幾十年前,許多高強度的工作場所造就了這樣的場景:強勢的雇主肆無忌憚地大喊大叫,還騷擾員工。性別歧視和種族主義也更為普遍,而且員工往往沒有可靠的投訴途徑。但時過境遷,現在大多數大公司的人力資源部門都不贊成對員工大喊大叫、貶低或恐嚇等老式的霸凌策略。“傳統的恃強凌弱型雇主”時代已基本終結。
當然,這并不意味著人力資源部門已經讓恃強凌弱型雇主絕跡。職場霸凌仍然存在,而且很普遍——只是不太張揚罷了。那些想要強行行使權力而無需受譴責的雇主們已經轉向采取更為隱蔽的策略。
倫敦經濟學院(London School of Economics)的勞動經濟學家格蕾絲·洛丹通過對500多名員工的采訪,發現了當代恃強凌弱型雇主的四種原型。以下是如何判斷你可能為哪種類型的雇主工作,以及如何應對的方法。
當代恃強凌弱型雇主
當代恃強凌弱型雇主是傳統的反復無常型雇主的延伸,是人力資源時代的升級版。他們不是大喊大叫,而是通過限制目標員工參與工作或晉升來達到騷擾的目的。
洛丹告訴《財富》雜志:“他們很精明,所以不會大發雷霆。他們更冷靜,對他們不喜歡的人,他們往往會忽視、孤立和排斥。”
根據洛丹的說法,這可能表現為雇主“忘記”邀請目標員工參加幾次會議,或者無視他們提出的請求(謀求新發展機遇)。一些雇主還拒絕處理員工的投訴,從本質上說,他們讓受害者無法為工作場所做出貢獻,并對他們不理不睬。
如果你發現自己在為當代恃強凌弱型雇主工作,與雇主保持身體上和工作上的距離是關鍵。受害者應建立雇主無法滲透的保護網,甚至更頻繁地移動辦公桌或遠程辦公,以盡量減少與霸凌者的互動。
如果雇主的霸凌行為嚴重,而且是持續性的,員工可以保留書面記錄,記錄自己何時被排擠,被惡言相向,或是錯過了他們應得的機會。與一次性的隱蔽侵犯行為相比,證明霸凌已成常態,可以讓人力資源部門采取更多措施。這也取決于侵犯者是誰:與監督高管相比,人力資源部門更擅長監督中層管理人員,畢竟人力資源部門的設立初衷就是服務高管。
洛丹說:“面對當代恃強凌弱型雇主,你要做的就是盡可能與他們拉開距離,同時也要遵守職場規則。”他指的是按規則行事,記錄不公平待遇和自己的成就。“就獲得機會、升職、加薪而言,你希望這個過程盡可能透明。”
自我中心主義者
自我中心主義者的特點是自尊心極強,因此他人需要謹言慎行,避開鋒芒。最重要的是,這種類型的人討厭受到威脅,所以他們的員工永遠不能鋒芒畢露。
洛丹說:“與自我中心主義者一起工作的人不能鶴立雞群,要幫助他們,并總是讓他們出風頭,這一點非常重要。自我中心主義者是罪魁禍首:因為他們往往雇傭那些和自己臭味相投的人。”
根據洛丹的說法,自我中心主義者雇傭和提拔與自己不謀而合的人,或者已經是他們的朋友的人,因為他們不想在未來出現分歧時覺得自己很愚蠢,或者暴露自己不了解某些情況。
如果你在為自我中心主義者工作,你必須決定自己想在多大程度上參與他們制定的游戲。如果你選擇奉承他們,以他們認可的方式行事,你很可能會得到加薪和晉升,但洛丹不建議這樣做。
她說:“如果你面對的是自我中心主義者,除了保持透明之外,你還得考慮一下自己究竟想走多少根鋼絲繩。如果你迎合自我中心主義者,如果你讓他們自我感覺良好,你可能會在公司里如魚得水。”
洛丹補充說,自我中心主義者真正想要的是掌聲,但要注意不能給他們太多掌聲,因為這會導致企業經營不善。與當代恃強凌弱型雇主一樣,最好的辦法是避而遠之,并將自己的行為記錄在案。
碌碌無能的管理者
顧名思義,碌碌無能的管理者并不擅長處理工作事宜。他們在完成本職工作方面可能差強人意,但由于他們知道如何玩弄公司政治,因此,能夠得到晉升。
洛丹說:“他們往往很擅長在公司內部建立關系,這就是為什么他們往往能夠平步青云,而且能夠在重組和并購等事件中幸存下來。不是因為他們真正勝任核心任務,而是因為他們在迎合他人方面頗有建樹。”
碌碌無能的管理者與自我中心主義者有著共生關系。他們通常找到了如何迎合自我中心主義高管的方法,并被提拔為親信。但就他們自己而言,他們也是相當善變和自私自利,比自我中心主義者更難以捉摸。
如果你有一位碌碌無能的管理者,重要的是要記住,他們是靠玩政治而不是靠工作業績在企業中生存下來的。洛丹建議,在與這類型管理者打交道時,要俯首帖耳和保持透明,但要趁早離開。
她說:“如果你發現自己在碌碌無能的管理者手下工作,時間十分緊迫。他們的實際反應是很難預測的。如果他們犯了錯誤,或者事與愿違,他們很可能會把責任歸咎于你。因此,一定要遵守規則,盡可能讓加薪晉升等事情的所有細節都保持透明。
