Three More Workplace Zeroes

Back by popular demand (I think) are three more workplace zeroes, those annoying personalities and outright headcases that make our work and private lives a living hell.

The Smartest Kid in the Class. You know this type. He/she has been making your life miserable since the second grade. They were always the first to raise their hand and get the correct answer. Their reports and projects were always A+. They were always the kids the teacher singled out as the best in the class. Known by other names like Teacher’s Pet, brown-noser and butt-kisser, they were annoying and frustrating. No matter how hard you worked, they were always just that much better. And they made sure you knew that.

You see this type in the workplace as well. You do two projects; they do four. You stay late; they stay 15 minutes later. No one works harder than they do and they make sure you know that. While being the smartest kid in the class may have gotten them gold stars in third grade, I’m not sure it really counts for much in the workplace. If budgets cuts are necessary, it’s not going to make one iota of difference how hard you worked or how late you stayed in the office. You will be a goner (unless you are an expert butt-kisser.)

I see this type with one particular woman in my office. A prototypical smartest kid in the class, she stays late and does more than anyone else (when she really doesn’t have to). Why? Because she’s the smartest kid in the class. 

Or is she? At closer inspection, I contend that her staying late may just be workplace theater. That with better time management, she could probably get her work done within 7 or 8 hours. She has also, I realize, formulated a clever research method that enables her to find reports that she simply rehashes and gets praise for. She also refuses any help because, you got it, nobody is as smart as she is and no one can do the work as well as she can (or so she believes). Total narcissism. (More on that later.)

What I don’t understand is that this woman (unlike me) has a life outside the office…a young child and a husband (a Dutch-born filmmaker no less). So why not go home and spend time with her family?

No she won't. Because she, like all other former Teacher's Pets, is addicted to praise. Most "normal" people (whatever that is, not quite sure) like to be praised, but we don't constantly seek it. If we get praised for a good job, great. If not, so what? If we get criticized for screwing up, well, we don't like it, but we take it in stride and vow to do better next time.

Frankly, I think she and all the smartest kids in the class are heading for a crackup. She actually had a mini-meltdown in the office the other day. (She was also the co-worker who screamed at me when I tried to wish her good night. Crazy.) The constant pressure to always be the smartest kid in the class leads to an unhealthy perfectionism and an inflated sense of one’s abilities.

The Solution? There really isn’t one on your part. These people need psychological help. Nothing you can say or do is going to make them understand they are no longer in grade school and —horrors — they just may not be the smartest kid in the class anymore.

The Know-it-All. ARG! Even when they do know it all, they are still annoying. They are always right, even when they are proven wrong. They know everything about everything and what they like is always going to be better than what you think is good or what you like.

But let’s say for the sake of argument, that you do prove the know-it-all wrong. Do you think they will ever admit they were wrong? Fat chance. The best you get is some, “Oh, yeah, la di da…” shrug off. Don’t even bother trying.

The way I see it, unless your first name is Albert and last name Einstein, then you don’t know it all.

The Solution? Again, there really isn’t any. You will never convince them of them of their ultimate delusion and yes, stupidity. But when you know they are wrong, you can always take comfort in knowing you proved them wrong, even if it’s just to yourself.

The Narcissist. These are probably the most difficult people to get along with either on a personal basis or in workplace setting. It’s all about them, all the time. I’m not talking about a typical self-absorbed person who babbles on endlessly about themselves (we’re all guilty of that at times). A self-absorbed person will occasionally inquire about your life and wellbeing. A narcissist, never. Their self-absorption is grandiose in its tenor.

That’s because a narcissist believes the world resolves about him or her. Her problems will always take precedence over yours. If you talk about a difficult time you are going through, well, to a narcissist, you are being negative and they really don’t care. But you must listen to their endless complains about their job, their love life, and on and on. Because they are so much better, more important than you.

Now, you may think a narcissist is the same as an egotist. Though the line between the two is thin, there are distinct differences.

An egotist, for one, is confident in their abilities. Yet while they may think they are smarter than the next guy, or are better in some particular skill, they DO NOT believe they are a better person because of it. Most egotists are humble enough to admit when they are wrong and will sometimes be self-deprecating. A narcissist takes himself way too seriously to ever have a sense of humor, especially about themselves.

