“It’s happening at 8:30 tomorrow morning” my husband told me without preamble when we called me on his way home from work last night. He did not even have to explain the “it” he was referring to; I knew immediately that the “jerk” he works with was finally being fired. I felt a sense of relief that my husband would no longer have to deal with this person who had made his work so much more frustrating, but I also felt sad. Sad for the individual being let go as well as the person tasked with doing the firing. It was a difficult situation.
As I lay in bed last night wishing I could just fall asleep instead of dreading what was going to happen in the morning I found dozens of question swirling around my head. There was one in particular that I kept coming back to. Does behaving like a jerk translate into someone actually being a jerk? No, I concluded. Just because someone acts like a jerk it does not automatically make them a jerk. But then how do you decide when you need to separate yourself from someone versus try to help them deal with a difficult situation in a better way?
When I listened to the interview of Dr. Bob Sutton at Stanford University, I was absolutely in agreement with his ideas of dealing with and reducing our contact with “jerks” in the workplace. This morning though, I find myself still wondering how we get to the point of slapping the label of “jerk” on someone.
It seems like a prime example of the fundamental attribution error to label someone as a “jerk” instead of attempting to understand what caused them to react in a negative way. But perhaps it’s not that simple either; I do believe that some people are predisposed to be mean no matter the situation they find themselves in.
To gain better clarity I took a deeper look at the attribution process and in particular at Kelley’s (1973) covariation model. According to Kelley, we can estimate whether the root cause for someone’s behavior is internal or external by determining levels of the following (Schneider, Gruman, & Coutts, 2012):
- Distinctiveness – Is this behavior unique to this situation?
- Consensus – Are others behaving in this same way in this situation?
- Consistency – Is this typical behavior for this situation and person?
This method can help us determine if the behavior stems from an out-of-character reaction to an external situation or if the behavior should be attributed to internal personality/character factors.
So then, should we default to labeling someone a jerk if it turns out that the behavior stems from internal factors? I think not, and I think it can even be detrimental to the individual being labeled. I believe that the average person who is labeled a jerk is aware of the stigma they carry. They usually know that they rub people the wrong way and that others don’t like them. While some may seem to be jerks down to their souls, could this be a self-fulfilling prophecy in others? The jerk knows they are disliked but perhaps they don’t think they have the power to change who they are. As a result, they don’t attempt to better themselves and instead write off their membership in the jerk club to innate and unchangeable personality deficits; the “jerk” lives up to the label.
Instead of labeling people we should focus on describing their behavior. Rather than calling someone a jerk, we could say that they responded inappropriately. Thus, it would be easier to detach the behavior from the character of the person. It would allow the person to still see themselves as “good” and choose to view their bad behavior as an exception rather than defining them.
In the workplace, perhaps we could identify the behaviors that we are wishing to encourage instead of focusing on the behaviors that we want to abolish. Instead of saying “no jerks allowed” we could institute a mandate that requires that employees always respond with kindness. The emphasis would be on promoting positive behaviors instead of labeling people by their behaviors, good or bad. I propose that by discouraging bad behaviors, instead of condemning individuals, we could have success changing the way people handle difficult situations.
References:
Schneider, F. W., Gruman, J. A., & Coutts, L. M. (2012). Applied social psychology: Understanding and addressing social and practical problems (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Bob Sutton (Stanford University) – The No Jerk Rule | Stanford eCorner. (2007). Retrieved from https://ecorner.stanford.edu/podcast/the-no-jerk-rule/
Tags: attribution theory, fundamental attribution error, Kelley's covariation model, no jerks allowed, organizations
Wow! What a thought-provoking post!
What I found funny was that as I was reading your post I was thinking “Well, if someone acts like a jerk all of the time, then yes, they are a jerk and it is caused by internal factors…but if someone thought I was a jerk it is probably just because I’m having a bad day!”. Then I realized I was displaying actor-observer difference! Schneider, Gruman, & Coutts (2012), define actor-observer difference as blaming everyone else’s behaviors on internal factors, but explaining your own behavior on external factors. The more I learn about social psychological theories, the more I find them in my own behaviors.
I love how you mentioned the self-fulfilling prophecy because I pretty much see the self-fulfilling prophecy in life every other day. I am a server on the weekends, and the way I treat my customers drastically effects how they treat me and then tip me. For example, some servers at my restaurant have a negative stereotype that a specific culture does not tip well. Because some servers think they will not get tipped, they give terrible service, and then don’t get a good tip, which encourages the negative stereotype in the server’s mind. However, I treat every single customer the same, and get tipped well because I give them good service regardless if I think they will tip me or not! This being said, I think it is completely possible that the man you are referring to as the “jerk” is treated in a way that reinforces his coworkers’ biases. For example, if I thought my coworker was a jerk, I would probably try to stay away from him, causing him to think I am rude, which would make him at like a jerk to me.