過于友善型雇主
過于友善型雇主似乎是大多數員工都求之不得的“麻煩”,但這本身也有問題。對于希望自己事業有成的員工來說,在一個過于友善的雇主手下工作是麻煩重重的,因為這會影響工作效率。這樣的雇主太專注于討人喜歡,以至于缺乏決斷力,無法完成任務,也不會給團隊帶來新機會。
洛丹說:“有些領導者在了解員工,了解他們的社交生活,并通過外部途徑支持他們方面游刃有余,但他們并不擅長在內部進行艱難的對話,包括績效管理等內容。”
他們還回避對業務至關重要的討論,比如如何實現創新或進行重組。他們希望維持一種過于快樂、輕松的氛圍,而這種氛圍最終與個人和企業的發展路徑背道而馳。
如果你的雇主過分友善,那么與其他類型的雇主相比,他們更容易相處。洛丹建議在公司內部尋找其他機會,甚至直接向雇主提出接觸新同事或調到其他團隊的請求。因為他們太友善了,他們很可能會同意。
底線
洛丹在接受《財富》雜志采訪時表示:“想要飛黃騰達的人,最好避開這五種典型的雇主。”(第五種是傳統的恃強凌弱型雇主)。
如果無法完全緩解雇主的不良行為模式帶來的影響,員工應該想辦法建立嚴格的工作與生活界限,這樣才能控制住毒性蔓延,避免給個人生活帶來壓力。如果竭盡全力卻仍折戟沙場,還可以選擇跳槽。
如果雇主對員工的職業生涯構成嚴重威脅,最好盡早離開,把損失降到最低。對于優柔寡斷的人來說,設定嚴格的改進期限是一個不錯的策略。雖然職場動態在過去幾十年里發生了變化,但只要你找到了新工作,打包走人始終是一種選擇。(財富中文網)
譯者:中慧言-王芳
幾十年前,許多高強度的工作場所造就了這樣的場景:強勢的雇主肆無忌憚地大喊大叫,還騷擾員工。性別歧視和種族主義也更為普遍,而且員工往往沒有可靠的投訴途徑。但時過境遷,現在大多數大公司的人力資源部門都不贊成對員工大喊大叫、貶低或恐嚇等老式的霸凌策略。“傳統的恃強凌弱型雇主”時代已基本終結。
當然,這并不意味著人力資源部門已經讓恃強凌弱型雇主絕跡。職場霸凌仍然存在,而且很普遍——只是不太張揚罷了。那些想要強行行使權力而無需受譴責的雇主們已經轉向采取更為隱蔽的策略。
倫敦經濟學院(London School of Economics)的勞動經濟學家格蕾絲·洛丹通過對500多名員工的采訪,發現了當代恃強凌弱型雇主的四種原型。以下是如何判斷你可能為哪種類型的雇主工作,以及如何應對的方法。
當代恃強凌弱型雇主
當代恃強凌弱型雇主是傳統的反復無常型雇主的延伸,是人力資源時代的升級版。他們不是大喊大叫,而是通過限制目標員工參與工作或晉升來達到騷擾的目的。
洛丹告訴《財富》雜志:“他們很精明,所以不會大發雷霆。他們更冷靜,對他們不喜歡的人,他們往往會忽視、孤立和排斥。”
根據洛丹的說法,這可能表現為雇主“忘記”邀請目標員工參加幾次會議,或者無視他們提出的請求(謀求新發展機遇)。一些雇主還拒絕處理員工的投訴,從本質上說,他們讓受害者無法為工作場所做出貢獻,并對他們不理不睬。
如果你發現自己在為當代恃強凌弱型雇主工作,與雇主保持身體上和工作上的距離是關鍵。受害者應建立雇主無法滲透的保護網,甚至更頻繁地移動辦公桌或遠程辦公,以盡量減少與霸凌者的互動。
如果雇主的霸凌行為嚴重,而且是持續性的,員工可以保留書面記錄,記錄自己何時被排擠,被惡言相向,或是錯過了他們應得的機會。與一次性的隱蔽侵犯行為相比,證明霸凌已成常態,可以讓人力資源部門采取更多措施。這也取決于侵犯者是誰:與監督高管相比,人力資源部門更擅長監督中層管理人員,畢竟人力資源部門的設立初衷就是服務高管。
洛丹說:“面對當代恃強凌弱型雇主,你要做的就是盡可能與他們拉開距離,同時也要遵守職場規則。”他指的是按規則行事,記錄不公平待遇和自己的成就。“就獲得機會、升職、加薪而言,你希望這個過程盡可能透明。”
自我中心主義者
自我中心主義者的特點是自尊心極強,因此他人需要謹言慎行,避開鋒芒。最重要的是,這種類型的人討厭受到威脅,所以他們的員工永遠不能鋒芒畢露。
洛丹說:“與自我中心主義者一起工作的人不能鶴立雞群,要幫助他們,并總是讓他們出風頭,這一點非常重要。自我中心主義者是罪魁禍首:因為他們往往雇傭那些和自己臭味相投的人。”
根據洛丹的說法,自我中心主義者雇傭和提拔與自己不謀而合的人,或者已經是他們的朋友的人,因為他們不想在未來出現分歧時覺得自己很愚蠢,或者暴露自己不了解某些情況。
