by The New York Times | Nov 15, 2019 | General
Kwame Anthony Appiah, who is a New York Times columnist, answers questions from readers.
READER: I just finished a big project working under a male manager with whom I don’t get along. I’m a woman in my 20s, and he’s significantly older.
We work in teams and our members spend a lot of time together – working, travelling and socialising. People who haven’t worked with this manager see him as charismatic and friendly. However, when he gets stressed, he has temper tantrums, snaps at people and digs in to defend his positions, rejecting all opposing points of view. This behaviour is unpleasant, especially when it is directed at me.
I’m equally troubled by a number of specific occasions when I felt his behaviour clearly crossed a line. Once, over drinks, he mentioned that he thinks most of the women at our company are “weird”.
Another time he said, seemingly jokingly, that he thinks women are the future and should run the world, but that men should “still be in charge of entertainment – seriously, men are funnier”.
After he had snapped at me in front of a client, a male member of the client team came up to me and said: “It must be hard to be a woman on your team.”
On another evening, we were hanging out as a team and watching music videos. I put on a video in which a female pop singer looks amazing and does a lot of dancing. He proceeded to cross-examine me and the other woman in the room, trying to force us to agree that the pop singer’s behaviour was a step backward for feminism.
We defended ourselves and asked him to read about third-wave feminism. He got upset and said he just wanted his daughter to be “like you two” and “not like her”. It was really awkward. He apologised the next day.
I’m upset that this guy thinks I’m a willing audience for his anti-women remarks when I’m really just trying to preserve my standing as a good worker, as well as my emotional well-being by not engaging with someone who rarely changes his mind.
I think my company needs to know about my boss’s bad behaviour, but I’m not sure what’s relevant. I know how I feel: His behaviour is anti-women and his professional development should be curtailed until he works to change himself.
If I don’t say anything, nothing happens. If I do, I need to be precise about my accusations. What’s fair in this situation?
KWAME: First, let me state the obvious: Your boss has a problem that can easily become the company’s problem. What counts as harassment – in particular, the “hostile environment” kind – is something you could discuss with HR, or even with an employment lawyer.
Because it’s unlawful to penalise people for reporting discrimination, HR generally will urge their companies to avoid even the appearance of retaliation. Whether your boss has crossed a legal line, he’s hovering close to it. In HR terms, he sounds like a lawsuit waiting to happen.
From an ethical perspective, it is important to have clear rules to discourage an atmosphere that makes things harder for women. That you have some recourse here is a reflection of a social development. People now understand that creating a workplace environment hostile to women is wrong. The rise of the #MeToo movement shows that existing legal remedies need to be coupled with changing norms, but norms without sanctions have no bite.
But it is troubling that the remedies to the Horrible Boss problem tend to be restricted to actions that specifically relate to gender, race, religion and the like. You’re just as dismayed by other aspects of your boss’s behaviour, and why shouldn’t you be? There are two wrongs here: making things worse for women and making things bad for everybody.
In this country, alas, we often take the ill-treatment of employees by their supervisors to be an unavoidable, if regrettable feature of the workplace. While labour employment laws vary, the usual default is that employers may fire employees “at will”. There is no presumption that if you do your job as required, you won’t be fired without good cause.
Of course, you can try to negotiate a contract in which you and your employer agree in advance that you’ll be fired only for a specified range of causes. But without a union to bargain for you or a tradition like academic tenure, the typical employee will find it next to impossible to negotiate such a deal as an individual.
This article first appeared in The New York Times.
by The New York Times | Nov 1, 2019 | General
Columnist Megan Greenwell answers a reader’s question:
Q: I’m a litigation attorney and am absolutely miserable. Recently, I went on a dream vacation abroad with a friend for a week, but concerns about work plagued me just about every day. I woke up from nightmares about work several times and felt incredibly guilty about not billing enough time. When I returned from vacation, I intended to take an additional day off to recover from jet lag, but I woke up from another work nightmare and went to the office despite feeling exhausted.
