Bob Sutton

Forbes.Com Story on "Are You An A$&*@^?"

Forbes.com has a nice, and slightly censored, story by Tara Weiss on The No Asshole Rule in question and answer formant, called "Are you an A$&*@?." Tara was quite fun to talk to, and was especially struck by the research on the nastiness that happens in hospitals, as her boyfriend is a  doctor (a resident as I recall).

The interview also contains a cool new story about coping with assholes that I heard from a former CEO a few weeks ago:

Often we're trapped with them. Find little ways to avoid them. I interviewed the CEO of a tech company who had an a------- board member who screamed at her whenever they spoke. She never had a face-to-face meeting with him. Instead, when they spoke on the phone, she put the phone on mute and did her nails. She would unmute the phone every three to four minutes to see if he was still yelling. She was trapped with the board member, especially since they had the ability to fire her.

It amazed me to hear this in the halls of the Stanford Engineering School.  Even for a CEO, you can see the host of effective coping strategies that people use to ride out a rough time with an asshole -- the use of technology to make the interaction "lower resolution" (she told me tried to avoid face to face interactions so she didn't have to  see his nasty expressions and veins popping out),  finding small ways to gain control over the  source of  stress (hitting the mute button to stop it), and when you are trapped with an asshole -- whether you work serving coffee at Starbucks or are a CEO -- finding ways to distance yourself emotionally from the asshole in question (I love the mental image of her calmly doing her nails, and occasionally undoing the mute button to see if his tiriade had subsided.). Great social psychology. And as I always like to say, it is better to avoid assholes if you can, to get out, but when you are stuck with them, there are sometimes ways to limit the damage, as this clever former-CEO shows us.

Also, Forbes has re-reprinted an online version of the Asshole Self-Test, which is done well. I confess, however, to be partial to the original ARSE test because we've had over 13,000 people complete it and it is fun to keep track of the numbers. But Forbes did a nice job.

"Nothing Strengthens Authority as Much as Silence"

This Leonardo da Vinci quote came in a comment in the discussion around New Research on Bad Apples is generally wonderful -- thanks so much to Kent, Rob, Lilly, Frank, Peter, Wally, and Randy. I especially wanted to thank the person who sent this quote, as it gets at one of the main reasons that the the pro-asshole rather than the no asshole rule flourishes: people pretend that they don't see or become blind to the abuse that is happening right in front of them.   This quote appears at the top of the enlightening -- and frightening -- blog contributes on Bullying of Academics in Higher Education -- unfortunately, as this blog shows so convincingly, academia can be a nasty place. I would add it isn't always that way, and in fact, I've been a member of a group at Stanford that used the no asshole rule and I know of one very successful lab director who actively enforced the "no jerk rule" in the Stanford Engineering School -- but as in any organization, things can turn ugly in academia.

ARSE UPDATE: 13,000 Test Takers

Aaron Mentele of Electric Pulp just gave me a quick update about the Asshole Rating Self-Exam (ARSE), the 24 item-online test that you can take to determine the different ways that your inner jerk rears its ugly head and if in fact you are -- or are at risk of becoming a certified asshole.

Here are Aaron's numbers: Of the 27,000 ARSE visitors, 22,224 have been unique. 13,313 have taken the entire test.

There is a lot of self-examination going on out there! And also examination of others -- apparently some asshole bosses.

In addition, I have received quite a few emails from people who report that they've turned the test around and completed it with co-workers and bosses in mind.  I got an amazing email this morning that said:

A colleague at work recently passed along a link to Kawasaki who was blogging about your new book The No Asshole Rule. Then we found the ARSE exam and after my friend took it for one of our VPs he promptly quit (the VP scored 23, no kidding). Last Friday was my friend's last day.

As Milan Kundera wrote in The Book of Laughter and Forgetting, no one is listening, they just wait for the person talking to stop for a breath so they can blurt out, "that's just like me, I...." So, that's just like me, I have an asshole working at my company. The guy constantly runs good people off. I look forward to your new book. I'm hoping to apply the part about surviving.

Jerks, Brutes, Schmucks, Jackasses, Antagonizers, Tormentors, Schmos, Browbeaters, Racals, and Harriers

These are the synonyms that Leigh Buchanan used for the word "asshole" in the interview that she did with me in the current INC magazine, titled "The Bully Rulebook."

You can read it online.  Her editor would let me use the A-word in the published interview, but not Leigh. I think she came up with a pretty amusing solution to the challenge.  I especially like the word "schmos," as it rare and funny.