如果你在為自我中心主義者工作,你必須決定自己想在多大程度上參與他們制定的游戲。如果你選擇奉承他們,以他們認可的方式行事,你很可能會得到加薪和晉升,但洛丹不建議這樣做。
她說:“如果你面對的是自我中心主義者,除了保持透明之外,你還得考慮一下自己究竟想走多少根鋼絲繩。如果你迎合自我中心主義者,如果你讓他們自我感覺良好,你可能會在公司里如魚得水。”
洛丹補充說,自我中心主義者真正想要的是掌聲,但要注意不能給他們太多掌聲,因為這會導致企業經營不善。與當代恃強凌弱型雇主一樣,最好的辦法是避而遠之,并將自己的行為記錄在案。
碌碌無能的管理者
顧名思義,碌碌無能的管理者并不擅長處理工作事宜。他們在完成本職工作方面可能差強人意,但由于他們知道如何玩弄公司政治,因此,能夠得到晉升。
洛丹說:“他們往往很擅長在公司內部建立關系,這就是為什么他們往往能夠平步青云,而且能夠在重組和并購等事件中幸存下來。不是因為他們真正勝任核心任務,而是因為他們在迎合他人方面頗有建樹。”
碌碌無能的管理者與自我中心主義者有著共生關系。他們通常找到了如何迎合自我中心主義高管的方法,并被提拔為親信。但就他們自己而言,他們也是相當善變和自私自利,比自我中心主義者更難以捉摸。
如果你有一位碌碌無能的管理者,重要的是要記住,他們是靠玩政治而不是靠工作業績在企業中生存下來的。洛丹建議,在與這類型管理者打交道時,要俯首帖耳和保持透明,但要趁早離開。
她說:“如果你發現自己在碌碌無能的管理者手下工作,時間十分緊迫。他們的實際反應是很難預測的。如果他們犯了錯誤,或者事與愿違,他們很可能會把責任歸咎于你。因此,一定要遵守規則,盡可能讓加薪晉升等事情的所有細節都保持透明。
過于友善型雇主
過于友善型雇主似乎是大多數員工都求之不得的“麻煩”,但這本身也有問題。對于希望自己事業有成的員工來說,在一個過于友善的雇主手下工作是麻煩重重的,因為這會影響工作效率。這樣的雇主太專注于討人喜歡,以至于缺乏決斷力,無法完成任務,也不會給團隊帶來新機會。
洛丹說:“有些領導者在了解員工,了解他們的社交生活,并通過外部途徑支持他們方面游刃有余,但他們并不擅長在內部進行艱難的對話,包括績效管理等內容。”
他們還回避對業務至關重要的討論,比如如何實現創新或進行重組。他們希望維持一種過于快樂、輕松的氛圍,而這種氛圍最終與個人和企業的發展路徑背道而馳。
如果你的雇主過分友善,那么與其他類型的雇主相比,他們更容易相處。洛丹建議在公司內部尋找其他機會,甚至直接向雇主提出接觸新同事或調到其他團隊的請求。因為他們太友善了,他們很可能會同意。
底線
洛丹在接受《財富》雜志采訪時表示:“想要飛黃騰達的人,最好避開這五種典型的雇主。”(第五種是傳統的恃強凌弱型雇主)。
如果無法完全緩解雇主的不良行為模式帶來的影響,員工應該想辦法建立嚴格的工作與生活界限,這樣才能控制住毒性蔓延,避免給個人生活帶來壓力。如果竭盡全力卻仍折戟沙場,還可以選擇跳槽。
如果雇主對員工的職業生涯構成嚴重威脅,最好盡早離開,把損失降到最低。對于優柔寡斷的人來說,設定嚴格的改進期限是一個不錯的策略。雖然職場動態在過去幾十年里發生了變化,但只要你找到了新工作,打包走人始終是一種選擇。(財富中文網)
譯者:中慧言-王芳
A few decades ago, many high-intensity workplaces fostered environments where militaristic bosses yelling at and harassing their employees went unchecked. Sexism and racism were also more prevalent, and there often were no reliable ways for employees to complain. But times have changed, and now most big firms have HR departments that frown upon old bullying tactics like shouting at, degrading, or intimidating workers. The “traditional bully boss” era is largely over.
