How do you build a happy workplace?  Typical team-building activities, flex-time, event tickets, free pizza on Fridays, a wilderness-survival course? I suggest a different goal: Create a “winning” workplace instead of a “happy” one.  If you build a winning workplace – including shared sacrifice, accomplishment and reward – you’ll also have a happy one.  You’ll retain only those people, at all levels, who are happy when they’re being very productive, winning and being rewarded.

If you focus on “happy,” you’ll only create an unproductive organization based on begging and bribery.

To read the rest of this article from the Business Journal of Jacksonville, see: Build a winning workplace, not just a happy one http://jacksonville.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/stories/2006/11/06/smallb4.html

Most of us think of “happiness” in terms of “what will they give me?”  But getting paid all that you want and having a good time working only when it’s convenient aren’t the reasons your customers are paying you.  They want results and service.

Outstanding performance will become a test of whether specific team-building activities and rewards are paying off.

You’re not looking for people who are happy only when they can hang out with friends or when they’re doing only what they prefer.  You want people who celebrate when there’s an accomplishment, not just because it’s Friday.

You’re also looking for people who develop camaraderie by feeding off accomplishment; who become more productive working with other good people.

Don’t bother with academic questions like whether it’s better to be an approachable, exuberant leader or a distant one.  Debates stimulated by sociology research or individual preferences won’t help you.  There is no one-style or ideal model of a successful leader. Become the best one of your type of leader.

You don’t need to be a party animal to create a winning team, but you do need to be successful, to foster success for others and to appreciate and reward them – no matter what your style is.  Do that and the best people will be eager to stay.

When we follow experts’ checklists, and we recognize and label our spouses’ behavior as “bullying” and our demanding, controlling, narcissistic, abusive spouses as “bullies,” we generate our own power.  We may use that power to re-enter the fight with renewed vigor and a new sense that we’re right. But many bullies, especially demanding, controlling, narcissistic, sneaky, manipulative, abusive spouses, will not be convinced to change by our experts or our internal power.

There’s a better way.

Bullying spouses will often get their own experts or friends or mothers to say that our experts are wrong.  Their experts will say, “Our spouses are in the normal range and it’s our fault that they’re acting the way they do.  We made them do it.”

Also, many bullies like to debate, argue and fight foreverThey never concede a point or give ground.  No matter how many experts we get to prove that they’re bullies, they won’t changeThey expect to wear us down.  We can see how that argument can go around and around forever.

The fundamental problem with that approach is our willingness to debate and argue because outside experts tell us that we’re right or that we’ve been wronged, and, therefore, our spouses should change.

The better course, the winning way is to ask our inner expert. We ask ourselves, not if they’re bullying us, but simply whether we like or don’t like what they do.  We know what we like and don’t like; we know how much we like or hate it; we know what we’re willing to compromise about or put up with and what we’re not.

We begin with our judgment and act on that judgment. The fundamental and true justifications for what we do are “I want to” and “I don’t want to.”  Not necessarily as a snap judgment, but as a source of energy and power.  Later, we supply a thin coating of logical reasons to make people think we’re rational.

We’re acting on our own standards and for the benefit of our heart and soul – and probably for our kids also.  That’s real power.  Since we know what we want, we don’t need to change our spouse or get our spouse to agree or give permission.  Gone are doubt, hesitation, self-questioning, negative, self-bullying self-talk, insecurity, lack of confidence and low self-esteem.

A declaration of what we want or don’t want is unassailable by outside experts.  We know right away that any who tries to talk us out of what we want by saying, “That’s dumb.  That’s crazy.  That’s silly.  That’s unreasonable.  That’s selfish.  That’s arrogant.  That’s too demanding.  That’s not loving,” is not a person we want to keep as a lover, friend or relative.

Acting because we want to is more than enough justification. Acting as our own expert, on our own best judgment, because we want to is how we take charge of our present and future.

Instead of thinking we need to prove or justify something according to our spouse’s logic, we’re now testing our spouse.

  • We say what we will never tolerate and what we must have.
  • We say what we want and don’t want strongly, and how many chances we’re giving.
  • We say what we’re willing to negotiate or to give, and what we must have in return – and how many chances.

 

This technique is detailed in “Bullies Below the Radar: How to Wise Up, Stand Up and Stay Up,” available fastest from this web site.

Don’t pay attention to objectors or inner objections:

We can’t let our feelings ruin our future.  We’ll fall in love again with someone even better.

Given our standards, is our spouse willing to act in a way that we’ll allow them to stay on our island or will we vote them off?  It’s our island and we’re the only one who votes.

It’s that clear and simple even though the specific action plan will have to be adjusted depending on the situation – money, kids, relatives, culture, etc.

But what if we’re wrong or too picky? On the one hand we do know that experts are wrong.  For example, expert advice for the best way to parent has changed every few years during my lifetime.  There are no guarantees.

