A community to post scientific articles, news, and civil discussion.
dart board;; science bs
rule #1: be kind
I hired someone like this once because I was looking for a confident individual who I could transition into a leadership role when the time was right.
They ended up making all my good employees leave. When it was their time to step into the leadership role they couldn't see past their nose to succeed.
I hope one day they have an epiphany and will realize they are the cause for most of the pain/problems with people. I wish them well. I also wish to never see them again.
This is just capitalism. It values, and thus incentivises, sociopathic behaviour.
The more one exhibits the traits of the financial triad, CPA[0], the greater the reward, recognition, and promotion they can expect to receive.
[0]: Cunt, Prick, Arsehole
The findings suggest that employees with dark traits may be more willing to take on tasks others avoid, so managers see them as useful for work that could harm the manager’s own reputation, such as enacting unpopular policies, disciplining staff or conducting layoffs.
“Throughout history and in organizations, there are people who have to do dirty, bad things that a lot of people don’t want to do, and perhaps dark personalities are better able to do those than those who lack these traits,” he said. “A leader recognizes a place for people who seem to violate conventional norms of what it is to be a good person.”
This explains the big management consulting firms like McKinsey to a T.
Some managers see themselves in those kinds of people, and therefore sympathize with them. Just my perspective anyway.
I'm a fancy dancy senior director. I hire leadership as well as individual contributors.
I would NEVER hire a psycho because people like that cause endless drama and bullshit. Now I have to hear about it constantly and everyone is going to question my judgement (as well they should) if I were to hire an asshole like that. I've had a few people who would get a little hot under the collar at work. Nothing big, but they'd get pissy and irritated on meetings, pretty minor stuff. They ain't even curse or yell. I'd STILL have people up my ass about dude because he got a little shitty during a call. I could not imagine having a genuine whack job who fucks with people on my staff. So much time wasted on Mr. Grumpy-but-Harmless. Have Professor Cockstain on the team would be endless misery.
The asshole at work creates more work than they do. Anyone who hires one knows damn well what they've done and unless they have the balls to fire them, they're complicit in keeping them around.
Sane people don't hire assholes.
The asshole at work creates more work than they do. Anyone who hires one knows damn well what they’ve done and unless they have the balls to fire them, they’re complicit in keeping them around.
Can confirm, dealing with that type of asshole at work. He wants to do as little work as possible and offloads his responsibilities on others, causing massive slowdowns and inconveniences his fellow coworkers who all hate him, but management loves him because he's a suck up and a snitch (read: often makes up stuff about people to get them fired). It's so infuriating that these people just skate on by.
Yes, I agree, especially since selfishness, ruthlessness, and greed are traits that promise profits - and (short-term) profits are the only, or at least the primary, measure by which most managers’ performance is judged (Shareholder Value, Quarterly revenue figures, and such). It is therefore quite likely that current managers also exhibit these traits and thus fill positions with people who are similar to them. It appears to be a systemic vicious cycle that allows for hardly any exceptions.
And this is why we invented democracy.
The workplace is a dictatorship that masquerades as a capitalistic democracy.
Yes, in principle, but unfortunately there are many politicians who do not act in the interests of the people. This is evident simply from the fact that the richest of the rich are getting richer and richer, even though this is by no means in the interests of a country’s citizens.
While there are neo-capitalist approaches such as "trickle-down economics" even after decades of pursuing them, what they postulate has never come to pass - instead, exactly what was to be expected has occurred: tax revenues are plummeting, resulting in a lack of funds for investments in socially vital sectors and infrastructure, and the standard of living for citizens is steadily declining.
The result is that a kind of new monarchy of billionaires has emerged, who use their enormous influence through corruption and lobbying so ruthlessly that today there is hardly a capitalist-democratic state left that still serves the interests of its citizens.
They work harder and take credit for other people's work.
It's all about optics. Ruthless people ruthless control their optics, normal people don't.