Of course that doesn’t mean HR has eradicated bad bosses. Workplace bullying is still alive and well—it’s just flying under the radar. Bosses who want to unfairly exert their power without getting reprimanded have shifted their tactics to less obvious ways.
Grace Lordan, a labor economist at the London School of Economics, has found, by conducting over 500 interviews with workers, four archetypes of these contemporary bad bosses. Here’s how to tell which kind you may work for, and how to handle them.
The modern bully
The modern bully is an extension of the traditional volatile boss, updated for the HR era. Instead of shouting, they harass targeted workers by limiting their ability to participate or advance in the workplace.
“They’re savvy, so they don’t explode,” Lordan tells Fortune. “They’re much more quiet, and the people who they don’t like, they tend to ignore, isolate, and exclude.”
This could take the form of a boss “forgetting” to invite targeted workers to several meetings or ignoring requests for new opportunities, according to Lordan. Some bosses also refuse to field employee complaints, essentially icing their victim out of contributing to the workplace and giving them the silent treatment.
If you find yourself working for the modern bully, creating physical and professional distance from the boss is key. The target should build networks that the boss can’t infiltrate, and even move their desk or work remotely on a more frequent basis to minimize interaction with their bully.
If a boss’s bullying is severe and persistent, an employee can keep a paper trail that documents when they were excluded, spoken badly of, or passed over for opportunities they deserved. HR can do more with proof of a pattern than one-off subtle aggressions. It also depends on who the aggressor is: HR is much better at policing middle managers than top ones, and primarily exists to serve the C-suite.
