"The No Asshole Rule: Building a Civilized Workplace and Surviving One That Isn't"

We can’t help but be entrained every time we pick up a newspaper or read a cutting edge management book. The stories used to illiterate central themes in an article or book could just as well be taken from the daily business practices of the Baltimore Area Council: improve cash flow, pay your vendors late; obliterate your rivals; appearances count more than reality; keep as much information secret as possible.

The book that has really caught our attention of late is The No Asshole Rule, Building a Civilized Workplace and Surviving One That Isn’t by Robert I. Sutton, PhD. Some might think that working for an organization that holds the Scout Law and Oath as core mission statement elements might not suffer from such a problem as the “Asshole”, we would beg to differ. Dr. Sutton defines an Asshole with a two part test. “Test One: After talking to the alleged asshole, does the “target” feel oppressed, humiliated, de-energized, or belittled by the person? In particular, does the target feel worse about him- or herself? Test Two: Does the alleged asshole aim his or her venom at people who are less powerful rather than at those people who are more powerful?”

If you were asked to invest in a public company with a staff turn-over rate at near 40%, much of this not due to the economy, what would you think? If the spike in the turn-over rate for this company was during the tenure of one CEO would you think there might, possibly, be a problem? Now here is an interesting fact: employee related expresses have not gone down. There is not an observable business reason for the turn-over rate.

With the economy in its current state (one job opening for every five job applicants) the effect of a 40% turn-over rate on current employees is much like being held hostage. Employees start to show signs of Stockholm Syndrome. To get on their employer's “good side” they will develop psychological characteristics to satisfy them: dependency; lack of initiative; and an inability to act, decide or think (“Understanding Stockholm Syndrome”, F.B.I Law Enforcement Bulletin, on-line archive).

A non-profit does not have to react to the financial markets. As long as a non-profit CEO can control the narrative with their board they stand the chance of not being held accountable for their actions. Don’t confuse board members with reports that most will not read. Make sure board meetings are short and entertaining. Keep any views that run contrary to the narrative miles away from the board. Quickly remove anyone that might contradict the CEO approved version of reality. Pray daily that the funding numbers are normative because this is the single measure that will get the attention of a non-profit board fast.

The National Council of the Boy Scouts of America keeps tabs on some of these issues; but they can be feed a narrative as well. A Boy Scout council has five major stakeholders; the executive board, the National Council, charter organizations, volunteers (council and district) and employees. Charter organizations, as a group, are about the weakest of the stakeholders. The important objective for the Scout executive is to ensure that the board and the National Council are strongly in his or her court in a triangulation against one of the other stakeholders. There are minor stakeholders as well; the general public, contributors, unit level volunteers, youth members. But for personal survival the major stakeholders are what count for a Scout executive.

It will be interesting to see if Ethan Draddy can continue the triangulation and control the narrative.