The 5 Habits of Highly Successful Slackers (Because 7 is too Many)

I got a charming email from K.P. Springfield about his book "The Five Habits of Highly Successful Slackers."  K.P. wrote approvingly of my suggestion that "Indifference is as important as passion."  I made the suggestion on a serious note, as there are times when a bit of emotional detachment can help people cope with stressful situations.  K.P.s book and his website take the idea of not caring -- and goofing-off -- much further.  And do it in a much funnier way (well, at least the website is funny, I actually haven't read the book).  I especially recommend the Slacker Quiz on his website.  Consider a sample question:

3. If you are in a situation where either a co-worker or a manager is trying to blame you for the failure of a project or other assignment, and you have proof that you are not to blame, do you:
A) Go over that person’s head and prove with the information that you are innocent.
B) Send the accuser an email with a subject line that says “Herpes Test Results” while they are in a large meeting with their computer screen on a projector.
C) Sit down with the individual and try to work out the conflict.
D) Take the evidence, throw it up in the air and say “Whatever!”

K.P. tells us that the right answer is "D" because "Successful slackers never stand-up for for what they think is right, because in the corporate world, it doesn't matter who is right."

Alas, this strikes me as too true in too many organizations that I know.  There are far too many organizations where speaking-up just gets you in trouble, and has little effect on the organization.  This isn't just an opinion, research on whistle blowers and people who "speak-up" documents the dangers -- see Fred Alford's book Whistleblowers: Broken Lives and Organizational Power for an example.

As for the slacker book, I feel obligated to order it, even though KP wrote me that: "I had The 5 Habits printed with the absolute highest quality paper, giving it exceptional burn qualities. So at a minimum, if the book fails to entertain, I can assure you that it won't fail as effective fireplace kindling this holiday season."

Frankly, in a world where too many people take themselves entirely too seriously (I plead guilty), K.P.'s attitude is refreshing.  Perhaps my reaction is fueled by the two days that I spent at a creativity conference at Harvard Business School last week.  It was a splendid conference (Diego blogged a bit about it), but HBS is a VERY serious place. Everyone always seems too earnest about things there, and I find myself acting that way there as well. K.P.'s book reminded me that I need to lighten-up a bit.

Comments

[RG]

"It is right to address injustice, but below a certain threshold the emotional maturity to be deteched is more valuable."

the problem, in my experience, is that situations will worsen to whatever your tolerance level. I tried doing "whatever" to various racist, sexist comments. You don't have to be a bully or a major political player, but thinking you can get away with avoiding politics seems naive.

[Michelle Malay Carter]

Bob,

I'm new to your blog. I enjoy your perspective immensely. I blog about how current management systems drive a$$hole behavior, and how redesign of systems would greatly reduce a$$hole episodes.

What strikes me about this is that organizations allow the blame game in the first place. If the project were set up appropriately in the first place, there would be one accountable project leader. Everyone understands from the get go that if the projects fails, it rests with him/her.

Now, project accountability without project authority is cruel (and common) and causes corruption and dysfunction. So, in order to be able to dole out this type of accountability, the organization must also have a set of institutionalized project manager authorities. There are 4 - the power to veto appointment of a person to the team, the power to assign tasks to the team members (that they are accountable to do as if it were assigned by their manager), the power to report back team member effectiveness to the team member's managers, the power to initiate removal of a non-performing team member.

How many times are project managers given team members who feel free to ignore them and the project manager has no recourse? This happens quite frequently to non-line staff personnel who are trying to carry out a project.

In parallel with this, all project team members would have a set of accountabilities and authorities relative to the project that emanated from their manager, as it would be only the manager who would appoint or approve their appointment to the team.

Ultimately, the team members give input and advise, but the accountable project manager decides when there is dissention. It has to be this way if the project manager is ultimately accountable. There can be no such thing as "team accountability" unless you want buck passing and the blame game which always ends in deadlock.

These are just a few thoughts on how work within organizations could be greatly enabled with some re-thinking in the area of accountabilities and authorities.

I blogged about this in a post called - Rethinking Accountability - Because the Hog Won't Butcher Himself. http://www.missionmindedmanagement.com/rethinking-accountability-because-the-hog-wont-butcher-himself

Regards,

Michelle Malay Carter

[PerGynt]

From a non-slacker perspective, which you may or may not be interested in, having that "whatever" attitude translates into "keeping your eye on the ball". When at work we are busy producing, managing, growing and earning money, and we wouldn't have a payroll to worry about if we were spending our time jousting amongst ourselves. It is right to address injustice, but below a certain threshold the emotional maturity to be deteched is more valuable.
just my 2.

P

[Tim Kramer]

"There are far too many organizations where speaking-up just gets you in trouble"

I had a situation where during my annual review I was asked to stop telling the truth about the company so much. This was the same annual review where I received a 22% raise (years before I got 9% and 12% raises) so obviously I was doing something right.

I guess it is just better to lie about the company?

Great stuff on this site by the way.

[KP Springfield]

Indifference is critical to being a successful slacker. People always think having a "Whatever!" attitude is detrimental, but let me tell you, exuding a "Whatever!" attitude in the workplace is one of the greatest assets a successful slacker can have. It completely numbs you when company stock inevitably tanks, bonuses are cut, your CEO is indicted on investor fraud, and you eventually lose your job.

And Bob, I was serious about the burn quality thing. I figured that for those who were seriously disappointed in the book - which I'm sure there will be many - at least they can take solace in burning it to brimstone and recover some shred of satisfaction.

KP Springfield