This week I thought I would knock out two birds with one stone and use "The No Asshole Rule" material for the ADR Book Club as my blog subject matter.

So far, we have only discussed Chapters 1-2, but it's a very book with very poignant ideas. So far the author, Robert Sutton, has introduced us to his test for spotting an ***hole: (1) Does the target feel oppressed/belittled after talking with the alleged ***hole and (2) Does the alleged ***hole aim his aggression at people who are positions less powerful than he/she (Sutton 2007, 9). As has been discussed so far in the book club, we have all been around people who easily pass both prongs of this test. Sutton doesn't think that "bully" or "jerk" quite encapsulates the same meaning as ***hole; however, I'm not a fan of using the "A" word repeatedly, so I think I will just adopt "jerk" for my discussion. 

One discussion thread asks if this is a good test or if there is anything we would add/change. I think it's an accurate test. Dealing with jerks does have physical, emotional, and psychological affects on others. Therefore, assessing the "lingering" effects/feelings after interacting with the jerk is a good start to the test. The second prong I feel is the obvious way to spot the jerk. It's what we expect - the big guy going after the little guy. Stereotyping the person at the "top" as being aggressive, evil-spirited, etc. However, there is probably a subtler method to the jerk's actions that may escape this second prong. I wouldn't necessarily change or alter this prong, because it does help spot one. And I'm not sure what I would add to cover those instances where it's unclear as to whom the jerk is "directing his venom" towards. It's a good test to start some discussion going in the workplace.

One portion of Chapter 2 that really surprised me was Sutton's discussion about medical errors committed by nurses. (Sutton 39-40). He was discussing another scholar's research project where she evaluated how many mistakes were committed by nurses. She had hypothesized that those under poor leadership (i.e. jerks) would make the most errors. Surprisingly, her research proved otherwise - it was those under the best leadership that reported the most errors. The primary explanation for this was that those nurses were not afraid to report the errors. I also believed the results may be the product of nurses trying harder and actually making fewer mistakes so they have fewer interactions with the jerk and one less reason to be subjected to his/her venom. How tragic that those under "jerky" leadership will often look out for only themselves, even with innocent lives are at stake.

Interestingly (Unfortunately?) enough, as I read the book I kept picturing males in these ***hole positions. However, this is obviously not the case, which I know firsthand. I've seen both male and female ***holes in the workplace - why is the male image my default? It also made me wonder about what this means for women in leadership roles. Are they thought of as "***holes" or does another label follow their actions (the b-word maybe?). And if another label is used, how does the analysis change? Can all these labels be equated? Can an asshole = bitch? I haven't heard a man be called the b-word so I'm not sure whether or not those labels are interchangeable. And here we have a book about how to spot and deal with assholes...can we just apply this to both sexes or do more considerations about gender differences in management style need to be addressed? I don't know the answer to any of these questions so any thoughts would be helpful.

Furthermore, Sutton's addressing how to deal with jerks in the workplace, but do these ideas apply throughout society? Is it different because in workplace we often have to work directly with the jerks where as in personal life we can choose to avoid them? Are people who act like ***holes at work ***holes in personal life? If so, how do they survive?

Sutton's argument is that jerks drain workplace resources of all types and on all levels. I totally agree with this. I'm intrigued to see how he comes out on the issue and whether he provides any concrete methods for appropriately dealing with ***holes when coming across one. And I hope he addresses how to deal with them from all levels. It may be helpful to get some coping ideas for upper management (i.e. send them to anger-management, fire them, etc.) but what about the immediate coping skills for those who encounter the jerk? What can they do during and immediately after the encounter that will not result in depleted feelings/resources that Sutton is seeing? Is it the workplace's responsibility to arm its employees with coping mechanisms or should they insure a no-***hole workplace in the first place?

So many intriguing questions and only two chapters read so far!