.jpg)
"Working with Bitches" isn't a pop psychology book.
It's solidly grounded in theory, knowledge and the experience of
working with a diverse range of clients over many years. Meredith
Fuller is a loved and respected Melbourne psychologist who interviewed a wide
range of women for the stories selected, to shed light on different kinds of
bitchy behaviour.
The stories give a sense of the personal challenges many women face in
working with bitches. They are a glimpse into a wide range of unhealthy
workplace dynamics - some are harrowing and you wonder how anyone gets away
with such appalling behaviour. All the stories are very readable, and I found
myself identifying behaviours I'd seen in different workplaces in a new and
helpful way.
Not only are the behaviours named and clearly identified, but the possible
effect of the behaviour on the target is outlined, along with an explanation
of why the bitch may behave in a particular way. Equally helpful are
realistic suggestions for dealing with the challenging boss or
co-worker and practical strategies are presented in a series of 'what to
do' lists.
Throughout the book are reminders that not all nasty, mean behaviour is
bitchy, even though it may appear that way. There could well be other causes,
and in addition there may be a need at some stage for deep self reflection as
well.
The second part of the book delves more deeply into psychological issues and
I found I needed to concentrate more carefully. The possible role of fear and
archetypes are discussed as well as different communication styles: for
instance a preference for either using the head (Thinking) or heart (Feeling)
can lead to difficulty with communication.
Age related issues are also discussed, with the possibility for
difference and misunderstandings explained helpfully.
Whilst "Working with Bitches" has been written by a woman,
for women who are working with bitches, I'll certainly buy a copy for my son.
I believe it'll give him an insight into behaviours that may
otherwise have been perplexing or even have gone unnoticed. The sections on
communication styles, learning to say no, managing workplace stress, and
strategies for deciding whether to stay or leave an unsatisfactory workplace
are equally as relevant to him and other men as they are to women in the workforce.
My personal interest in, and professional experience of supporting targets of
workplace bullying and bitchiness goes back many years. I am
pleased to celebrate Meredith Fuller's hard work and
enthusiasm which have led to the publication of this excellent,
helpful and readable book.
.
|
Showing posts with label type. Show all posts
Showing posts with label type. Show all posts
Monday, 3 December 2012
Book review: “Working with Bitches: Identify the Eight Types of Office Mean Girls and Rise Above Workplace Nastiness” by Meredith Fuller
US edition available 2013!
Wednesday, 22 February 2012
Book review: "Working with Mean Girls" by Meredith Fuller
- subtitled "Identifying and protecting yourself from workplace nastiness" (This book is sold in the US with the title Working with Bitches and is available as an ebook)If you've never worked with a bitch, it's hard to understand the anguish it can bring day after long day, week after long week. It's almost impossible to imagine the impact it can have on every aspect of your life, sleeping can be disrupted while you churn over the day, eating can be problematic and leisure time eroded with the ongoing distress of belittling, malicious and downright nasty behaviour. Frustration, self doubt, anger, confusion and exhaustion are words commonly used to attempt to describe the experience.
"Working with Mean Girls" isn't a pop psychology book. It's solidly grounded in theory, knowledge and the experience of working with a diverse range of clients over many years. Meredith Fuller is a loved and respected Melbourne psychologist who interviewed a wide range of women for the stories selected, to shed light on different kinds of bitchy behaviour.
The stories give a sense of the personal challenges many women face in working with bitches. They are a glimpse into a wide range of unhealthy workplace dynamics - some are harrowing and you wonder how anyone gets away with such appalling behaviour. All the stories are very readable, and I found myself identifying behaviours I'd seen in different workplaces in a new and helpful way.
Meredith has identified 8 types of bitches and has named them for their predominant behaviour:
- the Excluder
- the Insecure
- the Toxic
- the Narcissist
- the Screamer
- the Liar
- the Incompetent
- the Not-a-Bitch
Throughout the book are reminders that not all nasty, mean behaviour is bitchy, even though it may appear that way. There could well be other causes, and in addition there may be a need at some stage for deep self reflection as well.
The second part of the book delves more deeply into psychological issues and I found I needed to concentrate more carefully. The possible role of fear and archetypes are discussed as well as different communication styles: for instance a preference for either using the head (Thinking) or heart (Feeling) can lead to difficulty with communication.
Age related issues are also discussed, with the possibility for difference and misunderstandings explained helpfully.
Whilst "Working with Mean Girls" has been written by a woman, for women who are working with bitches, I'll certainly buy a copy for my son. I believe it'll give him an insight into behaviours that may otherwise have been perplexing or even have gone unnoticed. The sections on communication styles, learning to say no, managing workplace stress, and strategies for deciding whether to stay or leave an unsatisfactory workplace are equally as relevant to him as they are to women in the workforce.
Link here to a short promotional video for "Working with Mean Girls."
If you are dealing with a bitch at work or are the target of workplace bullying it's often helpful to seek professional support. Practicing some of the suggested strategies with an experienced counsellor can assist in getting the confidence to try new behaviours in the work setting or support you as you change direction.
 |
| Meredith Fuller - photo by Jordan Head |
My personal interest in, and professional experience of supporting targets of workplace bullying and bitchiness goes back many years. I was honoured to attend the launch of "Working with Mean Girls" on Feb 18, 2012 and am pleased to celebrate Meredith Fuller's hard work and enthusiasm which have led to the publication of this excellent, helpful and readable book.
 |
| Meredith with Andrea McNamara (Penguin publisher) at the book launch Feb 18 2012. |
.
