Five Tips for Dealing with Uncomfortable Office Talk

I would like to welcome Holly McCarthy as our first guest writer. The following article comes from her blog at www.careeroverview.com/blog. As you can tell, she writes interesting articles on careers and job searches and this article focuses on office culture.

By Holly McCarthy

One of the unwritten rules of social conduct is that you should never engage people in conversations related to the topics of politics or religion. Some people, however, fail to realize just why we don’t bring these topics up with others, especially in the workplace. These topics can be particularly divisive and can create many problems within an office culture.

Other uncomfortable topics of discussion have to do with finances and business ventures. Oftentimes a co-worker will attempt to engage you in a conversation related to his or her home business. None of these topics are appropriate for the workplace, end of story. What follows is a list of a few tips for dealing with uncomfortable office talk.

Avoid those trying to initiate the discussion.

If at all possible, avoid the people who are trying to discuss divisive issues such as politics or religion. Perhaps these people congregate in a certain part of the office or have lunch together. Do your best to avoid these people when they are discussing these matters, and maintain a professional demeanor around them, avoiding rudeness or confrontation.

Don’t get involved.

If you absolutely cannot avoid being around these people, make sure you don’t encourage their behavior. As the saying goes, silence is golden. After a while, they may begin to get the message loud and clear without you having said anything at all.

Politely excuse yourself.

Again, if you happen to find yourself in a situation where being in contact with these people is unavoidable and you are uncomfortable, politely excuse yourself. If someone wishes to confront you or questions why you are leaving, explain why in a neutral manner. Letting them know that you don’t think it’s appropriate, whether you agree or not, is the main reason for not engaging in the conversation.

Change the subject.

Maybe you really do like the people, but don’t like discussing these sorts of matters at work. Make a joke or try and change the subject. Doing this a few times will let them know that you certainly want to be part of a conversation with them, but on another, less controversial topic.

Notify a supervisor.

If you feel that the conversations are inappropriate and are beginning to feel alienated or harassed, it is time to let someone else know. Many offices and companies forbid discussions related to politics and religion, and trying to drum up business at work is certainly a conflict of interest.

Note from Dale. Again, I want to thank Holly for finding my blog and contacting me. If you would like info on my Workplace Attitudes Test and possibly avoid problems like those Holly discusses please visit www.workplaceattitudes.com

Are Jerks Disruptors or Are Disruptors Jerks?

This blog has talked about jerks in the workplace and I was discussing this with a friend the other day. He made a point that I found interesting. He said that jerks are everywhere and they earn their status in a variety of ways, but jerks in the workplace are simply disruptive.

In the search to be ever more precise in using language, it appears to me that the “jerk in the workplace” description should be replaced by the word “disruptor.” To put it simply, if an individual yells at his spouse, kicks his dog and flips the bird to various people on the way to work, that person is a jerk. But once at work, if that person does a good job and treats others with a modicum of respect, that person may be a jerk but he is not a disruptor.

The Workplace Attitudes Test does a great job at identifying disruptors because it focuses upon the workplace. All the questions are related to workplace attitudes. Yeah, I know all you fathers with teenage daughters are probably saying, “You mean to tell me that I can’t use the Workplace Attitudes Test to weed out all those dweebs who are trying to date my daughter?” No, sorry, dweeb alerts are outside my field of expertise.

I think dweeb might be a little like a jerk, a little too general, and maybe a bit too imprecise. See www.workplaceattitudes.com to learn more about disruptors who may also be jerks or dweebs.

Is a Good Employee Someone Who is Not a Bad Employee?

The Workplace Attitudes Test is designed to screen out people who have a propensity to be disruptive in the workplace. I refer to these people as “turkeys” or “jerks.” They are disruptive all out of proportion to their numbers. An assumption underlying the Workplace Attitudes Test is if you avoid hiring problem employees you will ipso facto hire good employees.

But we can turn this upside down and ask what constitutes a good employee? You say you demand a better definition than “A good employee is someone who is not a bad employee.” Well, I’ll take a shot.

A good employee is one who is not disruptive. Not good enough? You say you want something more proactive? How about this, a good employee is a person who is slow to judge, who sees the world in gray rather than black and white, and has genuine concern for one’s fellow man.

In sum, a good employee is a person who is decidedly disinclined to say, “I am doing this for your own good.” See www.workplaceattitudes.com

Religious Tolerance

Bill Maher stars in HBO’s Real Time and he brings us the movie “Religulous.” I like Bill Maher, he’s our best ambassador for the blue states. Half Jewish, half Catholic, his early quips about the confessional are hilarious, “Bless me father for I have sinned. I think you have met my lawyer, Mr. Cohen.”

I am sure that he regards the Catholic Church as the First Church of the Perpetual Second Chance, Mormons as purveyors of bullet-proof underwear, Protestants as snake charmers, and other forms of religion as delusional. Bill, in the name of rationality you are a bit extreme. It seems to me that this is a little like the Pyrrhic skeptic who says, “I can know nothing,” and when asked “How do you know?” he replies “I don’t.”