P.S. An INC reader -- Jeffrey Fry -- also left this great comment:

I like to add my Universal Equine Equitation:
"In the history of the world, there always has been and always will be more horse`s asses than horses."

Assholes Across Cultures

I wrote a post last Fall called "In Praise of Librarians," which was inspired by the experience that Jeff Pfeffer and I had working with librarians Daphne Chang and Paul Reist at the Stanford Graduate School of Business library to set-up www.evidence-basedmanagement.com.  As I said at the time, my conclusion from all this is that -- because blogs and webs sometimes seem to be totally void of facts and, for that matter, skills to check facts -- librarian's skills are desperately needed.  Of course, the another great thing about librarians is that they read a lot and they are really smart!

To that point, Loren Rosson III --  a supervisor at the library in Nashua, New Hampshire -- just posted a most thoughtful review of The No Asshole Rule on his blog the busybody.  Loren makes quite a few interesting points and I found the most interesting to be on what it means to be an asshole and how assholes are treated in different cultures.  I do touch on cross-cultural effects int he book. And the book is being published in a lot of different countries including France, Holland, the UK, Korea, Spain, and is has really caught in Germany, perhaps half-a-dozen other languages as well.  But I find Loren's insights about Asia and the Middle East to be especially interesting:

In Asian and Middle-Eastern (and other) cultures, insults are fine and frequent arts; belligerence a commendable show of machismo; public degradation a staple of life; two-faced attacks (and backhanded compliments) prestigious displays of wit; and "treating others as if they are invisible" a proper way of snubbing inferiors and equals. What constitutes being an asshole in one culture is honorable in another, and not nearly as psychologically damaging.

Interesting stuff. And Loren reports that he is going to do a post on "the one asshole rule" next. And sets the stage by asking: "In the next post we will look at his interesting complement to the no asshole rule -- the one asshole rule. Ponder the following until then: Was Paul right about a little bit of yeast leavening the whole batch of dough (I Cor 5:6)? Or can the opposite be true?"

Indeed, if you look at my recent post New Research on Bad Apples, I've been wondering about the question myself lately.

Objectif Zéro-sale-con: A New Blog for French Edition of The No Asshole Rule

I wrote a post a few weeks back about the forthcoming French edition, which will published by Vuibert in April and is called Objectif Zéro-sale-con.  I love the explanation from my publisher about the process through which they developed the title. As I said, Geoff Staines explained:

The literal translation of asshole is "trou du cul", a form of endearment generously employed throughout the French-speaking world, but during an impromptu Vuibert seminar on the subject its meaning was felt to be halfway between sneak and jerk, besides which it is not used in relation to women. The very commonly used "con", in many ways the natural choice, usually means plain stupid and lacks the disruptive/destructive/mean-minded nuance. The more selective expression "sale con", however, does it all because the qualifier "sale" (dirty) emphasises the intentional nature of the con-ness. And as for "zéro" instead of "règle" (rule) or "facteur" (which means factor but also postman), we went for it because it harks back, amongst other things, to "zéro défaut" (from the quality circles'  elimination of faults).

Vuibert  has also just launched a blog about Objectif Zéro-sale-con. It looks fantastic.  For starters, it has a translation of my post about why I call them assholes, the self-test now known as the ARSE Test, and an excerpt, with more to come. As those of you who have read my posts about the reaction to Der Arscholch-Faktor in Germany know, I've been quite interested to learn what it takes to be known as workplace jerk in different cultures, and the different ways that they are handled in different cultures.  I hope that those of you from France (and from other French-speaking regions, such as Quebec in Canada) will enlighten us in French on both the new Objectif Zéro-sale-con blog, as well as on this blog in English. 

Meanwhile, I will turn to one of my favorite Stanford students, Tsedal Beyene to help me translate what written in French about the book -- Tsedal went to French schools when she was growing up and speaks it fluently, along with another four or five languages.

Winning Assholes: “Making Money Gives a Pass to Even the Worst Manners”

One of my motivations for writing The No Asshole Rule was that I am disgusted with the norm in business and sports that, as one of my friends put it, “if you are a really big winner, you can get away with – even be celebrated – for being a demeaning creep.” One of my little dreams is that all leaders and their organizations will eventually treat acting like an asshole as a sign of bad performance rather than an excuse for good performance. If you want to see a detailed and eloquent argument along these lines, check out Pamela Slim’s post Bob Knight: The Perfect Mascot for the No Asshole Rule.

