Identify types and tactics of bullies

Learn to identify and label different types of bullies and the tactics they use.  That will give you power.  You’ll know what you’re up against.  You won’t second-guess yourself.  You’ll be able to align and focus your energy and action.  You’ll get the help you need. Some ways many people think of bullying are:

• Mental, emotional, physical bullying (including harassment and threats).
• Verbal bullying, non-verbal harassment, physical violence (attacks on people, pets or things).

But I focus on 5 types of bullies and their tactics:

1. Overt bullies.
2. Covert bullies.
3. Cyberbullies.
4. “Professional Victims.”
5. Self-bullies.

Often there are no clear and fixed lines between these types of bullies and bullies often use different tactics.  I don’t include sexual bullying as a separate category because that can be done using all the tactics.

Overt bullies act out in public.  They’re easier to see and to get evidence against.

Covert bullies are sneaky, manipulative and controlling.  They abuse in secret; it’s much harder to get evidence against them.

Some of the techniques overt and covert bullies use:

• They get out of control and throw temper tantrums (like children).  They’ll have physical or verbal explosions or give the “Loud Silent Treatment.”  They get power by anger and rage.
• They indulge in personal vendettas and scapegoat victims.
• They make harsh judgments or remarks or put-downs.  They’re experts in personal criticism and negativity.
• They talk down to people.  They push sensitive places in order to make other people feel bad.
• Their feelings matter; yours don't.  They make the rules; you don't.  Their reasons make sense; yours don't.  They're right; you're wrong.
• They’re instigators.  They pour gas on the fire, get other people to fight and they create “uproar.”  They’re splinters.
• They’re control-freaks and turf protectors.  They’re always right and righteous.
• They’re relentlessly negative, critical, naysayers who are impossible to please.  They complain until they get attention.
• They tease, taunt and use name calling put-downs.  They use people as emotional punching bags.
• They make nasty, ugly, vicious, snide jokes or cut you down, followed by “I was just kidding” or “You’re too sensitive” or “I didn’t mean anything bad” or “I was only having a little fun.”
• They mock with non-verbal, disrespectful “editorial” comments like eye rolling or snorting.
• They form school yard cliques to cut out their targets. They’re passive-aggressive.  They manipulate, triangulate, and stimulate unhappiness and drama.
• They spread rumors, gossip, innuendos and lies.
• They’re great debaters who never let you win.  They’re antagonistic, boundary pushers who do the minimum and undercut authority and systems.
• They always blame others.  Nothing is ever their fault.  They have endless excuses and justifications while showing little-no improvement.

Cyberbullies are hostile and personal.  They encourage or organize “mobs” to pile on.

“Professional Victims” – most people overlook this category.  Professional victims act fragile and have hurt feelings in order to gain power and control.  People walk on egg shells near them.  They’re hypersensitive, spoiled brats who cry and blame.  They’re hysterical Drama Queens-Kings.  They make a big deal over things you think aren’t worth fighting about.  They use shame, guilt and anger.

Self-bullies beat themselves up all the time.  They feel unworthy and have low self-esteem.  They wallow in self-questioning and self-doubt, and stay stuck and insecure.  They’re easily manipulated by overt and, especially, by covert bullies.  They’re the hardest people to help.

Please watch the following YouTube videos:

• Five Types of Bullies
• Types of Bullies - General

Knowledge is power.  Learn to recognize all types and styles of bullying so you can protect and defend yourself and your children.

Protect your personal environment from pollution.  Get bullies out of your personal space.

Since all tactics depend on the situation, expert coaching by phone or Skype helps.  We can design a plan that fits you and your situation.  And build your will and skill to carry it out effectively.

What to do when complaints are about a senior manager

Suppose your employees are grumbling about one of your senior managers, the director of a key department – he’s much too harsh and turnover is high.  What should you do? One option, the easy way out, is to ignore it.  This option may be especially appealing if productivity is decent, despite the grumbling.

To read the rest of this article from the Business First of Louisville, see: What to do when complaints are about a senior manager http://louisville.bizjournals.com/louisville/stories/2005/01/24/editorial2.html

But suppose you look deeper and the evidence is clear:  Your senior manager is a critical perfectionist.  He micro-manages with sarcastic criticism and put-downs, browbeats staff relentlessly, never gives compliments and hogs the credit and shovels the blame.  He harasses, bullies and abuses his staff.  Even long-term stars want out and productivity is merely OK.  Unhappiness has spread to other departments that have interacted with him.

You can still find easy explanations to avoid getting involved: You have other worries, there are no red flags on balance sheets, he treats you OK and he hasn’t thrown anything, hit anyone or blown up in public.  Employees always complain about hard-driving leaders and why open a can of worms?

Leaders who still gloss over these situations are merely conflict-avoidant.  They’ll ensure years of hard feelings, declining performance, scorn behind their backs and, eventually, increased costs to clean out a bigger cesspool.  Or maybe they think they’ll be long gone before it backs up to their door.

Another option is often chosen by leaders who think, “We’re all good people here. If we got together we’d agree on an effective compromise.”  They hope the politically correct approach of facilitated negotiation will manufacture a solution that works for everyone.

