Theory: "Troublemaker" Position
For every sick organization out there, there must be at least one person designated as the "troublemaker." The position is needed so the staff can direct their anger at the "troublemaker" rather than at the administration, and so the administration can have a person to use as an example for the rest of the staff on what will happen if you cross them plus have the "troublemaker" as the "blame" guy (all sorts of things can be blamed on the "troublemaker" so the other staff is intimidated into complying to administration wishes, and directing their anger at the "troublemaker," etc.)
.
The "troublemaker" must rear his/her head (like a snake) every once in a while so the administration can beat him/her back down to "save" the rest of the staff, or to keep him/her/them in line. He/she rears head by asking a question, putting forth an idea not generated by the administration, questioning a wrong act done by a senior staff member, or any number of things to "bother" the administration, etc.
A good "troublemaker" plays a very important role for the sick organization in getting the rest of the staff to focus on his/her supposed wrongdoings rather than on those of the administration. The staff can then spend hours talking about the "troublemaker" rather than thinking about how the administration is also screwing them. A smart sick organization will keep a good "troublemaker" around for years to help keep the others in line.
But once he/she is no longer useful, or some political demands require one of their buddies to be supplied with a job (i.e., the "troublemaker's" job), or he/she leaves of his/her own decision, then a new "troublemaker" must be chosen. Usually the new one has been tested by the administration by previous blame games, etc., so the administration easily shifts the blame game to another, and they have a new "troublemaker."
If you think my theory is crazy, talk to various present, and former, "troublemakers" at sick organizations all around you ............ They are also called whistleblowers, free-thinkers, rebels, independents, etc.
See other "Troublemaker" posts.
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D., (C) 2011 --
Sunday, November 13, 2011
Friday, November 11, 2011
Theory: Troublemaker Must Decide
Theory: Troublemaker Must Decide
Any chosen for the "troublemaker" position at a sick organization must make a life-altering decision when he/she realizes he/she has been made the organization "troublemaker."
One theory: Sometimes the "troublemaker" likes his/her work, but not the nasty politics. He/she knows if he/she leaves he/she will have to start all over, and he/she will probably not get a good and honest letter of recommendation from his/her bosses at the sick organization. He/she is only about 10 years from retirement and thinks he/she can make it, having withstood their best shots thus far. And he/she knows from past experience that he/she can outwork them, and can mostly out-think them, so he/she decides to stick it out. This may or may not be a good decision. There are also other theories/paths the "troublemaker" can follow.
Things any "troublemaker" should consider in making a decision to stay or leave a sick organization:
---How many years are left to retirement? Is the retirement plan good?
---Will retirement mean anything, i.e., any concern about politicians/owners stealing the money before one can get a retirement?
---Any concern about tormenters getting him/her terminated before retirement to save parent organization money?
---Is physical health good enough to stand years of torment?
---Can "troublemaker" do the work that will be required by tormenters?
---Can one get a truthful letter of recommendation from boss or organization?
--- Does "troublemaker" have enough information on their wrongdoings to hold them at bay for several years? (To outlast the tormenters one must be able to keep them at bay for a long time. They must think it is safer to keep you under their thumb rather than cut you loose to possibly "spill the beans.")
---Can "troublemaker" stand a hostile work place for 10 + years?
---Can "troublemaker" stand no, or little, advancement in pay or position for years?
---Can "troublemaker's" family stand the stress and long hours of work that will occur over the next 10 + years?
---Can "troublemaker" easily sell his/her house, and move?
---Can "troublemaker" mentally stand years more of torture?
---Can "troublemaker" keep sanity while others get credit and pictures for his/her work?
There are probably many more questions one should consider before making a final decision, and the questions will vary per situation, "troublemaker," and type of sick organization (private, religious, charity, foundation, education, government, etc.). Every "troublemaker" should think long and hard before making a decision on what to do.
See other "Troublemaker" posts.
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D., (C) 2011 --
Any chosen for the "troublemaker" position at a sick organization must make a life-altering decision when he/she realizes he/she has been made the organization "troublemaker."