An egotist will monopolize the conversation; but a narcissist will suck the air out of the room with their unrelenting need for attention. Most egotists I know are self-aware enough to, on occasion, admit they have a big ego; a narcissist would never have that much insight into their damaged psyche.

A narcissist would never admit to being wrong. He or she cannot abide even the mildest of criticism and will cut you to pieces if you have the temerity to question their actions or beliefs. (An egotist would at least evaluate the criticism.) They think they are the most wonderful people on earth and anybody else who doesn’t believe as they do is beneath them.

If you dare criticize them, it’s because you are jealous or a negative person. It’s never because they were being a condescending jerk.

There are some code phrases that are the hallmarks of a narcissist. They include: “I deserve…” “Oh, she’s just jealous of me…” “Oh, that person is so negative…” “I’m so unique…”

Oh, and nothing but THE BEST for a narcissist. Who do you think keeps Whole Foods in business?

You can usually spot a narcissist by how they are constantly focused on themselves and their own feelings, not other people or the outside world. Try having a normal conversation with a narcissist. You can’t.

The only good thing about a narcissist is that you never have to worry about what they think of you...because they only think of themselves. And if they do think about you, it's probably that they think they are better than you (a point I'm happy to concede).

They are really quite sad people. They are so blinded by their own narcissism that they don't see the damage it's doing to their relationships with other people. They believe another person is only there to love and honor them; it's about what they can receive in a relationship, not what they can give. Narcissists have wildly unrealistic expectations of what love and friendship truly is. It's a give and take, not a one-sided affair.

They cannot fathom that another person has needs, feelings and beliefs that deserve respect. It's all "me me me"...all the time. When the relationships goes sour, the narcissist blames the other person, when, in reality, it was their own narcissism that destroyed the relationship.

Another sign is their incessant posting of selfies on their Facebook page. It just screams “Look at me and tell me how beautiful/handsome I am!” (What else is a person supposed to write in response to a selfie? “Hey, when was the last time you had a good night’s sleep” Or, “You need to step away from the Big Macs.”)

Unlike a confident egotist, a narcissist is supremely insecure and tries to mask that insecurity with an exaggerated sense of their own importance.

The more I live, the more I realize the most pernicious human frailty is narcissism. Unfortunately, our society promotes an unhealthy concentration on ourselves, our wants, needs, and feelings, sometimes under the guise of "self help spirituality." Nothing wrong with self improvement, but perhaps we'd all be a lot of happier if we thought about other people more often instead of ourselves all the time.

The Solution? After much trial and error, I’ve come to realize that it’s near impossible to be a friend of a narcissist. They want to pull you into their own self-focused universe. They don’t want a friend; they want a fan, somebody who will continually tell them how wonderful they are. A true friend will be supportive, but will tell you, in a nice way, when you are being a jerk. My best advice for dealing with a narcissist is to stay away from them. Don’t get sucked into their me-only world. There is no room for anyone else but the narcissist.

So there you have it…three more workplace zeroes. You know of any more?

Fugazy

Fugazy (fa-gay-zee)…an Italian-American urban slang term meaning something that is cheesy, not quite right, a lie, phony, not authentic.

When politicians or corporations are fugazy, it’s called spin. When anybody else acts fugazy, it’s called lying.

I’ve been thinking about this word a lot lately because there have certainly been some fugazy happenings at work in recent weeks.

First, they announce they are closing down three business lines, yet keeping the people who worked for those units on staff, but in different, unspecified roles. The stated reason from upper management is they “don’t want to let good people go.”

Like that has ever stopped them before. At my former workplace, when they shut down your department, they wanted you outta there at warp speed. So I guess it was somewhat comforting to hear management express some measure of compassion for employees, instead of simply giving them the steel-toed boot.

It was also heartening to hear a company admit that if a worker is doing a good job, the job they were hired for, but revenues are down through no fault of the employee, then there really is no justifiable reason to let a good person go. And certainly with the amount of work they are asking us to do, we need all hands on deck. (Alas, companies don’t think like that; it’s all about doing more with less and squeezing as much as possible out of a leaner and leaner workforce.)

Is this really compassion? Digging a little deeper, this has more to do with the company saving face than compassion. I mean, if a company is seen as cutting workers and units en masse, then it must mean revenues are down and the company looks bad to the entire business world. So if it doesn’t cut the employees, then the company doesn’t look so bad, right?