Bob Knight still has his job and is still bragging that “I did it my way” and Steve Jobs (who I confess is brilliant) is so widely revered now that – short of a jail sentence – I don’t thank that the backdating scandal will get him fired no matter how bad it turns it to be. There are, however, a few bright spots in recent years, where  bosses with a reputation for being nasty were apparently shown the door, at least in part, because of their nasty ways: Carly Fiornia at HP, Bob Nardelli at Home Depot, and Michael Eisner at Disney.  But it seems we still have a long way to go. A recent article in Vanity Fair called The Trouble With Judith made me realize, as the headline here shows, that if a person brings in a lot of money, the rules of civility that most of us must follow still don’t apply to them (Assuming that the reports in this article are accurate). It is about Judith Regan, the famous book publisher whose books sold millions of copies – with authors ranging from Rush Limbaugh to Howard Stern. She did eventually get fired late last year, but got away with apparently vile behavior for many years.

The article suggests that her downfall at Murdoch happened when she pushed to publish O.J. Simpson’s never published semi-confessional book “If I Did It,” with apparently the final straw being some anti-Semitic comments that she allegedly made. You can see her in the attached picture, in an interview with O.J. about the book that was never aired.

This article is written by a former friend Michael Wolff, an author who had known Judith since college. Perhaps Wolff has an ax to grind, but if his reports are accurate, this is a rather frightening illustration of how much abuse successful people are permitted to heap on others. Wolff starts out:

Somehow Judith Regan—the most famous book publisher of her generation, and the would-be Nancy Drew ready to finally close the O. J. Simpson case—has always gotten away with her obscene, grotesque, often funny, Jewish-obsessed, not just politically incorrect but reprehensible, probably slanderous, not necessarily truthful monologues (definitely monologues—she doesn't really engage in conventional conversation). Neither corporate America  nor upwardly mobile society objected, or, even, seemed to blanch. Her diatribes were part of her charm—or at least part of the forcefulness of her nature (if you didn't find her charming, you certainly found her forceful).

A few paragraphs later, he adds:

Anybody who's ever come in contact with her has been exposed to the bilious, vitriolic, manic, gynecological, anti-everybody-and-every-propriety conversation—if not awed by it.

But what really struck me was this line:

She's got an 800-pound chip on her shoulder. And the chip is part of how she's made money—she's tapped into a vein of American resentment and victimhood, plus she's been able to bully her way into the market—and making money gives a pass to even the worst manners.

The No Asshole Rule has plenty of examples of people who have succeeded without bullying others. And I show ways to build teams and companies where demeaning people aren’t hired in the first place, and if they do get in the door, either change their behavior quickly, or are expelled. BUT it seems there are too many places where (apparently… perhaps the press reports are wrong about her behavior) leaders like Judith Regan get away with – and even seem to be rewarded and applauded – for spewing out their venom, because they are WINNERS.

My view is that letting people like this do their dirty work not only leaves them free to damage a host of victims, it demeans all of us as our silence lends support to a system that allows asshole poisoning to flourish and spread. That is a nice sentiment, of course, but it means nothing unless it is backed by effective action. So, here is my question:

HOW DO WE CHANGE THINGS SO THAT ASSHOLES ARE TREATED AS FAILURES EVEN WHEN THEY BRING IN BIG BUCKS?

This isn’t an easy question, but it is one worth fretting over and trying to solve.

New Research on Bad Apples: Perhaps it Really is the No Asshole Rule

In chapter 3 of The No Asshole Rule, I suggest that --based on theory and research on deviance and conformity to norms -- it might be better to allow one or two token assholes to survive in an organization (especially if they have little power), as they will provide living proof of how not to behave. This idea is based partly on interesting studies of conformity to norms and deviance, especially studies on littering.  These studies by Robert Cialdini and his colleagues show that people are less likely to throw garbage into a parking lot or walkway that has ONE piece of litter than NONE, because the a single vivid violation reminds everyone of the norm and the costs of violating it.   In fact, in Kent Blumberg's review of The No Asshole Rule, he wondered if I should have called "The One Asshole Rule" instead, which I thought was a reasonable point given the evidence presented.

Well, if you read this blog, you know that I am committed to evidence-based management, and that means that I reach conclusions based on the best theory and research I can find, but update when new information comes along.  This means I try to act with knowledge while doubting what I know, or to steal a phrase from The University of Michigan's Karl Weick, "arguing as if I am right, listening as if I am wrong."