Reference:
Schneider, F. W., Gruman, J. A., and Coutts, L. M. (Eds.). (2012). Applied Social Psychology. Understanding and Addressing Social and Practical Problems. CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.
Hello,
I’m sorry to hear about your husband’s work situation. It’s certainly not easy to deal with a “jerk” in the workplace. Barsade (2002), studied how people can influence each other’s mood and emotions in group settings. He explained that emotional contagion is when people’s moods or emotions are transferred from one another in group settings. A person who is exhibiting aggressive or bullying behavior at work can create a very toxic work environment. It’s certainly not beneficial to allow negative behavior to ripple out into the workplace.
I can certainly understand Dr. Sutton’s view of zero tolerance towards such behavior in the workplace (PSU WC, 2019). While I agree with Dr. Sutton’s view of not allowing a “jerk” to infect a workplace with negative behavior, I struggle when I think about what happens after this “jerk” is fired. Perhaps this person becomes a problem for another employer and a vicious cycle of negative behavior and job loss continues.
I can’t help but wonder if this person was aware of their behavior. I’m not sure if any interventions were attempted prior to making the decision to fire this person. This person’s poor behavior could have been a sign that they were not satisfied with their job. This person might have been experiencing role ambiguity where they might have felt confused over their status in the workplace. It would be helpful to try and understand where this behavior stems from.
Your use of Kelly’s Covariation Model (1973), seems like a great tool to help understand if this person’s behavior was internally or externally caused (Schneider, Gruman & Coutts, 2012). This might be a proactive way to reduce interoffice conflicts. Understanding where this person’s behavior stems from can certainly provide a path towards finding the right interventions to improve the outcome of this situation.
This week’s lesson has helped me realize the importance of early intervention, especially around communication in any group or work environment. I think many workplaces would benefit from Sullivan’s Communication Training Program (Schneider, Gruman & Coutts, 2012). This program has been used to help teams improve communication and particularly enhance personal awareness of communication. Improving our own awareness of communication is very important because we tend to think we communicate better than we actually do. It might be beneficial to ensure that all employees receive communication training. This can help a person who acts like “jerk” to be more aware of their behavior and can help other employees assess their own communication skills towards negative behaviors. Offering the right tools to change behavior in the workplace might help improve communication, improve interactions and prevent the need to fire problematic individuals.
Thank you for your post and providing such great information this week. I hope things will be better at your husband’s workplace.
References:
Barsade, S. G. (2002). The ripple effects: Emotional contagion and its influence on group behavior. Administrative Science Quarterly, 47(4), 644-675. doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/10.2307/3094912
Pennsylvania State University World Campus (2019). PSYCH 424 Lesson 7: Organizational Life and Teams. Retrieved from https://psu.instructure.com/courses/1973019/modules/items/25635703
Schneider, F. W., Gruman, J. A., & Coutts, L. M. (2012). Applied Social Psychology: Understanding and Addressing Social and Practical Problems. Los Angeles: Sage.
Hi there!
It was very interesting to read your post! I think it’s always important to remind ourselves to be cognizant of the fundamental attribution error, even when dealing with those “jerks” in our lives. As you said, we should separate our judgment of a person’s behavior from their actual character, especially when we don’t know everything that’s going on in their life. When I was a kid, my mom was always very careful to say that my sister and I were behaving badly rather than saying that we were bad. This has always stuck with me, and I think it’s important to give everyone this consideration. However, it’s also important to establish boundaries and prevent people’s toxic behavior from negatively affecting us. I think a combination of boundaries and kindness is the best way to deal with these individuals.
Furthermore, your post made me think about how an organization should treat a “jerk.” Honestly, I don’t think that this should be a problem for a business or company. Governing bodies like the law and upper management should be impartial and objective. There shouldn’t be a “personal” aspect to reprimands or firing. Therefore, managers should be careful not to confuse poor performance with someone’s character and should avoid making statements that attack them as a person when explaining why their behavior is inappropriate for the work environment. Quite frankly, in the eyes of an organization, an individual’s internal “character” doesn’t matter. Their behavior is what affects the team and will decide whether or not they remain on it.
Of course, it’s unreasonable to expect that people will act like robots, but I think that this type of impartiality is what we should be aiming for. A person shouldn’t be fired because they’ve been given the label of a “jerk” but because they continually fail to meet expectations. It’s not a personal attack, just reality. Unfortunately, it is important to eliminate individuals who are not contributing to the team. Freed (2000) discusses the importance of firing marginal employees, stating that “a poor performer […] [can] disadvantage an otherwise successful team […] [and that their rights] cannot receive priority over those of an entire unit” (p. 51). Consistently bad behavior, the kind that “jerks” tend to participate in, will negatively affect the team. A successful organization pays attention to the bottom line, and chronic “jerks” will hurt it.
References
Freed, D. H. (2000). One More Time: Please Fire Marginal Employees. The Health Care Manager, 18 (3), 45-51.