I feel like I can’t escape my job. It’s all I think about as I try to fall asleep. I wake up well before my alarm most days because I’m worried about work. I’ll cut activities with friends short because I start to worry that I need to get more work done. I also find myself becoming the buzzkill, as I regularly end up discussing my unhappiness with work.
There are parts of the job that I love, and I’ve produced some great work. But I spend most of my days on tasks that I hate. I think it’s time to either find a new job that’s a better fit or get out of the legal profession entirely. The problem I’m facing is that I’m at my third firm in a bit over two years and have only been here for about three months, which I’m afraid will throw up major red flags to prospective employers. I’m trying to decide if I should just tough it out for a while longer, start applying for new positions, or quit and take the time to recover from this career and reinvent myself for something new. – Dallas
A: I have decided there were only four types of work problems:
1. My boss annoys me.
2. My co-workers (usually millennials) annoy me.
3. I am dissatisfied with the type of work I do and/or don’t know what to do next.
4. I don’t actually have serious work problems but am anxious about that.
Numbers 1 and 2 can be tricky to solve, but the stakes are never as high as you think. If you are frequently in rooms where you like absolutely everyone, congrats, I guess, but functioning in the real world requires dealing with a lot of very annoying people! That’s not to say you just have to get over a boss who clips his nails or eminent-domains your work, but, buddy, the world does not need your four paragraphs of flowery prose about the exact ways in which he sucks.
Most people suck.(Fun fact: Millennials do not suck more than most.) You can deal with them or quit and go looking for a place where a smaller minority of them do, but bear in mind that you might suck, too, so don’t assume that working for yourself will be any better.
Numbers 3 and 4 are the sticky ones, because fundamentally they’re about your psychology. Jobs aren’t sentient, which means you can’t talk any sense into them, which means the only good way to solve problems is by talking some sense into yourself regardless of whose fault they are. I do believe that most work problems (and non-work problems) would be mostly solved if every man would sign up for therapy, but men tend to react quite poorly when you tell them that.
So, Dallas. Your tough situation has led you to misidentify your actual problem, which has nothing to do with how prospective employers see your résumé, and is in fact about your relationship with your work more generally. You don’t say why you left those other two jobs, but I’m going to take a wild guess that this is not the first time you’ve felt serious anxiety about work.
While I love my current job, I recognised far too much of myself in your letter. I have stress dreams about work all the time! My spouse and I have each ruined our share of fun activities by fixating on our jobs! Whether sitting at my desk or having drinks with friends, I frequently have flashes of realising that “if I don’t do this particular task right this instant I will never achieve anything in life!” Because I very recently started a new job after a tumultuous exit from my old job that has left me worried about my former colleagues, I’ve spent the last two months having anxiety about both the old job and the new job!
You and I, Dallas, need to rewire our brains, not find the elusive perfect job. Therapy really does help (or so I, uh, hear), as does creating a more fulfilling life outside the office. Read Jenny Odell’s brilliant work of philosophy/memoir/self help, How to Do Nothing, which has done a better job of settling my brain, at least temporarily, than anything else in recent memory. If you are a person who tends to bury your feelings about things (not that I know anything about that), make a point of opening up to people you trust who know you well enough to give more personally tailored wisdom.
None of this is to say you should stick it out at a job you hate. I am an advocate of quitting bad jobs when you can afford it, so get out of there! Three months at a job is not long enough to justify putting it on your résumé – I’ve entirely removed the four months I spent working under an abusive boss from my professional record without negative effects – so don’t worry about that.
Thinking of your time off as a recovery period is exactly the right mind-set. Before you can even think about your next career move, you need to train your brain to obsess about work less through hobbies and volunteer work and maybe even some mild boredom. Then worry about figuring out what your dream job is.
Make good decisions, go find a hobby, stop blaming millennials for your problems and quit your terrible job.
This first appeared in The New York Times
by The New York Times | Oct 7, 2019 | General
The New York Times workplace columnist Megan Greenwell answers readers’ workplace questions.