A new article just published in Research in Organizational Behavior challenges my "one asshole rule" theory. Research in Organizational Behavior of the most respected publications in the field of organizational behavior, which has been co-edited for over 25 years U.C. Berkeley's Barry Staw -- I edited with Barry for a few years in the late 1990's. and he currently co-edits it with Art Brief.  There is a new article in ROB by  William Felps and Terrance Mitchell, who are the University of Washington.  Their analysis of 20 published studies suggests that "one bad apple" is enough to push a group into a downward spiral, as a Science Daily put it,

"Felps and Mitchell define negative people as those who don't do their fair share of the work, who are chronically unhappy and emotionally unstable, or who bully or attack others. They found that a single "toxic" or negative team member can be the catalyst for downward spirals in organizations. In a follow-up study, the researchers found the vast majority of the people they surveyed could identify at least one "bad apple" that had produced organizational dysfunction."

Co-author Terry Mitchell is one of the best in the business,  so I suspect that this research done carefully. I will read the original paper closely, but  based on the report in Science Daily, it seems that the authors focused on small groups, where bad apples are especially like to have powerful effects. So perhaps a bad apple in a bigger group might still help crystallize "no-asshole" rather than  "pro-asshole" norms. And another factor might have to do with the power of the "bad apple," so if the nasty person widely seen as behaving badly and plays a marginal role in the group, then perhaps they do less damage.

On the other hand, perhaps Felps and Mitchell are right.  They do have 20 studies and Felps story about the "bad apple" that his wife worked with rings true to me:

Felps' wife was unhappy at work and characterized the environment as cold and unfriendly. Then, she said, a funny thing happened. One of her co-workers who was particularly caustic and was always making fun of other people at the office came down with an illness that caused him to be away for several days.

"And when he was gone, my wife said that the atmosphere of the office changed dramatically," Felps said. "People started helping each other, playing classical music on their radios, and going out for drinks after work. But when he returned to the office, things returned to the unpleasant way they were. She hadn't noticed this employee as being a very important person in the office before he came down with this illness but, upon observing the social atmosphere when he was gone, she came to believe that he had a profound and negative impact. He truly was the "bad apple" that spoiled the barrel."

In short, perhaps The No Asshole Rule is the right title after all.  And as a practical matter, it is so hard to keep demeaning jerks out of organizations that it is likely wisest to aim to hire none at all, as odds are one or two are likely to slip through the cracks anyway! 

Finally, I should add that the the negative effects of assholes suggested in Felp's story above and the 20 studies reviewed in this article provide further support for the vile effects of workplace jerks:

For example, in one study of about 50 manufacturing teams, they found that teams that had a member who was disagreeable or irresponsible were much more likely to have conflict, have poor communication within the team and refuse to cooperate with one another. Consequently, the teams performed poorly. 

Sounds like like asshole poisoning to me!

Lawyers and The No Asshole Rule

I guess it is no surprise that lawyers are interested in The No Asshole Rule.  As I mentioned earlier in the week, there is a long excerpt in the American Lawyer and Julie Fleming Brown just posted a very nice review on her blog Life at the Bar.  As Aric Press -- Editor of the American Lawyer -- has written, part of law firm firm management entails keeping overbearing and at times nasty attorneys under control, and if necessary, expelling the most destructive of the bunch even if they are billing a lot of hours. And as I like to say, one of the keys to law firm management is figuring out how to turn your assholes on and off, because after all, one of the reasons that people hire lawyers to be tough and nasty --to do their dirty work.  But people who are best suited for such work aren't always capable of turning off their venom when they deal with staff members and fellow attorneys.

The No Asshole Rule also has implications for client work.  Certainly, people who engage in sexual harassment and in physical abuse are properly labelled assholes, but I am starting to learn that there is growing concern about what I would call "equal opportunity assholes," people who demean people routinely regardless of race,gender, age and so on. Indeed, check out this article about the risks of relying on the "nasty but neutral" defense that I found on Littler's web site (they are a national employment law firm). 

As the summary warns:

While intuitively appealing, the nasty-but-neutral defense has limited utility. Employers should be fairly cautious about relying on evidence of non-biased behavior to defend litigation or to dismiss internal complaints. One missed racial epithet or sexually suggestive remark may convert nasty-but-neutral evidence into a plain nasty verdict. Littler reviews recent verdicts and the instances where this defense is best used.

The upshot is that Dr. House might be in trouble!  And for the rest of us, being an equal opportunity asshole may not longer be a defense. Indeed, as I've written about before, there are some countries that already have legislation about workplace bullying and there have been some bills introduced recently in the United States.