One theory: Sometimes the "troublemaker" likes his/her work, but not the nasty politics. He/she knows if he/she leaves he/she will have to start all over, and he/she will probably not get a good and honest letter of recommendation from his/her bosses at the sick organization. He/she is only about 10 years from retirement and thinks he/she can make it, having withstood their best shots thus far. And he/she knows from past experience that he/she can outwork them, and can mostly out-think them, so he/she decides to stick it out. This may or may not be a good decision. There are also other theories/paths the "troublemaker" can follow.
Things any "troublemaker" should consider in making a decision to stay or leave a sick organization:
---How many years are left to retirement? Is the retirement plan good?
---Will retirement mean anything, i.e., any concern about politicians/owners stealing the money before one can get a retirement?
---Any concern about tormenters getting him/her terminated before retirement to save parent organization money?
---Is physical health good enough to stand years of torment?
---Can "troublemaker" do the work that will be required by tormenters?
---Can one get a truthful letter of recommendation from boss or organization?
--- Does "troublemaker" have enough information on their wrongdoings to hold them at bay for several years? (To outlast the tormenters one must be able to keep them at bay for a long time. They must think it is safer to keep you under their thumb rather than cut you loose to possibly "spill the beans.")
---Can "troublemaker" stand a hostile work place for 10 + years?
---Can "troublemaker" stand no, or little, advancement in pay or position for years?
---Can "troublemaker's" family stand the stress and long hours of work that will occur over the next 10 + years?
---Can "troublemaker" easily sell his/her house, and move?
---Can "troublemaker" mentally stand years more of torture?
---Can "troublemaker" keep sanity while others get credit and pictures for his/her work?
There are probably many more questions one should consider before making a final decision, and the questions will vary per situation, "troublemaker," and type of sick organization (private, religious, charity, foundation, education, government, etc.). Every "troublemaker" should think long and hard before making a decision on what to do.
See other "Troublemaker" posts.
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D., (C) 2011 --
Thursday, November 10, 2011
Theory: Never Admit
Theory: Never Admit
Over time the "troublemaker" has figured out the sick organization will never admit that any of its chosen ones did anything wrong (because that would mean they made an error in selecting or keeping their chosen ones), and will never admit that anything he/she says pertains to their sick organization, because that would be an admission of their guilt and complicity in the torture and slander of someone that worked very hard for them.
Since they can never admit any wrongdoing, they can never even fully recognize their being sick and thus do the work to be cured of being sick, so the sick organization continues being SICK .............
And the sick organization can stay sick for many, many years ..................
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D., (C) 2011 --
Over time the "troublemaker" has figured out the sick organization will never admit that any of its chosen ones did anything wrong (because that would mean they made an error in selecting or keeping their chosen ones), and will never admit that anything he/she says pertains to their sick organization, because that would be an admission of their guilt and complicity in the torture and slander of someone that worked very hard for them.
Since they can never admit any wrongdoing, they can never even fully recognize their being sick and thus do the work to be cured of being sick, so the sick organization continues being SICK .............
And the sick organization can stay sick for many, many years ..................
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D., (C) 2011 --
Theory: Family Reward
Theory: Family Reward
There are several ways the "troublemaker" could be treated, out of many possible ways, by his/her family. The "troublemaker" could be considered a hero by his/her spouse and children for standing up for his/her beliefs and supporting the family, and trying to protect them, while undergoing various attacks, as a loving spouse and parent should do. The family could stand by their leader, and help make him/her stronger, or, at the least, feel stronger. ..........
Or if the "troublemaker" has a spouse that is merely along for the free food and shelter and benefits as long as he/she is having fun, there can be a much different outcome. The spouse, unknown to him/her, could be a great actor. Maybe he/she married him/her for a free ride, not for love, so he/she would not have to work. ............. He/she does not believe the "troublemaker" or in his/her character to try to do the right thing, and decides to leave because he/she believes the "troublemaker" "is going down the tubes" politically and professionally, and he/she can no longer count on an easy free ride. The "troublemaker" works too much to keep his/her job and now is boring to the spouse. The spouse has apparently been warned by the spouse of the chief tormenter that they are going to eliminate the "troublemaker," or "get him/her." ........ The spouse takes everything that can be hauled off while the "troublemaker" is at work, demands almost everything the "troublemaker" has, starts a line of younger lovers, and expands his/her search for more fun. .......... The "troublemaker" is devastated. But no one cares.