“When it comes to the modern bully, what you’re trying to do is to get as much distance from them as possible, and also enter into compliance baseball,” Lordan says, referring to playing by the rules and keeping a record of unfair treatment and your own accomplishments. “In getting opportunities, getting promotions, getting pay raises, you want to bring as much transparency to that process as possible.”
The egotist
The egotist is characterized by a huge sense of pride that has to be tiptoed around. Above all, this type hates being threatened, so their employees can’t ever perform better than they do.
“It’s very important that the person who is working with the egotist doesn’t excel, and helps them, and always shines them in a good light,” Lordan says. “The egotist is one of the biggest culprits for hiring people who are basically like themselves.”
Egotists hire and promote people who agree with them, or are already their friends, because they don’t want to feel foolish in any future disagreement or be exposed as not knowing something, according to Lordan.
If you’re working for an egotist, you must decide to what degree you want to play their game. If you choose to flatter them and act in a way they approve of, you’ll likely be rewarded with raises and promotions, but Lordan doesn’t recommend that.
“If you are dealing with an egotist, along with transparency, you want to think about how many tightropes you actually want to walk,” she said. “If you pander to the egotist, if you make them feel good about themselves, you can probably do quite well in the organization.”
What an egotist really wants is applause, but be wary of giving them too much, as it results in a poorly run organization, Lordan added. As with the modern bully, your best bet is to avoid them and keep record of your own actions.
The mediocre manager
As the name implies, the mediocre manager is not very good at their job. They can be terrible at completing basic responsibilities, but they are promoted because they know how to play company politics.
“They tend to be quite good at building relationships within the company itself—that’s why they tend to do well and they can survive things like restructuring and mergers,” Lordan says. “Not because they actually are competent in their core tasks, but because they’re quite competent at pandering to other people.”
Mediocre managers have a symbiotic relationship with egotists. They usually have found how to pander to a high-ranking egotist and got promoted as a crony. But in their own way, they’re also quite volatile and self-serving, and more unpredictable than an egotist.
If you have a mediocre manager, it’s important to remember that they’ve survived within the organization by playing games, not by the merit of their work. Lordan advises being compliant and transparent when dealing with this manager, but to get out sooner rather than later.
“If you find yourself under a mediocre manager, the clock is really ticking,” she said. “It’s very unpredictable about how they’re actually going to react. If they make mistakes, or things don’t go their way, they probably would blame you for it. So be in compliance mode, making every detail regarding things like paid promotions as transparent as possible.”
The overly nice boss
An overly nice boss may seem like a problem most workers are dying to have, but they come with their own problems. For workers wanting to advance in their careers, working under an overly nice boss is problematic because it hinders productivity. This boss is so focused on being liked that they’re unassertive, can’t get things done, and don’t bring in new opportunities for their team.
“Some leaders are incredibly nice with respect to learning about their employees, learning about their social lives, and supporting them externally, but they’re not very good at having those hard conversations inside,” Lordan says. “That includes things like performance management.”
They also shy away from discussions that are essential to the business, such as how to innovate or restructure. They want to maintain an overly happy, chill atmosphere that ultimately is at odds with individual and organizational career growth.
If your boss is nice to a fault, it’s easier to deal with them than the other archetypes. Lordan recommends seeking other opportunities within the organization, and even asking your boss directly for exposure to new colleagues or transfer to another team. Because they’re so nice, they’ll probably say yes.
The bottom line
“Somebody who wants to do well in their career would do well to avoid those five types of archetypes of bosses,” Lordan tells Fortune. (The fifth type is the traditional bully boss).
If it’s not possible to fully mitigate a boss’s pattern of bad behavior, employees should find ways to create strict work-life boundaries, so that the toxicity is contained and doesn’t cause stress in their personal lives. And if all else fails, there’s always the option to switch jobs.
If a boss poses a serious threat to an employee’s career, it’s best to get out sooner to minimize the damage. Setting a hard deadline for improvement is a good strategy for indecisive people. While workplace dynamics have evolved in the past few decades, packing up one’s cubicle and walking out is always an option, as long as you have another job lined up.