It is for the foregoing sentiments that I didn’t like “Religulous.” Too many straw men and it seemed too easy. Goldwater said, “Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice.” I suspect Goldwater’s motives. Bill, I am sure you are pure of heart, but extremism in the defense of doubt is a vice because it is another form of intolerance.

I am reminded of the joke about the patient who goes to the doctor and is told that he is overweight. The patient says “I’d like a second opinion” and the doctor says ok, “You’re an idiot.”

I admit I may have my doubts about the talking snake, Jonah and the whale, and Noah and the flood. In fact I may be best described as an agnostic with foxhole reservations (there are no atheists in foxholes). Still I don’t think that agnosticism and certitude, even about doubt, make a good platform. It’s like saying, I am not sure and you can’t be sure so you’re wrong.

Shoot down the zealots to your heart’s content but give a little credit to Mother Theresa, Mahatma Gandhi and Albert Schweitzer. You can call them self-deluded do-gooders but they still did a lot of good.

P.S. Bill, I still like you. For more on intolerance see http://www.workplaceattitudes.com/.

The Trickle-Down Theory

This morning on iGoogle I noticed an article referring to WikiHow entitled “9 ways to get by while living in your car.” This is depressingly relevant to more and more people. The situation stems from an abuse of trust and lack of regulation. I fear it was those at the top who proved James Madison’s admonition, “If men were angels, government wouldn’t be necessary.” Anderson Cooper on CNN has a feature called “10 despicable bastards considered responsible to for our present economic situation.” (I paraphrased that.) Even Anderson thinks that 10 are not enough. I am reminded of a comment by Barnie Frank, Congressman from Massachusetts, in response to the statement, “A rising tide lifts all boats.” He said, “yeah, but what if you don’t have a boat?”

I must admit that I feel a little guilty testing people at the lower levels for “good workplace attitudes.” How many people with good attitudes worked for Enron and Merrill Lynch? I bet it was plenty, in fact the vast majority. It only took those at the top to bring the others down. Sure there are jerks everywhere, but I’m not so sure that the crème rises to the top. What rises to the top seems to be more a matter of what a skimmer removes at a sewage treatment facility.

I know, in times such as these it is easy to be cynical. I wish it was as easy as the scenario in the movie “Network” where Peter Finch encourages us to go to the window and yell, “I’m mad as hell and I’m not going to take it anymore.” What then? The movie doesn’t say.

The Workplace Attitudes Test suggests that about one in twenty workers is a jerk. But there is another phenomna going on here. Jerks tend to congregate together and at all levels there is a tendency to ignore the rules. A lower-level jerk can be a pain in the butt to those around them, and jerks at the highest levels can cause untold damage, but the lesson is to ferret out jerks at all levels and don’t hire them. Hey, corporate boards don’t tolerate them. Government regulators, regulate them. Legislators, remember what Madison said about men (and women) not being angels and pass the appropriate legislation. Rules and consideration for one’s fellow man should apply to everyone. Maybe, the Workplace Attitudes Test should be considered a candle in the darkness. See, www.workplaceattitudes.com.

Deep Do Do

Ah, irony of ironies. Here I have developed a pre-employment instrument that is designed to screen out the jerks in the workplace and at the highest level, the pigs have taken over the farm, the fox has been put in charge of the hen house and the engineers have been asleep at the switch. Is this too many clichés? Give me a break, how in hell can I describe the imbroglio called Wall Street and the sell out we call government.

Yes, the Workplace Attitudes Test will help you keep jerks out of the workplace but short of a revolution, what do we do about psychopathic executives and irresponsible regulators? Frankly, I just don’t know. See www.workplaceattitudes.com if you would like to foster an island of sanity in a sea of deep do do.

Workplace Attitude Insurance and More

I think you should assume that the Workplace Attitudes Test is like an insurance policy. But it is more than that. You buy insurance because you want to be compensated when something bad happens; you buy the Workplace Attitudes Test to prevent something bad from happening.

Our statistics show that about one in twenty hires is a bad one. That’s about five percent. Now I know you may think that the following quote could apply to me: "He uses statistics as a drunken man uses lamp-posts, for support rather than illumination." Andrew Lang (1844-1912) But I say unto you, as Johnny Carson said to Ed McMahon, “Wrong moose breath!” It really is about five percent.

Plus I’m not saying this as a perception thing. Like George Carlin observed, “Have you ever wondered why everyone who drives faster than you is a maniac, and everyone who drives slower than you is an idiot?” It’s really is about five percent.

Yes, about one in twenty potential employees has an attitude problem. How many times have you had thoughts like this: "I have never killed a man, but I have read many obituaries with great pleasure." (Clarence Darrow) Or along the same line, consider this quote from Mark Twain, "I didn't attend the funeral, but I sent a nice letter saying I approved of it."

Now, at least in the workplace, you don’t have to have these sentiments. You can screen out these people before nature does it for you. See: www.workplaceattitudes.com.