The kids, who have mostly bonded with the leaving spouse, may not believe the "troublemaker" either, but may believe the words of the person they bonded to, no matter what that person does. ......... It may take years for them to see the truth, if ever. Except for a faithful friend or two, he/she is essentially alone.
He/she relishes his/her triumphs alone, but he/she has always really been alone (even though he/she did not realize it at the time), so it does not matter anymore. He/she becomes resigned to being really alone, and fighting alone for things believed to be right.
If you fill the "troublemaker" position at your organization, better hope you have a good and faithful spouse who believes in you .........
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D., (C) 2011 --
There are several ways the "troublemaker" could be treated, out of many possible ways, by his/her family. The "troublemaker" could be considered a hero by his/her spouse and children for standing up for his/her beliefs and supporting the family, and trying to protect them, while undergoing various attacks, as a loving spouse and parent should do. The family could stand by their leader, and help make him/her stronger, or, at the least, feel stronger. ..........
Or if the "troublemaker" has a spouse that is merely along for the free food and shelter and benefits as long as he/she is having fun, there can be a much different outcome. The spouse, unknown to him/her, could be a great actor. Maybe he/she married him/her for a free ride, not for love, so he/she would not have to work. ............. He/she does not believe the "troublemaker" or in his/her character to try to do the right thing, and decides to leave because he/she believes the "troublemaker" "is going down the tubes" politically and professionally, and he/she can no longer count on an easy free ride. The "troublemaker" works too much to keep his/her job and now is boring to the spouse. The spouse has apparently been warned by the spouse of the chief tormenter that they are going to eliminate the "troublemaker," or "get him/her." ........ The spouse takes everything that can be hauled off while the "troublemaker" is at work, demands almost everything the "troublemaker" has, starts a line of younger lovers, and expands his/her search for more fun. .......... The "troublemaker" is devastated. But no one cares.
The kids, who have mostly bonded with the leaving spouse, may not believe the "troublemaker" either, but may believe the words of the person they bonded to, no matter what that person does. ......... It may take years for them to see the truth, if ever. Except for a faithful friend or two, he/she is essentially alone.
He/she relishes his/her triumphs alone, but he/she has always really been alone (even though he/she did not realize it at the time), so it does not matter anymore. He/she becomes resigned to being really alone, and fighting alone for things believed to be right.
If you fill the "troublemaker" position at your organization, better hope you have a good and faithful spouse who believes in you .........
Adrian R. Lawler, Ph.D., (C) 2011 --
Monday, November 7, 2011
Theory: Top Gun Stays Mum
Theory: Top Gun Stays Mum
The top gun has been sent the evidence proving some at the sick organization are lying about the "troublemaker," and told by the "troublemaker" that the top gun will get the first shot to clean up the slanders going around the sick organization. The "troublemaker" waits, and waits, hearing nothing from the top ......... and sends an enquiring email once a month for several months. He/she starts to formulate a theory of what could be going on in this case. Having heard nothing from the top gun, who apparently will never reply or acknowledge the "troublemaker" because a reply could be taken as an admission of guilt by the sick organization, the "troublemaker" thinks long and hard about the next step.
He/she has figured out that the sick organization will never admit that any of its chosen ones are guilty of anything, and even the most vile of them will be protected to the bitter end. ...... The "great" organization must never be questioned in any way by anybody. Doesn't the "troublemaker" know the organization can do no wrong? .......... Only the organization can decide who and what to punish, and no one out of their circle is allowed any input.
Since the "troublemaker" has heard nothing from the top gun or from the rest of the sick organization via the rumor mill, he/she assumes nothing has been done, so he/she composes a memo to be sent to his/her colleagues so they will know that the slanders are really lies, and to defend his/her reputation. The "troublemaker" fires off his/her memo to defend his/her reputation and also sends the proof so people can see for themselves.
