Again the main thing is that you cannot believe the corporate world is intrinsically good or that its arc bends towards moral or ethical justice. It absolutely does not. Look at all the women who lost their jobs to Glenn Thrush or Mark Halperin or Matt Lauer.
-
-
It takes them a while to realize but they always end up getting rid of the jerks. Naturally, a CEO would trust the person they hired directly more than others. But the goal should be to take action as quickly as they can when they realize that person is breaking the company.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
The businesses you speak of are not exactly thriving. The only reason why companies succeed is because they can successfully align a group of people to work as a team.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
These are the largest companies in the world. Apple. General Electric. J.p. morgan.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
I have seen jerks outlast literally everyone, for years, because the good people have options and leave. You can't lie to yourself. This is a systemic, persistent, problem of patriarchal reinforcement of abusive qualities.
@cindygallop has spoken about it.1 reply 1 retweet 17 likes -
And I say that not to discourage you, because I agree that teamwork should be central. But without a realistic appraisal of the scale of this, the persistence of it, it's impossible to solve it. You have to see it clearly to understand why it's so difficult. Abuse *pays*.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
You are right that this is systematic and lasts for a long time before it is actioned upon, even when it doesn't make sense financially. I do appreciate your honesty and your time. You've given me a lot to think about and learn more about. You are awesome!


3 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Have any of you read The Gervais Principle by
@vgr? It's the most accurate and insightful look into *why* large organizations scale & endure, by normalizing a certain sociopathy.https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2009/10/07/the-gervais-principle-or-the-office-according-to-the-office/ …4 replies 7 retweets 34 likes -
This rings true, good link. I’ve seen some companies avoid this Gervais problem to a degree by being more metric focused and brutally honest about real results. Although, that doesn’t lower the “brilliant jerk” quotient.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @peteskomoroch @djpardis and
Yes, one thing I haven't seen mentioned yet in my reading (maybe covered in later chapters?) is the effect that strong mission-oriented leadership *can* create an organizational alignment that overcomes the Gervais hierarchy. It's necessary but not sufficient.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes
Pournelle’s iron law of bureaucracy suggests this can’t happen. https://www.jerrypournelle.com/reports/jerryp/iron.html …
-
-
What people think of as “strong mission-oriented org” one of two things is happening: Either the mission is bullshit B-Corp corporate virtue signaling and is all theater OR there is an asshole at the top, whose jerk qualities are masked under charisma except to direct reports.
3 replies 2 retweets 10 likes -
I have never met an org of the first type where the rank-and-file actually buy the bills hit theater. I wrote this about the latter “asshole at the top” syndrome a few years after the fervais series.https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2013/09/12/the-exercise-of-authoritah/ …
0 replies 0 retweets 3 likes
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.