The No Asshole Rule

On the topic of "interruption", I think that "it depends".

Sam Bleckley wrote a really good essay on this behavior[0] that pretty much explains how my wife and I interact with each other. We interrupt each other constantly to move the conversation along faster and to express our current state of understanding. I have learned that this often comes across as "rude", but I feel like it's perhaps a difference of style between east coast (and maybe just NY/NJ) and the rest of the US.

The Holy Creedo of The Church of Interruption:

    1. Thou shalt interrupt when thou understand’st.
    2. Thou shalt speak until I interrupt.
    3. Thou shalt use physical cues to indicate when I ought continue talking.

    > “I’m talking about how you behave when we’re talking. When you understand whatever it is I’m trying to say, you don’t wait around for me to finish my sentence, you—”
    
    > “Interrupt. Sure. It’s the easiest way to make sure I understand what you mean.”
    
    > “That’s very insightful. You’re right; if you finish my statement in a way I agree with, I know that you understand. And, if I accept your summary, we both know you’ve got it. It’s very efficient.”

[0] https://sambleckley.com/writing/church-of-interruption.html

I'm a CTO, and this is one of my cardinal rules: no assholes. We hire by it, and we fire by it. I took me a while to become such a firm believer, but here's what I've learned:

1. The true, genius level assholes are very few and far between. If you do find one, isolate them from your broader team, and ideally put them on contract. They are going to build you a great organization. The corollary of this: if you're an asshole, you likely aren't a genius. So stop acting like one.

2. Most assholes don't actually create anything great, they just look like they do. Strong opinions and blistering personalities tend to hide a crappy work product.

3. You'll learn there are enough nice people out there that you don't need to settle for crappy behavior. It can take time to find capable, nice people, but it's worth the effort.

Finally: there are naturally asshole people, and then there are people who have been around so much institutionalized asshole-ism they just look like assholes. Learning the difference is critical.

(Edit, formatting)

I dunno, Steve Jobs was famously an asshole. Apple couldn't exist if every manager acted like him, but would it exist if he didn't? Tho unfortunately, that writes a blank check to all too many CEOs who think they're Steve Jobs when they're just an asshole.

Shockingly, it's almost like a slogan on a book cover isn't enough.

Companies are not natural environments. There is an obvious established hierarchy that is not decided by the group but imposed from the outside.

> Does the person target people who are less powerful?

I have seen too many times a big-boss talking how good someone is after receiving criticism: "How can X be doing bulling if X is so nice with me, the boss?".

I cannot count how much money it costs to companies I have worked for to have unmotivated employees. It is bad for the company, it is bad for shareholders, is bad for employees, it is bad for society... but up in the hierarchy someone feels good about themselves for being assholes and getting away with it.

The worst is when an asshole is promoted. A supervisor job was offered to a co-worker who was groomed for the job for three years, when the time for promotion arrived, he declined because the money wasn't right for him. Management panicked and promoted an asshole who even they didn't want!

Over the next five plus years this asshole screwed up almost everything he touched. Many logical complaints to upper management and HR were lodged, with no action taken, he always flew just below the "fire" threshold. The management team who promoted him (it was revealed later after the asshole left) wouldn't remove him because of how it would have reflected on them!

""The theme of this book is that workplace bullying worsens morale and productivity. To screen out the toxic staff, it suggests the "no asshole rule". The author insists upon use of the word asshole since other words such as bully or jerk "do not convey the same degree of awfulness".[6] In terms of using the word in the book's title, he said "There's an emotional reaction to a dirty title. You have a choice between being offensive and being ignored.""

PS. I am sure there's an in-between somewhere, but, fair enough.-

The tone of the article is way off as far as Wikipedia guidelines go. Reads more like a promo piece.