Mark Fortier's Asshole Rule Style Guide

Mark Fortier is a book publicist who is working with me to promote The No Asshole Rule. Mark recently set-up shop on his own after developing a reputation as one of the best in the business at the respected firm Goldberg McDuffie.  Mark is not only persistent and knowledgeable; he is also creative and funny. You can see Mark's talents on display in the e-mail brainstorm list that he sent me last week, where he makes suggestions about how the press might best censor the title in radio interviews and in print:

Here are my suggestions for how the book can be described on air:

Censored style: THE NO BLEEP-HOLE RULE

Semi-censored style: THE NO A-HOLE RULE

British style: THE NO ARSEHOLE RULE

Animal style: The title's third word ends with "hole " and begins with "another name for a donkey."

Confessional style: The title's third word ends with hole and beings with a cussword beginning with A.

Royal style: The title's third word starts with the letter A and sort of rhymes with "castle".

Hard sell style: Tell listeners to log on to Amazon.com and search Bob's name to see the title that they can't mention.

Here are suggestions for how the title can be described in print:

THE NO A**HOLE RULE

THE NO A--HOLE RULE

THE NO A__HOLE RULE

I think these suggestions are both useful and pretty funny. And now they are online, I can send journalists to this post to spark their ideas. My personal favorite is the "Royal Style-- starts with the letter A and rhymes with castle". I also thought this article in the Philadelphia Enquirer on "Expletive Deleted" was pretty clever too -- I reproduce the picture that went with it to give you the full effect.

If you have any other ideas, send them along -- this is challenge that I now face constantly! Thanks.

ARSE Statistics: 11,000 and counting

Michael Lehmkuhl from Electric Pulp sent me the new stats for the Asshole Rating Self-Exam (ARSE) this morning.  The total number of "self-exams" is now over 11,000 -- one week after Guy Kawasaki  posted it. Above, you can see the pattern of "test-taking" and scores. Here are the totals from Mich

As of Monday, February 12^th (7:00 AM PST): 11193 completers /6.59877 average score

Here's a breakdown:

2/9 -588 completers /6.16156 average score

2/10 -291 completers /6.32990 average score

2/11 - 246 completers /5.43902 average score

2/12 - 109 completers /5.82569 average score (so far today)

It looks like there is a lot of self-examination going on out there!

 

American Lawyer on THE NO A**HOLE RULE

The February American Lawyer just appeared and it contains a story about The No Asshole Rule.  I haven't seen the story as it isn't available online, but I do know that they are printing an excerpt.  If you have seen it, please let me know what it is like!

Aric Press is the editor of the American Lawyer, "the nations leading publication for lawyers."  They have over 100,000 subscribers. Aric has been a strong supporter of the concept of the no asshole rule since I first published my 2004 essay, "More Trouble Than They Are Worth" in the Harvard Business Review. Aric wrote an editorial right after that essay was published suggesting that law firms implement "jerk audits," which included this wise advice:

Partnership and brilliance have their privileges. And, to their credit, most lawyers seem to manage a decent politeness even under stress. Which only makes the outliers seem worse. At a minimum, what I'm suggesting is that you ask yourselves this question: Why do we put up with this behavior? If the answer is 2,500 value-billed hours, at least you will have identified your priorities without incurring the cost of a consultant.

Aric's 2004 editorial also resulted in a funny -- and I confess very satisfying -- little twist. At that time, my wife --who is a partner in a large law firm -- was in senior management. We have different last names. When Aric's editorial came out, one of her partners sent her an email about the article, suggesting that it was a topic she might be interested in... he didn't know it was her husband's article!

I don't think that there are more assholes in the law than in other occupations, despite the popular stereotype.  In fact, although law gets the rap for having the most assholes, surveys of different occupations suggest that doctors are more abusive than lawyers, with nurses being their most frequent targets.  But there are some special challenges for law firms that want to enforce the rule.

First, there are big power differences in law firms among people at different levels, and as I've shown, there is a lot of evidence that power can turn people into selfish insensitive jerks, who act is if the norms of civility that the rest of us have to follow don't apply to them!

Second, as I show in The No Asshole Rule, one of the primary causes of demeaning behavior, backstabbing, and an nastiness of all kinds is severe competition between individuals, when life is seen as an I win-you lose game.  Most partnerships divide up the profits every year among the partners in a zero-sum game, where if one partner gets more, the others get less. Moreover, the American Lawyer -- the most important publication in the business -- fuels this problem by ranking firms (among other ways) in terms of profits per partner.