But in this situation that’s just a band-aid.  It won’t lead to long-term, productive change because the problem is a brutal manager, not a lack of understanding and acceptance of different styles within a reasonable range.

At this point, there’s little incentive for the senior manager to make consistent, lasting change.  During negotiations a lot of talk will happen, fingers will get pointed, people will get argumentative and defensive, hopes will get raised and dashed, and people will become even more polarized, antagonistic and litigious.  You’ve simply delayed a real solution and upped the pain and cost.

I recommend a third option: To give the problem manager a chance to turn things around and mend fences, give him an ultimatum - “change or else” - backed by short timelines, close monitoring, effective support for the changes you want him to make and repeated praise from you for any progress.

Get a coach-advisor the manager can respect, accept and trust.  He will need to learn a new managing style and new communication skills.  Expect stepwise progress as he learns whether his new approach can keep productivity, quality and kudos high.  Help him maintain leadership credibility by requiring training for the whole department hand having him participate.

How do you know when to quit dodging your responsibility and to use the third option? A truthful and global costing out is crucial.  See original article for details.

Take into account the effects of his behavior on:

• Productivity.
• Time spent by HR, staff and supervisors in all departments talking about incidents and dealing with complaints and hurt feelings.
• Effects on inter-departmental interactions.
• Transfer and turnover of good employees, especially outstanding young people who would be the next generation of leaders.
• Monetary and emotional costs of facilitated negotiations that fail.
• Costs for litigation, lawyers and buying silence from many employees.
• Lost respect for you and lost passion for your mission and goals, which will infect the organization.

You may have heard the expression, “People don’t leave organizations; they leave bad supervisors.”  That’s much too simplistic.

Once you have competitive benefits, great people leave bad environments – including poor supervisors, peers and coworkers, and systems that thwart accomplishment.  The most effective way of keeping the best employees and managers is setting high standards and standing up for them.

Remember, your leadership is on trial also.

Often, individuals need coaching and organizations need consulting to help them design and implement a plan that fits the situation.  To get the help you need, call Ben at 1-877-828-5543.

How to deal with antagonistic 'rule people' in the workplace

Company rules and employees who follow them are essential for the success of your business.  But antagonistic “rule-people” can reduce team effort and sabotage your operations. To read the rest of this article from the Denver Business Journal, see: How to deal with antagonistic ‘rule people’ in the workplace http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/stories/2006/02/13/smallb6.html

Rule people aren’t necessarily malicious.  But their rigid inflexibility can cause as many problems as any troublemaker.  Rule-people:

1. See everything in black and white, need all procedures and boundaries clearly defined and labeled, with rewards and consequences spelled out exactly – no gray areas and no choices.  They need uniformity and repeatability, can’t handle ambiguity, uncertainty and what they perceive as mixed messages.
2. Insist on clear titles and privileges.  They want to know everyone’s exact job description, authority, responsibility and accountability.  They can’t handle matrix management – multiple reporting and task relationships.
3. Use authority and experts to back up their opinions.
4. Don’t like change unless they can see immediate and obvious advantages.
5. Need closure, want decisions made and set in stone, even if nothing has to be begun for years.
6. Compare themselves with everybody on every criterion.
7. Relate only through power dynamics – command, control and obeying orders. They’re bullies.  They don’t get things done through relationships or by simply pitching in.  They need to know where everyone stands.  They’re more comfortable knowing they’re on the bottom, than wondering where they are.

We all follow the rules sometimes, but “Edna” is a good example of an antagonistic rule-person. She uses the rules to intimidate people and advance herself at the expense of your supervisory authority and departmental productivity.  For example:

Other typical examples of rule-people in crucial roles are human resource and financial managers, and administrative assistants.

To work with an antagonistic, rule-person, you’ll have to:

• Be exacting and clear about rules, and demand what you need specifically in writing.
• Be prepared to be challenged if you treat the rule-person differently from anyone else.
• Include “professional, team behavior” rules – specific, detailed behaviors, not abstractions or attitudes – as important components in performance evaluations.
• Clearly label your actions; indirect cues, kindly suggestions, informal messages or casual conversations will not be counted as important.  You must say, “This is a verbal warning” or “This is a disciplinary action.”  Antagonistic, rule-people take any softening to mean that your feedback doesn’t have to be acted on.
• When they excuse their bad behavior with innocuous labels like, “It was a misunderstanding,” or “I’m just an honest person,” you must re-label it clearly as unprofessional.  For example: “Yelling or name calling is not a misunderstanding or honesty.  Neither is acceptable behavior at this organization, no matter how you feel.”
• Document everything.

Overly rigid rule-people who use the rules to serve their own selfish interests are problem employees.  They need to be dealt with promptly and decisively – or they will create big problems for you and your organization.

Generally, rule-people who want to help can become good managers and administrators, but they won’t be outstanding leaders.  They can oversee repeatable operations, but they won’t be able to act creatively and appropriately in the face of uncertainty, novel problems and risk.