Q: For more than 20 years, I had the job I always dreamt about. I knew since junior high school that I wanted to work in what was then called the record business.
After graduating, I landed a job at a PR firm and over the years climbed to a senior vice-president position, earning well over six figures plus a nice, steady bonus.
After the president of the company was unceremoniously booted from the firm he had founded, a new guy came in and within a short period fired people he felt had loyalty to the old regime. After more than 20 years I was out. For the next 15 or so years I stayed involved in music, but could never land a position like I had previously.
Last year I got separated and moved across the country. Although I had money coming in from my pension and early social security payments, I was depressed because I couldn’t fit back into what the business had morphed into.
Finally, after encouragement from my kids, I decided to apply for a job at a retail chain I respected. Although the pay scale was at the opposite side of what I was making, I thought it would be good for me to be doing something and I thought I could be an asset.
Six months later, I got promoted and received a small bonus for being an associate.
When I walked out of the store after being told the news, I was so happy I wanted to post about it, but I am a bit hesitant that people who knew me in my previous life, working with big-name music artists, will think less of me now.
Even people I work with now don’t know about my history. I’m comfortable with my transition, I just don’t know how others will react. How would you suggest I come to terms with this?
A: There’s no way to make anything feel less fraught without talking openly about it, so if you announce on Facebook that you’re loving your retail job and you’re proud to have been promoted, it will stick in someone’s mind the next time they’re in a similar situation.
Some fake friends and old professional rivals will probably make a joke or two behind your back, but I’d wager that more people will be genuinely happy that you’re doing so well and relieved that you’re showing them a version of life they’ve been irrationally afraid of.
Q: My colleague and I have an informal snack corner in our shared cubicle. We enjoy it when people stop by to eat some salty and sweet items we provide. But there are some co-workers who either don’t contribute or bring a single box of biscuits per month and act as if they deserve a medal. It isn’t the money, but the principle. How should we handle this?
A: This is a nice thing to do. I wonder if people just think you’re even nicer? You don’t owe them an unlimited supply of treats, of course, but have you ever been specific about the terms?
I will confess to occasionally dropping in on a co-worker pal who always has a good stash of sweets and I have never brought her some in return. You have shown me the error of my ways; now you have to do the same for your colleagues.
Put up a sign that says “contributions appreciated”. Watch the treats flow in.
Q: I have been at my job for about two months. I have learnt quickly that there is little work for me to do. While I am at the office eight hours a day, I perform maybe one or two hours’ worth of work because that is all there is available.
I have informed my boss that my projects are done, yet it appears nothing more is coming my way. I feel guilty sitting in my chair reading the news all day when I’d rather be doing my job. What should I do during my downtime? Should I discuss this more with my boss?
A: Having too much work to do can be awful for one’s stress levels and overall sanity, but it is far preferable to having no work to do.
Being paid to do nothing sounds great, but doing nothing generally means watching TV in your pyjamas, not sitting upright at a desk in the office. Your situation is more analogous to the “rubber room” where New York City teachers accused of misbehaviour have to sit all day while they’re being investigated, or my idea of hell.
I asked a friend in the same situation how to survive. “Keep quietly and persistently suggesting to your boss that you have no more work on your plate and would happily take on anything else at any time, but mostly to build a paper trail in case someone asks why you aren’t doing anything,” she said.
It’s a good idea, to which I would add only: use your free hours to look for another job.
Megan Greenwell is the editor in chief of Deadspin and a workplace columnist at The New York Times.
by The New York Times | Sep 27, 2019 | Employers
When Ariel Coleman quit her last job as a project manager in the corporate office of a bank, it wasn’t because her new employer had
offered her a raise, a different role or more seniority.
“The work-life balance is just much better,” she said.
At her new company, everyone works from home on Tuesdays and Thursdays at whatever hours they choose. Coleman can go for a
run or walk her dog.