Third, let's face it, one of the reasons that people hire lawyers is to help intimidate rivals in litigation and negotiation, yes partly through facts and logic, but also through demeaning interpersonal moves meant to unnerve and intimidate opponents -- dirty looks, put-downs, teasing, glaring, and intense eye contact.  The problem is that, although these very same skills may help in the courtroom, a deposition, or a negotiation when used at just the right moment,  when attorneys use them on their peers and underlings (and aren't stopped)  the asshole poisoning spreads.

Indeed, you might say that one key to law firm management is learning how to turn your assholes on and off!

Is Your Boss an Asshole? Update On Guy's Post

Guy Kawasaki, as usual, has provoked a compelling mix of weird, silly, thoughtful, hostile, absurd, and revealing comments. His post yesterday on Is Your Boss an Asshole? was followed by 31 comments. As almost aways happen when the term "Asshole Boss" comes up, there was discussion about Steve Jobs (and some argument that he isn't an asshole, which is rare).  I use Jobs as the poster boy for my chapter on "The Virtues of Assholes" (e.g., To this point, just a few weeks ago, I mentioned my book at a meeting in the Stanford engineering school that had a lot of Silicon Valley insiders, and without prompting, several of them chimed-in --"so did you mention Jobs?" Afterwards, one of them came up to me and commented that he had been at a lot of meetings with Jobs, and saw him demean a lot of people, and made some of them cry. The problem -- and fascinating thing about Jobs -- was, as this insider commented was "He was almost always right."

There were also comments from  some pretty well known names in high-tech, including an extremely thoughtful one from John Lilly, COO of Mozilla, which brings us the Firefox browser. I've known John almost a decade now, and seen him in action -- he is one of the smartest people I know. And I was a bit shocked to see T.J. Rogers, CEO of Cypress Semiconductor chimed in too (He is known as a mighty tough boss himself -- although that isn't the same as being an asshole), who added 'Al McGuire had a quote that went something like "A team usually can stand one ass, but not two because they'll breed." '  Not bad, and a funny way of saying that asshole poisoning is a contagious disease that you get from and give to others, as I emphasize.

The most discouraging comment  -- and one of the most careful and well-crafted -- came from "Jon." It is pretty long so I won't print all of it, but consider three items that he adds to Guy's list, based on what he endured from his former asshole boss:

12. Uses his title to intimidate and bully others. Lacking the general ability to win over minds by offering a compelling viewpoint, the asshole resorts to intimidation and bullying tactics in order to kill ideas or discussions that threaten his 'vision'. Anyone who challenges an idea or product feature 'owned' by him might be accused of insubordination or have to deal with an angry come back. Another favored tactic of the asshole 'visionary' is to keep all discussions focused on peripheral topics that avoid addressing why the main 'vision' is failing.

16. Is too arrogant or threatened to learn from others. Seeing all around him or her as potential adversaries and competitors, the asshole carefully avoids opportunities to let others lead in ways that would grow the company or dramatically improve the product. For the asshole, keeping his or her image intact as the singular visionary and talent in the company is paramount. Any threat to the asshole's image or total control is not tolerated.

17. Loves to fire. The asshole typically sees himself as a great victim at the hands of others who lack the talent or vision to work with him. When progress is sidetracked by a problem, there's always a remedy that's so fulfilling that it compensates for any lost time- a good firing. When firing, the asshole likes to help the exiting party understand that there's absolutely no chance of ever working at the company again. It's also important for the firee to understand how much the asshole has suffered over the course of their working relationship.

I also want to thank Guy for ideas and for creating a place where some mighty interesting conversation is happening, and of course, for the ARSE test.

Amazon's Policy on the Word "Asshole:" They Can Say It, We Can't

The No Asshole Rule is officially released on February 22nd, but copies are already appearing in various places (Maureen, thanks for your report that Barnes & Noble has some and is displaying them).  As I noted before, Amazon has been shipping for a few days. But there is a pretty weird twist at Amazon. It turns out that, although they are not censoring the title in their advertising, BUT if you want to mention the title on The Amazon No Asshole Rule page, they will reject your post -- whether it is on their product forum (as I've done) or in a review (thanks Kent and Leslie). In fact I got a note from a reviewer who had sent in in his review, but it never appeared even though he got no feedback from Amazon about why -- but he eventually figured from reading Kent's review (which mentioned the Amazon policy) that it was probably because he had mentioned the name of the book.

I had three quick reactions to this: 1. My first reaction was to be annoyed because they won't allow reviewers to mention the name of the book that they are selling and they mention and because at least one thoughtful person had taken the time to write a review, and it had apparently disappeared in ether; 2. My second reaction was to realize that, although the policy doesn't quite work for this book, that Amazon has a zillion books and they can't make special policies for each book, as the inefficiencies would cost them a fortune (and have to be passed on to us -- they have small margins); and, finally, 3. I realized that the entire thing is pretty silly and I was taking it entirely too seriously, and one cost of writing a book with a dirty title is that these kinds of things are going to happen, and I should just laugh about it -- but  try to let people know why their comments on the forum or reviews might not appear.