But as we all know, people will believe what they want to believe, proof or no proof, and dirty politics rule all.
Nothing happens for a while. ......... Then many hear of the sudden and mysterious resignation of one of the tormenters and liars. The "troublemaker" guesses that the tormenter "blew his/her top" at the release of the "troublemaker's" memo and his/her lying exposure to his/her buddies (his/her true character was exposed). This apparent theory by the "troublemaker" of open uncontrolled anger by a tormenter was then apparently something the top gun could no longer ignore; such obvious "sandbox" behavior could not be seen by others as coming from the "great" (but sick) organization. The other tormenters acted like nothing had happened and the sick organization kept them on.
Apparently even the tormenters must not squawk when exposed, or stepped on, and must take their "medicine" quietly.
So the "troublemaker" never was acknowledged, replied to, apologized to, or even thanked for taking all the persecution, BS and lies and still doing his/her job and then some for years. And many still believe in the lies, and will never acknowledge the "troublemaker" and his/her work efforts.
And the sick organization pays no attention to all the flaws in its handbook and management system that the "troublemaker" pointed out, and stays the same, and stays sick on and on because no one has the courage to change it to make it better, or likes the politics as they are .............
... and you could be next in line for the "troublemaker" position in your organization ..........
Generally speaking, real truth will not be tolerated in a sick organization ............. only their "truth" .........
Adrian R. Lawler, (C) 2011
The top gun has been sent the evidence proving some at the sick organization are lying about the "troublemaker," and told by the "troublemaker" that the top gun will get the first shot to clean up the slanders going around the sick organization. The "troublemaker" waits, and waits, hearing nothing from the top ......... and sends an enquiring email once a month for several months. He/she starts to formulate a theory of what could be going on in this case. Having heard nothing from the top gun, who apparently will never reply or acknowledge the "troublemaker" because a reply could be taken as an admission of guilt by the sick organization, the "troublemaker" thinks long and hard about the next step.
He/she has figured out that the sick organization will never admit that any of its chosen ones are guilty of anything, and even the most vile of them will be protected to the bitter end. ...... The "great" organization must never be questioned in any way by anybody. Doesn't the "troublemaker" know the organization can do no wrong? .......... Only the organization can decide who and what to punish, and no one out of their circle is allowed any input.
Since the "troublemaker" has heard nothing from the top gun or from the rest of the sick organization via the rumor mill, he/she assumes nothing has been done, so he/she composes a memo to be sent to his/her colleagues so they will know that the slanders are really lies, and to defend his/her reputation. The "troublemaker" fires off his/her memo to defend his/her reputation and also sends the proof so people can see for themselves.
But as we all know, people will believe what they want to believe, proof or no proof, and dirty politics rule all.
Nothing happens for a while. ......... Then many hear of the sudden and mysterious resignation of one of the tormenters and liars. The "troublemaker" guesses that the tormenter "blew his/her top" at the release of the "troublemaker's" memo and his/her lying exposure to his/her buddies (his/her true character was exposed). This apparent theory by the "troublemaker" of open uncontrolled anger by a tormenter was then apparently something the top gun could no longer ignore; such obvious "sandbox" behavior could not be seen by others as coming from the "great" (but sick) organization. The other tormenters acted like nothing had happened and the sick organization kept them on.
Apparently even the tormenters must not squawk when exposed, or stepped on, and must take their "medicine" quietly.
So the "troublemaker" never was acknowledged, replied to, apologized to, or even thanked for taking all the persecution, BS and lies and still doing his/her job and then some for years. And many still believe in the lies, and will never acknowledge the "troublemaker" and his/her work efforts.
And the sick organization pays no attention to all the flaws in its handbook and management system that the "troublemaker" pointed out, and stays the same, and stays sick on and on because no one has the courage to change it to make it better, or likes the politics as they are .............
... and you could be next in line for the "troublemaker" position in your organization ..........
Generally speaking, real truth will not be tolerated in a sick organization ............. only their "truth" .........