Except that our new CEO has cut entire departments and people have been laid off. So it sounds disingenuous, to say the least, to now say you are not going to cut positions. And wouldn’t the people previously let go want to know why they were cut and these other employees were kept on even though their department was disbanded? Just asking…

If a company is shutting down whole departments to save costs, then wouldn’t it make sense to eliminate perhaps the biggest expense: the employees at those units? Doesn’t keeping them on negate the intended purpose of cutting expenses? Obviously, upper management thinks we are just a bunch of morons. (Why do I keep hearing that old Who song in the background: “We won’t be fooled again”?) Something fugazy is going on here.

A couple of examples of fugazy treatment of staffers who were either demoted or had their positions axed but were kept on are very instructive of how upper management works…in a fugazy manner:

One fairly high-lever manager was obviously demoted and his job taken over by another manager. But instead of letting him go, they kept him on and gave him that kiss of death of a title: special projects something or other. Yeah, special projects…cleaning out your gutters at home. (Now, I never liked this guy. He was smug and acted like he was too good to even speak to me. So I can’t say I was sorry to see him get the shaft.)

Please…No one is fooled by that bogus special projects title. It’s a “don’t let the door hit you on the way out” title if there ever was one. Fortunately, this guy got the message (getting publicly humiliated in front of co-workers has a way of hitting you upside the head) and found another job. His “special project” position is going unfilled.

Then there was the guy they shuffled around to four different positions before they finally let him go. Before they did, however, they made his life miserable by nitpicking and criticizing the work he did. Apparently, he didn’t get the message soon enough.

He didn’t make the situation any better by constantly grousing and whining. The fact that he was less than enthusiastic about having to learn new jobs every two months was understandable. I’m not sure he could have done anything that would have made the outcome any different. It was obvious they wanted him gone and he was slow on the uptake. But there is a happy ending: he eventually got another job…at a competitor. (Moral of the story to upper management: be careful those workers you discard so cavalierly.)

Far be it from me to question my executive betters, but these decisions seem a bit, well, fugazy.

Taken together those two stories lead me to believe that what is going on here is an indirect (or possibly direct) message to those workers who are kept on but whose departments have been eliminated that goes something like this:

“OK, we’re keeping on the payroll but for only about 6 months. We’re giving you time to find another job so we don’t have to pay unemployment for you. But if you take longer than 6 months, you will make your working life a living hell until you leave or we make you leave. Got it?”

Compassion? More like fugazy. This is all about the company not wanting to look bad, and treating good workers badly and getting away with it under a cloak of phony compassion.

It stretches credulity like Spanx on a Kardarshian to believe that there won't be a winnowing of the headcount sometime soon. We see through this fugazy act like a sheer top on a Hollywood starlet.

Now, to be fair, in some circumstances, they have found proper positions for those staffers whose departments were disbanded. A position may open up they could fill, or if there is a genuine, newly created job (not some fugazy special projects title) a person is qualified for, then it always makes sense to fill from within the company. But those instances are far and few between. Most of the time, you’re likely a goner.

NEWS FLASH! A member of the department resigned today. Now, before you think he took one for the team, he got a great position at a prestigious company. So, it will be interesting to see if they fill his position or let it remain unfilled. If it goes unfilled, then we will know they ultimately had staff cuts on the agenda...yeah, fugazy.  

Then this past week, something happened that shook me and others to the core. I won’t go into the details, suffice to say that when my former company undertook the same strategy, a round of layoffs (including me) soon followed.

Remember, too, we are deep into autumn, the time of the year when companies formulate budgets for the New Year. Those plans could include layoffs. (Oh, how I used to love the fall.) As a co-worker succinctly put it, we workers are here to make the company profits, when we fail to do that and are no longer of use to them, we are cut off like a head in a guillotine

To a company, all these maneuvers are justified as a way to make profits, whatever the cost may be to workers and their families.

And change can be hard. But there is change, and there is a “Game of Thrones” episode; what is happening now is veering uncomfortably close to the latter.

I understand that companies must change direction and if an employee no longer fits into that new vision, then might it be more compassion to let them go instead of jerking them around unmercifully? (Yeah, I can’t believe I’m saying that.)

Frankly, all these changes are disruptive to working morale. How are we as workers supposed to do a good job when we know we could be out of work at any time?

These changes signal to all in and outside of the company that management doesn’t know what it is doing; that is grasping at anything in a futile attempt to make money.

Like I said. Fugazy.