P.S. Another weird thing about Amazon is that they still list The No Asshole Rule as #2 for pre-orders among Business and Investing books, even though it is shipping. I guess that is because the official date is still about 2 weeks off.

Assholes Are Us

Guy Kawasaki just put up a post called Is Your Boss an Asshole? He does an effective and somewhat horrifying job of listing the kinds of things that asshole bosses do -- calling on Saturday, destroying other's careers, seeing others primarily as means to satisfy their own needs, and a host of other nasty and all too common things.  The point I would add, and as I commented on at Guy's blog, is that it is important to remember that -- although some people are more prone to it than others -- power can turn any of us into assholes.

Being an asshole isn't just something that only happens to others and can't possibly happen to wonderful people like you and me --  all of us are at risk. As I like to say, assholes are us. To elaborate a bit on what I said in Guy's blog, if you take a position of power, there are several things you can do to stop yourself from turning into an asshole, to fight back against the focus on your own needs and the tendency to act as if social norms don't really apply to you:

1. Eliminate as many unnecessary power differences between yourself and others.  There was a great story  in the New York Times earlier in the week about Home Depot's new CEO ,  Frank Blake, which shows how this is done. He has eliminated the executive dining room, so now employees have to go to the employee cafeteria like everyone else.  He cut his own pay, and most interesting to me:

Mr. Blake has distributed an old company icon, called the Inverted Pyramid, that lays out the retailer’s hierarchy, with customers and employees above the chief executive on the bottom. The image, which fell out of favor under Mr. Nardelli, has begun popping up in store break rooms and office cubicles across the company.

“It’s not about me,” Mr. Blake has told investors and analysts in introductory meetings, according to people who have attended the sessions.

2. If you don't have them already, get some friends and colleagues who can and will tell you when you are acting like an asshole. And when they tell you, listen to them.  Remember, power will blind you to all the ways that you are acting like a jerk and all the ways you are hurting other people. If other people tell you that you are an asshole or there are other warning signs (see the ARSE test), and your reaction is that they wrong, odds are you are fooling yourself.

3. Even better yet, hold your subordinates responsible for telling you when you have been asshole and make it safe for them to do so. If you haven't seen it already, check out "My boss thanked me for calling him a jerk."

ARSE Statistics: Over 9000 Completions

Michael Lehmkuhl from Electric Pulp just updated me on the new stats for the Asshole Rating Self-Exam (ARSE). The total is now over 9,000 responses and he predicts that we will break 10,000 before it is all over:

On February 5, the first day, there were 2432 completions with an average score of 5.44860.

On February 6,  there were 5063 completions with an average score of 7.21272.

On February 7, there were 1608 completions with an average score of 6.99316

Today, so far, there are 448. So, although things have slowed down, it looks like we are going to hit 10,000.

SuccessFactors: "My Boss Thanked Me For Calling Him A Jerk"

Guy Kawasaki's post earlier in the week in the ARSE test also listed the 14 rules of engagement that new employees at SuccessFactors are required to sign.  This provoked a number of cynical and critical comments, such as "In my experience, good companies build an environment where people don't want to act like assholes - nobody needs to be bound by an agreement." I guess that there is a good argument that some companies and teams follow the rule so strongly that they don't need to write it down. But my view is that such clarity isn't so easily dismissed, and in fact, you can see the power of such expectations if you follow the history of Southwest Airlines, which has espoused "we hire and fire for attitude" since it's early days, and you can see the spirit still throughout the company. 

I would also add, as I wrote in an earlier post, that such agreements mean nothing unless they are backed by action.  Indeed, two measures of the power of a norm are:

1. What happens when someone breaks  it: Is the transgression immediately discussed and identifed?  Does the rule-breaker accept responsibility for the violation?

2. Do peers and subordinates -- not just superiors -- feel psychologically safe -- even obligated -- to enforce the norm.

An example that I have a lot of experience with is brainstorming sessions at IDEO. One of the most important norms is "don't criticize" because the fear of evaluation stifles the idea generation process.  And people at all levels of status and experience are obliged to enforce the norm no matter who breaks it.  I've seen David Kelley -- Chairman and Founder, and a truly inspirational and modest leader -- break the norm at a  brainstorm and seen a young engineer call him on it.  David's reaction was immediate: "Sorry, I blew, I can't believe that I did that."

