests.

The methods used can be categorized as emphasizing some combination of self-importance, exploitation of others, exhibitionism, and impersonal relationships. This post continues an exploration of the narcissistic behaviors that are most closely associated with exploiting other participants in the conversation.

A bit of terminology

In that When abusers use "I" statements that
ought properly to be "We" statements,
they seem to the uninitiated to be
leaders or experts when they are notfirst post of this series I introduced the term abuser as a shorthand for narcissistic conversation participant, because the term narcissist won't do — not all abusers are narcissists. In general, it's the behavior that is narcissistic, not the person exhibiting the behavior (though some who exhibit the behavior are narcissists).

In what follows, as in the previous posts in this series, I describe someone as "having the talking stick" if he or she is the person whom the conversation participants acknowledge as the current speaker. (The term speaker won't do, because someone else might be speaking too.)

Guided by the work of Vangelisti, et al., I've collected ten different patterns abusers use and which are associated with exploiting other conversation participants. [Vangelisti 1990] I described four patterns last time.

Seven more patterns of conversational narcissism that are associated with exploitation of others

In this post I describe six more patterns abusers use to exploit the other conversation participants. They include contributing aggressively, interrupting, overtalking, talking rapidly, talking continuously, acting as emcee, and using iceberg statements.

Descriptions follow.

Contributing aggressively

When speaking, abusers can employ extended direct eye contact (glaring) to assert dominance over other conversation participants. [Toscano 2018] This behavior can be especially useful to the abuser who regards a particular participant as likely to seize the talking stick or to redirect the conversation.

In face-to-face conversations, glaring at one participant while speaking can be a tool of intimidation. In video conferencing, the analogous tactic is looking into the camera and either prefacing a contribution with one participant's name, or naming that participant repeatedly during the contribution, or both.

Interrupting

Wiemann and Knapp define an interruption as an "…attempt to assume the speaking role before it has been relinquished by the current speaker." [Wiemann 2017] Interrupting is a technique that accomplishes several possible goals of abusers. After acquiring the talking stick, they can filibuster, which helps them consume time, or they can engage in narcissistic questioning, or any number of other maneuvers. But the interruption itself is exploitative, in that it is a statement that the person interrupted is of lesser value than the abuser.

An advanced form of interrupting is interrupting with deniability. To interrupt deniably, the abuser makes a contribution while another participant has merely paused for breath or punctuation. The abuser then presses on, even after the interrupted participant tries to resume after pausing. The interruption is deniable because it appears superficially to be an honest mistake — most participants and witnesses assume that the abuser simply failed to notice that he or she interrupted someone.

Overtalking

Overtalking is the tactic of intentionally beginning to speak, or continuing to speak, to prevent others from speaking or to make them stop if they're already speaking. [Brenner 2013.2] Overtalking also happens when the target of an interruption decides to keep speaking. The interrupter then makes the same choice. Overtalking is another method of dismissing the target's speech as worthless.

Overtalking is equivalent to prefacing a contribution with, "Whatever you're saying is of less value than what I have to say." Many experience overtalking as abuse or bullying.

Abusers find this tactic extraordinarily useful not only for dominating conversations, but also for guiding conversations they don't yet utterly dominate.

Talking rapidly

Involuntary rapid speech is associated with various mental disorders. Talking rapidly, voluntarily, is something else again. It's a tactic abusers employ to create difficulty for auditors in two ways. First, talking rapidly tightens the abuser's hold on the talking stick by creating difficulty for other participants to begin speaking without interrupting the abuser. Second, a high tempo makes grasping the abuser's meaning more difficult, especially if the auditors are less than conversant in the topic. If the topic is arcane or specialized, or if it involves complex arguments, talking rapidly can compel auditors to ask for clarification or elaboration. It's exploitative because it compels auditors to admit that they aren't following. It's another tool of humiliation.

Escalating volume is an option abusers can use to enhance the effect of talking rapidly. It's equivalent to verbal violence. By escalating voice volume when overtalking or talking rapidly, the abuser intends to prevent the target from speaking or even thinking.

Talking continuously

When speaking, many non-abusers pause for breath, or for the conversational equivalent of punctuation, such as commas, periods, or em dashes. To talk continuously, the abuser must master the art of avoiding these pauses and breaks, because they normally serve as cues to others to reach for the talking stick. Instead, abusers pause in mid-thought, which confounds those waiting to speak. Example: "I've never found the M1 highway to <pause> be busy at that hour."

Acting as emcee

Some abusers adopt the role of emcee, offering the talking stick to another participant (or a series of other participants). Example: "Mark, tell us about your trip to D.C." This behavior might be appropriate, even welcome, in some situations, and when executed with grace and generosity. One such situation is hosting a dinner party in which many of the guests aren't well known to each other.

But in an ironic twist, in other circumstances this same behavior can be exploitative. Abusers sometimes recognize in a moment of clarity that they have been abusing the conversation and its participants. One option would be to begin supporting the conversation and its participants in whichever direction they choose. But often the abuser chooses to direct the attention of the participants to one of their number, as an emcee. Their calculation seems to be that directing the group's attention to someone other than themselves serves to acquit the abuser of the charge of abuse. The stratagem fails, because the abuser is now the emcee, which is a form of indirectly directing.

Using iceberg statements

The iceberg is a widely used metaphor for systems that have the property that only a small part of the whole is evident. In the self-help community, an "iceberg statement" is one that indicates that the speaker has a story to tell more significant than the statement itself. By listening for iceberg statements, so the theory goes, the auditor can be more adept at building relationships. [Yee 2013].

Abusers can work this angle in reverse to exploit auditors. By devising iceberg statements, abusers can induce auditors to ask the questions that the abusers can use to steer or dominate the conversation. From the abuser's perspective, the techniques encouraged by the self-help community are free assistance.

Last words

When a skilled abuser deftly exploits other conversation participants, some (or all) of those participants might be unaware of what has occurred. The abuser is satisfied, and the other participants are unaware that they have served the abuser's purpose. But abusers must take care. Some who do recognize the pattern choose not to challenge their abusers. They might have answered in the negative two questions: First, "Is confrontation worth the effort and risk?" And second, "Is the likelihood of a mutually beneficial outcome to the confrontation great enough?"   First issue in this series    Next issue in this series   Top    Next Issue

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

Footnotes

Your comments are welcome

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 Effective Meetings:

The End-to-End Cost of Meetings: II

Few of us realize where all the costs of meetings really are. Some of the most significant cost sources are outside the meeting room. Here's Part II of our exploration of meeting costs.

Virtual Brainstorming: I

When we need to brainstorm, meeting virtually carries a risk that our results might be problematic. Here's Part I of some steps to take to reduce the risk.

Interrupting Others in Meetings Safely: II

When we feel the need to interrupt someone who's speaking in a meeting, to offer a view or information, we would do well to consider (and mitigate) the risk of giving offense. Here are some techniques for interrupting the speaker in situations not addressed by the meeting's formal process.

Why Meetings Go Down Rabbit Holes

When a meeting goes "down the rabbit hole," it has swerved from the planned topic to detail-purgatory, problem-solving hell, irrelevance, or worse. All participants, not only the Chair, contribute to the problem. Why does this happen?

On Schedule Conflicts

Schedule conflicts happen from time to time, even when the organization is healthy and all is well. But when schedule conflicts are common, they might indicate that the organization is trying to do too much with too few people.

See also Effective Meetings and Effective Meetings 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