On the other hand, we might make a mistake.  So what?  We are learners.  The more we listen to our inner expert, the more expert it will become and the more it will help us.  We’re not children any more.  It’s better to follow our own path than be ruled by parents, spouses or experts.

This choice is wonderfully illustrated in the Daniel Day-Lewis movie version of “The Last of The Mohicans”.

British Major Duncan wants Cora to marry him.  Her father wants her to marry him.  But Cora hesitates.  Cora is thinking about breaking away from the cage of her upbringing.   She tells him of her hesitation.

Duncan says, “Why not let those whom you trust, like your father, help settle what is best for you.  In view of your indecision, you should rely on their judgment and mine.  Will you consider that?”

At first she’s not sure, but later she sees a side of Major Duncan she would never let herself live with.  She tells Duncan, “I have considered your offer.  The decision I have come to is that I would rather make the gravest of mistakes than surrender my own judgment.  My answer to you must be, ‘No.’”

She will follow her own judgment, not theirs.  She will not let those “experts” rule her life.

Be brave.  We can get help to access the expert within us and learn to trust our inner expert.  We can act because we want to and be the hero of our lives.

George Will reported in his Newsweek column, “More Stimulating that the Stimulus,” that “In Ottawa, the sensitivity police in a children’s soccer league announced that any team attaining a five-goal lead would be declared to have lost, thereby sparing the feelings of those who were, if you will pardon the expression, losing.” This was confirmed by many other articles including, “Win a soccer game by more than five pints and you lose, Ottawa league says.”  Although the title says enough, here are some quotes from the article, “In yet another nod to the protection of fledgling self-esteem, an Ottawa children’s soccer league has introduced a rule that says any team that wins a game by more than five points will lose by default… Club director Sean Cale… said the league’s 12-person board of directors is not trying to take the fun out of the game, they are simply trying to make it fair. The new rule, suggested by ‘involved parents,’ is a temporary measure that will be replaced by a pre-season skill assessment to make fair teams.”

The Club fields teams between the ages of 4 and 17.

It’s hard to keep calm when we hear this kind of idiocy.  I suppose next they’ll want the Ottawa Senators to stop shooting if the ever get a two goal lead.

The bullies here are not good soccer players who score many goals, although they might be if they go overboard into vicious fouling and nasty taunting against overmatched opponents.  The bullies here are the members of the Club Board who act like self-appointed “Self-Esteem Police.”

Bullying by “Professional Victims” One of the 5 types of bullying that we deal with regularly is the “Profession Victims” who use their hyper-sensitivity and hurt feelings to manipulate and control their environment.  They win when you accept that your job is not to hurt their sensitive feelings.  Professional Victims and their supporters say your job is to do everything they want in order to please them…and they’re never satisfied. They win when everyone else is walking on eggshells to avoid hurting their feelings and causing them to blow up or withdraw into a pouting silence.

The rules of soccer, when followed, already make the game fair.

Professional Victims assume that their children’s psyches and self-esteem are weak and fragile The slightest problem will damage them forever.  As if kids can’t maintain their self-esteem when they’re beaten badly by a better team. I assume, on the contrary, that children begin strong and have to be taught to see themselves as weak and fragile Children are not damaged by failing or learning their present location in the hierarchy of inborn gifts and hard work.  I assume that when children fail it’s because they haven’t worked hard enough.  The solution to not succeeding is to work harder to fulfill your potential.  Children survive intense pressure, challenge and struggle.  When they improve, their self-confidence and sense of competence increases. Also, we all have much more choice about how we feel You have to be taught to have low self-esteem after you lose at something you know you’re not very good at.  You have to be taught to have stress, anxiety and depression after you lose.  You have to be taught to wallow in negative self-talk and self-bullying.  You have to be taught to give up. People who succeed in life respond by directing their energy into a vow to do better and a determination to work harder, get better and win at life We’ve all been beaten down at times.  We’ve all found out where we stand in the hierarchy of who’s faster, stronger, smarter, prettier.  And our position in that hierarchy has nothing to do with happiness or self-esteem.  Ask any great athlete how they motivate themselves after having been beaten.  Ask any great mother or father how they motivate themselves to do better after they’re done something really dumb in their family.

The general rule is never to give the Self-Esteem Police or the Professional Victims credence or power.  Treat them as bullies and learn to stop them.  Tell them to suck it up; stop creating and wallowing in hurt feelings.  The lesson for these kids is to have more inner strength, courage and perseverance and to get more skillful so you can succeed in the real-world.

We need to learn how to win.  Winning is critical for our survival as individuals and societies.

The general rule in winning big is to not be a jerk about it.  Grownups are supposed to learn not to thrash their kids when they’re young,  The big kids in any extended family are supposed to learn how to make it fun for the little kids to play ball with them.  We’re supposed to learn how to be gracious winners when someone isn’t in our league in any game. The general rule in dealing with defeat is to gather yourself, get more skillful and do better next time.  And if you’re not good enough to be a champion, decide to be happy enjoying playing at any game in life, whether it’s sport, dance, music, art or any other area of endeavor where there are only a few “work class” players.