Now, to return to SuccessFactors, consider the last paragraph of Max Goldman's amazing and inspiring post on their Performance & Talent Management Blog on "I agree not to be an a-hole:"

"My own personal experience with no assholes is very simple. Once, my boss was being a jerk. I told him so - in those words. Instead of getting mad, he accepted the comment and we moved on. Later, he thanked me for telling him. My boss thanked me for calling him a jerk. Let me repeat that. My boss thanked me for calling him a jerk. Calling the spade a spade helped everyone work better together and get more done. Can you do that at your company?" 

Max asks a damn good question.  I bet that 95% percent of the American workforce would answer a resounding "no." I sure can't do it at Stanford. ( Well, I guess I could do it at the d.school as David Kelley  is the founder and leader, although he refuses to accept any title but "co-founder," but nowhere else.) I should also add that Max is pulling in another rule of engagement at SuccessFactors, "I will be transparent. I will communicate clearly and be brutally honest, even when it’s difficult, because I trust my colleagues."  

Amazon and Barnes & Noble are Shipping The No Asshole Rule

The No Asshole Rule is my fourth book (excluding several academic volumes) and I am still bewildered by many aspects of the publishing business. I thought that the release date of 2/22 would mean that the books wouldn't ship until that day, but apparently that means the day that the book has been shipped and shelved in enough places that is safe to say it is widely available. I was pleased, and a bit surprised, to discover that both Amazon and Barnes & Noble started shipping the book yesterday. And Kent Blumberg has already posted a review on Amazon -- thanks Kent! So it is out, I am a bit shocked, as I was assuming I had a couple more weeks.

This also strikes me as a good juncture to thank all the great bloggers and all the people who have sent me so many great comments and stories. I started to put down a list, but it was so long and, as I am a bit rushed, I was worried I would leave someone out. I will do that later in the week. In the meantime, you know who you are, and I am most grateful for all your help and wisdom.

The Rules of Engagement are Spreading!

I have written multiple posts about SuccessFactors, the fascinating HR software company that espouses and works to enforce a "no assholes" rule since it was founded about 7 years ago. I have visited the company, had the honor of talking to all 400+ employees about the rule a few weeks ago (it felt more like a pep rally for the rule than a speech, it was really fun), and I sat down with CEO Lars Dalgaard for 45 minutes -- a bundle of energy and brilliance.

All new employees who join the firm are required to sign 14 rules of engagement.  You can see the complete list on Guy's blog, and note that #14 is "I will be a good person to work with—I will not be an asshole." And also note that the rules end with a commitment to enforce these rules, a very important step for making sure that what people say is actually done,  And there is a statement that their rewards will be linked to following the rules:

"I agree to live these values. If my colleagues fail to live up to any of these rules, I will speak up and will help them correct; in turn, I will be open to constructive criticism from my colleagues should I fail to live by these values. I understand that my performance will be judged in part by how well I demonstrate these values in my daily work."

The rules of engagement appear to be spreading. Another firm is considering adopting these rules since their leaders read about it on Guy's blog. Check out this post at Architel, an IT support firm in Dallas, Texas. They appear to be asking their employees if they should adopt the rules. They also thank SuccessFactors and Guy for it. 

My view is that  considering  the rules are a great first step.  But just posting them and having people sign them  won't help if the rules clash with how people are treated and treat each other. When I talked with Lars, he emphasized that although they had laid out these rules in early days of the company, they still have to work every day to make them come alive, that there are still people who break the rules at times (including himself), and he constantly talks about the rules, calls people on it, and calls himself on it when he has transgressed.  So I hope that the rules will help Architel, but they need to be something that people work on every day -- as Jeff Pfeffer and I wrote about in The Knowing-Doing Gap, the absolutely worst thing is to talk about values and post on them on the  wall, and then to violate them constantly.  When that happens, leaders are seen as hypocrites, which breeds cynicism and lack of trust.

P.S. Check out what Lars wrote on BusinessWeek.com  on the talent wars. 

ARSE Statistics: 8000 and Counting

Michael Lehmkuhl from Electric Pulp mailed-in new stats for the Asshole Rating Self-Exam (ARSE)  early this morning. The total is now over 8,000  responses  and the keep rolling in:

On February 5^th, the first day, there were 2432 completions with an average score of 5.44860.

On February 6^th, there were 5063 completions with an average score of 7.21272.

So far today we've seen 631 completions with an average score of 7.28685.

As Michael says, we are still on a pretty good pace.