At the bank, she said, people judged her for taking all her paid time-off. At her new workplace, it is encouraged, which is why she didn’t
mind answering work emails while sitting by the fire on a recent camping trip.
“A client calls me at 8pm and I’m happy to talk to them, because that means the next day at 10am, I can take my dog to the vet. It
enables me to make my career more seamless with my life,” she said.
Many of Coleman’s friends have chosen their jobs for similar reasons, she said. “That’s how millennials and Gen Z-ers are playing the
game. It’s not about jumping up titles, but moving into better work environments,” she said. “They’re like silent fighters, rewriting policy
under the nose of the boomers.”
For many, work has become an obsession, and long hours and endless striving something to aspire to. It has caused burnout,
unhappiness and gender inequity, as people struggle to find time for children or passions or pets or any sort of life besides what they do for
a salary.
But increasingly, younger workers are pushing back. More of them expect and demand flexibility, such as paid leave for a new baby and
long time-off, along with daily things such as the ability to work remotely, come in late or leave early or make time for exercise or
meditation.
The rest of their lives happens on their phones, not tied to a certain place or time; why should work be any different?
Today’s young workers have been called lazy and entitled. Could they, instead, be among the first to understand the proper role of work
in life – and end up remaking work for everyone else?
It is still rare for companies to operate this way and the obstacles are bigger than any company’s HR policies. Some older employees may think new recruits should suffer the way they did, and employers benefit from having always-on workers.
Even those who are offering more flexibility might be doing it because unemployment is so low and they’re competing for workers.
Also, it is a luxury to be able to demand flexibility in the first place. Those who can, tend to have university degrees and white-collar
careers and can afford to take a pay cut in exchange or be highly selective about their jobs.
Still, there are signs that things could change for more workers. Some large and influential companies have recently begun talking about the need to shift from prioritising shareholders to taking care of their employees too. As more millennials become bosses and more job seekers demand a saner way to work, companies will have no choice.
“They have proved the model that you don’t need to be in the office 9 to 5 to be effective,” said Ana Recio, the executive vice-president
of global recruiting at Salesforce, a tech company. “This generation is single-handedly paving the way for the entire workforce to do their
jobs remotely and flexibly.”
Written by Claire Cain Miller & Sanam Yar for The New York Times.
by The New York Times | Sep 13, 2019 | Employers
Chances are you’ve attended a meeting today. Was it time well spent or a soul-draining exercise in futility?
Although no two meetings are the same, their collective impact on the culture of a company is significant. Meetings matter. They are the forum where people come together to discuss ideas, make decisions and be heard. Meetings are where culture forms, grows and takes hold.
So it stands to reason that if an organisation desires a more inclusive culture – and leaders want to model inclusion – then meetings are the place to start. But, from what we’ve seen, executives often miss the mark. Like a plate spinner at the circus, leading a meeting requires eyeballing a dozen different details such as agenda setting, time management, conflict resolution, decision-making and more.
Inclusion? Who has the bandwidth to keep yet another plate in the air?
But leaders must.
Decades of research show that diverse organisations are more engaged, creative and financially successful.
Our previous study, an examination of 360° feedback collected from more than 1 000 female executives, gave us insights into why some people feel shut out in meetings.
We learnt that women are often uncomfortable speaking up and are more than twice as likely to be interrupted in group dialogue, particularly in male-dominated industries.
Our more recent coaching experiences reveal that men from minority groups feel similarly. If organisations fail to address this issue, women and minorities will remain on the periphery and in turn, the company’s creativity and innovation will suffer.
Setting a diverse workforce up for success requires a commitment to inclusion. This means more companies need to create meeting cultures where diverse contributors have equal impact.
As a leader, it is your responsibility to actively and intentionally give them opportunities to do so.
The problem is that many leaders don’t know where to start. Inclusive behaviour in meetings can be wide-ranging, from making sure everyone has a seat at the table to giving each person a chance to speak.
To simplify what amounts to a complex equation, we coach leaders to focus on three key areas.