Expert coaching can help you design a plan for each individual child; from those who tend to be aggressive and nasty to those who tend to withdraw and need lots of encouragement.

By the way, so much scorn was heaped on the Ottawa soccer club that they did get rid of that rule.  They now have a new mercy rule “under which a game will be called once one team has a lead of eight goals. Whichever team is ahead at that time will be credited with the win,”

My advice was asked on this situation on condition that the author remains anonymous.  What would you do if you faced a two-faced coworker or teammate who treated you civilly in public but attacked you when you were alone?  And no one else in the office knew or would believe you. In public, Bart (fictitious name) smiled and seemed helpful to Fran (fictitious name).  Even though he didn’t know her specialty, he started offering polite, detailed suggestions in an authoritative and convincing way about how she could improve her performance.  Fran felt like she was being micro-managed in a way she couldn’t resist or argue back.  It would take too long to show why his suggestions wouldn’t work and she didn’t think everyone else was really interested.  Other members of the team started to think she was pretty incompetent since Bart knew so much more.

In private, Fran asked Bart to stop being so controlling and making her look bad.  He agreed to, but then he continued to subtly demean her in public.  In addition, he started ignoring her, leaving her out of the information loop, and putting her down subtly in front of others.  Fran again asked him to stop.  Bart said he wanted them to have a good working relationship and suggested a meeting to clear the air.  Fran was initially wary, but he persisted and she agreed.

At the private meeting, Bart told Fran she was the worst person he'd ever worked with.  She wasn’t completely bad professionally, but she had the worst personality he’d ever seen.  He wanted her to treat him with as much friendliness as she treated other people in public.  Fran was mystified because he didn't say who these other people were and she thought she already treated everyone politely and professionally.

He said Fran was bullying him, he couldn't sleep at night because of her, she was just as hostile and nasty as another girl he used to work with and his girlfriend agreed that Fran was bullying him, even though Fran had never met her.  He said he’d been verbally cruel to people in the past, but he didn't want to be with her.  He said Fran was the worst person he'd ever worked with and the worst thing about his otherwise perfect job.

Fran felt scared because nothing like this had ever happened to her before and because Bart said everything very quietly and calmly with a twisted look of pure hate on his face.  He seemed to be enjoying it.  Fran had never seen him look or act this particular way before, so she thought others wouldn't believe her.

He carried on this way for an hour and Fran felt like she was in the presence of a psycho.  She apologized profusely.  He kept twisting the knife.  She said she was sorry for “bullying” him.  He kept twisting the knife.  She asked how she could make things better between them.  He kept twisting the knife.

Since she had to work with him closely, Fran pretended to be his friend from that day on.  She followed up two weeks later to see if he was happier.  He said he no longer thought of her at night, but added that he hated her because of the way she treated him.  He didn’t stop correcting her in public and he continued to sabotage her work.

Don’t waste time psychoanalyzing Bart and Fran or thinking that some trust building exercises, communication techniques or skillful conflict resolution will bring them together.  Fran should realize that she and Bart live on different planets.  She thinks she’s okay and he’s a scary psycho.  He hates her guts, thinks she bullies him and that professional behavior allows him to vent his feelings and hatred.

In her world, she’s faced with a relentless, crazy person who blames everything on her and is out to get her.  In that office, she’ll always feel his hatred shooting into her back.  She’s also afraid he might blow and physically harm her.  She must be willing to skillfully fight a work war against a fanatic or have her credibility and reputation destroyed.  Or leave.  For example; see my article in the Denver Business Journal on winning a work-war.

Notice that every time she tried to please him by taking the blame or being nice, he only twisted the knife more.  Fran’s comment that she never met his girlfriend probably shows that she thinks she can prove her case with reasoning, logic and good will because everyone will listen and be objective.

There are many other variants of the two-faced, bullying colleague.  Some stealth bullies spread rumors and lies behind your back.  Some cut you down behind your back.  Some drive a wedge between you and other people by telling them that you said bad things about them.  These back-stabbers always work in the dark and can’t be pinned down

My books, CDs and coaching can help.

What did Fran do?  Fran secretly hated Bart for what he had put her through.  She didn’t want to become buddies with him.  Also, she didn’t want to waste her time proving to everyone how mean and crazy he was.  Three month's later, she secured another job and left.  Since then, she’s been happy at the new job.

That’s one effective solution to deal with people like Bart, but what will Fran do if she encounters another one.  For example, if she’s highly skilled and competent, she’ll make someone else jealous, scared and angry.  If she’s beautiful, she’ll arouse these same feelings in some other women.

What would you do if you were Fran?