Adrian R. Lawler, (C) 2011
Saturday, November 5, 2011
Theory: Waiting to Expose Lies
Theory: Waiting to Expose Lies
The "troublemaker" must learn to be patient, and bide his/her time. Waiting for any crack to appear in their wall of torment .......... that allows him/her to get through to redeem his/her reputation and expose their lies. He/she can wait for years ..... but he/she WILL wait to expose them for what they are.
They had laughed at him/her when he/she did nasty work, torn at his/her reputation as best they could, lied about him/her to others, etc. Laughed when he/she was down and they tromped on him/her; laughed when his/her spouse left for younger, exciting sex, etc. ..........
They did him/her so much evil he/she could now use their evil actions against him/her as information to use against them, to expose them, and the "operation" of a sick organization.
Finally he/she sees his opening. One of the main tormenters has really enjoyed his/her role as the chief basher/tormenter and has gotten giddy with excitement over the years and has embellished his/her bashing of the "troublemaker's" life and ways so much that he/she is now openly lying and slandering him/her, and using him/her as an sick organization example of what not to do or the organization will "get them, too." But the "troublemaker" has proof via court records that the lies are lies. He/she thinks of ways he/she can expose the main tormenters, thoroughly thinking about all options. He/she could expose them via a slander lawsuit, proof given to the local media, or to the head politician over the organization, or to the top one of the organization telling him/her to handle it or he/she will. He/she thinks long and hard .............
He/she gets his/her proof together and sends it to the top gun, and says "I'm giving you the first shot to clean this up." Letting them quietly police their own people, but knowing they will not actually do much. But knowing a slander lawsuit takes a long time and is hard to prove because all the witnesses "clam up," because they are still at the sick organization and they do not want to be known as the "troublemaker," or experience "troublemaker" persecution ...........
Now it is done .......... He/she has exposed the liars, and they are known ......... and he/she has done it by making the sick organization do the job .......... but the ones at the top do not do enough, as expected, so the organization still stays sick ....... but is now known as sick .......
Another theory on life at a sick organization ......... it could happen to any of you.
Adrian R. Lawler, (C) 2011 --
The "troublemaker" must learn to be patient, and bide his/her time. Waiting for any crack to appear in their wall of torment .......... that allows him/her to get through to redeem his/her reputation and expose their lies. He/she can wait for years ..... but he/she WILL wait to expose them for what they are.
They had laughed at him/her when he/she did nasty work, torn at his/her reputation as best they could, lied about him/her to others, etc. Laughed when he/she was down and they tromped on him/her; laughed when his/her spouse left for younger, exciting sex, etc. ..........
They did him/her so much evil he/she could now use their evil actions against him/her as information to use against them, to expose them, and the "operation" of a sick organization.
Finally he/she sees his opening. One of the main tormenters has really enjoyed his/her role as the chief basher/tormenter and has gotten giddy with excitement over the years and has embellished his/her bashing of the "troublemaker's" life and ways so much that he/she is now openly lying and slandering him/her, and using him/her as an sick organization example of what not to do or the organization will "get them, too." But the "troublemaker" has proof via court records that the lies are lies. He/she thinks of ways he/she can expose the main tormenters, thoroughly thinking about all options. He/she could expose them via a slander lawsuit, proof given to the local media, or to the head politician over the organization, or to the top one of the organization telling him/her to handle it or he/she will. He/she thinks long and hard .............
He/she gets his/her proof together and sends it to the top gun, and says "I'm giving you the first shot to clean this up." Letting them quietly police their own people, but knowing they will not actually do much. But knowing a slander lawsuit takes a long time and is hard to prove because all the witnesses "clam up," because they are still at the sick organization and they do not want to be known as the "troublemaker," or experience "troublemaker" persecution ...........
Now it is done .......... He/she has exposed the liars, and they are known ......... and he/she has done it by making the sick organization do the job .......... but the ones at the top do not do enough, as expected, so the organization still stays sick ....... but is now known as sick .......
Another theory on life at a sick organization ......... it could happen to any of you.
Adrian R. Lawler, (C) 2011 --
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)