Customs
Priya Parker, author of The Art of Gathering, emphasised the importance of setting the stage for inclusion before your meeting even begins. Focus on structural behaviour that makes people feel comfortable.
This could be as simple as sending a pre-meeting email to attendees and inviting people to come “ready to share as well as listen”.
It may sound like a little thing you can delegate to another employee, but in our everyday work, we hear loud and clear that leaders are in the best position to make people feel safe in this kind of setting.
She suggested leaders demonstrate what she calls “gracious authority”, which is a polite demeanour that nonetheless leaves little doubt about who is in charge.
To set the tone, welcome people by name as they enter the meeting room, and make sure the seating accommodates everyone.
In the meeting itself, customs and expectations should be established upfront. Let people know they can speak openly and offer a dissenting opinion without fear of retribution.
If you have introverts in the room, start with a brief round robin activity that includes everyone and helps the attendees get to know one another better.
If it is an especially large group, either break people up into smaller teams or rotate the seating halfway through the exercise.
Conductor
The role of the conductor in an orchestra is to manage the tempo of a performance. He listens critically to keep musicians playing in unison and actively control the dynamic to prevent one instrument from overpowering the rest.
The same goes for leaders in meetings. You need to conduct and give everyone space to play their part.
In many cases, one alpha individual dominates the conversation. In other cases, there is an “in-crowd” or a group of allies who share commonalities, such as gender, personal interests or job seniority.
The in-crowd often takes up more space in the room, supports the same ideas and speaks up inordinately, drowning out differing viewpoints.
Regardless of the specifics, it is your job to step in when strong personalities overreach, tamp down offenders and actively bring all voices into the conversation.
Take advice from a few of our most successful clients:
Set clear ground rules at the start of the meeting and stick to them. When inclusive meeting conduct is codified, it puts offenders on notice and makes everyone aware of their rights and responsibilities.
Watch closely for dominators and interrupters. If someone tries to control the dialogue, interject and redirect the conversation back to the broader group.
If someone is interrupted, step in quickly. You might say: “Wait a minute, I want to hear more of what Janice has to say,” or “Back up. I am intrigued with what Luke was telling us. Luke, can you finish your thought?”
Leaders who actively orchestrate meeting interactions in this way create an inclusive space by leaving room for everyone to contribute and set a standard for respect across the group.
Commitment
Most organisations have already put a stake in the ground on diversity in hiring practices and creating diverse teams. The same needs to happen for inclusion. We need to insist that it is the standard in meetings and beyond.
If you’re a leader, start with yourself. Define inclusivity explicitly. Be clear and transparent about what it looks like in meetings.
Model the behaviour you expect to see from others.
Hold teams accountable for following through every time. Only then will people feel empowered to offer their best ideas and speak the truth, instead of telling you what they think you want to hear.
It is important to remember that leading an inclusive meeting is a skill that you have to develop and refine. Find out what is working and what isn’t by asking your team members for feedback either at the end of your meetings or with an email or app that allows anonymity.
Checklist for leading inclusive meetings:
Review your list of attendees: are you missing people who represent diverse or dissenting points of view?;
• Send the agenda out ahead of time;
• Greet each meeting participant warmly, by name, so that everyone feels welcome;
• State ground rules upfront and make sure they explicitly foster inclusion;
• Mediate and facilitate: keep track of who’s talking and who’s not;
• Exhibit zero tolerance for interruptions. Prevent anyone from dominating or derailing the discussion;
• Remain engaged in the conversation from beginning to end;
• Follow up after the meeting. Thank participants for attending and ask for their feedback.
• Meetings have changed over the years. We gather virtually, across time zones and often with far less face-to-face time. Yet, one thing has not changed. Meetings are still the prime venue to build and foster a fully inclusive culture that engages and equips people to do their best at work. As a leader, it is your job to make sure that they do.
Kathryn Heath and Brenda Wensil
This Harvard Business Review article first appeared in The New York Times.