Wednesday, 19 October 2011
Workplace communication – teams, games and sport.
I’ve been reading Susan Haden Elgin’s “The Gentle Art of Verbal Self-Defense at Work”, (Prentice-Hall 2000) not an easy read, but very interesting.
Elgin is writing about business communication and mentions the fact that dominant adult males control most of the power in America and that many of us spend large amounts of time interacting with dominant adult males. (I have no reason to think things have changed since 2000 or are significantly different in Australia.) She explains that “… most American men today define anything that involves negotiation as a game, at least temporarily, and they switch to gameplaying behaviour for the duration of the negotiation.”
She states that women, other nationalities and different ethnic groups don’t always agree on the meaning of ‘negotiation’ or understand the terminology of gameplaying behaviour and that this leads to massive communication breakdowns in many business settings.
What is your experience at work? Certainly in the workplaces I’ve been in, gameplaying terminology is prevalent. Such comments as “The ball’s in your court”, “Are we all on the same team here?” “We’ll get some runs of the board with this one”, “Don’t waste the play”, “That meeting was a bit of a free for all” or “Good play”, are commonplace.
Often there are a lot of non-verbal signals too, with the action of passing a ball to others at a meeting to denote the next person to speak. There are visual gags and asides that leave the non-initiated perplexed, out of it and wondering what on earth is going on.
Sometimes it’s even more pronounced with the expectation that personnel will attend football, tennis and cricket matches and entertain clients at these venues on weekends and in the evening. If this fills you with dread or loathing, perhaps you and that particular workplace aren’t entirely suited.
I want to make three points relating to games, sports and teams.
Firstly: What does the word game mean to you? Is it something light-hearted and perhaps trivial? Did you love sport at school? Or was it a time of purgatory? Does it matter one way or the other if you win or lose? How do you view the language of games?
Are games to be taken seriously, to be won, do they mean something to you? If they do to everyone but you in the office, what will the effect be? If you’re not speaking the same language, how does this affect your workplace dynamics?
If we don’t understand or relate to the language that is being used, where does that leave us?
Secondly: How do significant people at your workplace use game playing terminology? Does it pepper their speech? Are you talking the same language? Do you know how they view games? Do they love team sports or do they prefer non-team sports? How does a boss’s love of sport, the fact that he or she takes sport extremely seriously affect everyday work interactions and negotiations?
Thirdly: How do you view team sports?
I listened to an interview a while ago where two groups were debating the benefit of team sports at school. They were rational adults, full of goodwill and respect for the ‘opposition’, but it was glaringly obvious that they simply couldn’t (not wouldn’t but couldn’t) understand the perspective of the other side.
Those in favour of team sport were adamant about the many benefits of belonging to a team that weren’t easily achievable elsewhere. They talked about the pleasure of belonging, being part of a team (that word again) working towards achieving something together, of having a goal, focus, discipline and purpose. They revelled in the joy of winning! Their entire lives, on field and off, were viewed in a sporting context.
Those against spoke about the pain of not being chosen, of being reluctantly included when the Phys Ed teacher insisted, of being clumsy, not fitting in and of being perplexed about the rules, confused and uncomfortable. They remembered doing anything to get out of dreaded sport at school, forging notes, faking illness - anything to avoid the humiliation of participating. I think it is fair to say they abhorred sport and everything to do with it.
Neither side understood the others perspective, they weren’t being difficult, there was simply a deep gulf separating them.
How do these perceptions, prejudices and beliefs about teams carry into the workplace where sporting terminology and game playing is prevalent? If you hated sport at school, how does that affect you in a workplace? How does your disinterest and lack on knowledge affect the sport lovers?
What do the words team sports mean to you? What images thoughts and feelings arise? “ Be a good sport” (and do something you don’t want to do) “It’s not winning, but how you play the game”, “Don’t be a sore loser”, “This game is for the boys, we don’t want sissies here”, “It’s a bit of a boy’s club here”, “Can’t take the rough and tumble?” (said in a derisive tone)
If you don’t like games and have residual negative feelings regarding team sports, could this affect your body language when the terminology is used in a work setting? How does this affect others?
Like Elgin, I firmly believe effective workplace communication matters. When the terms are unfamiliar and come from the world of sport and games, which not everyone is familiar with, mis-communication can and will take place. Expectations about roles can, as Elgin says, lead to outright confusion and clashes; there will be hurt, baffled and angry people. Unlike her, my experience is that both men and women can be alienated by game terminology - personality type is more relevant than a division along gender lines.
It’s a bit like being in a foreign country for those who aren’t natural games people. They don’t understand the terminology. At best, they may watch and listen with curiosity, but it’s a closed book, which needs courteous, patient, respectful explanation.
I believe it’s incumbent on both sides, whether male or female and of whatever nationality or ethnic group to work hard to communicate maturely and clearly in terms the other can relate to and understand.
I also believe it’s incumbent for all people involved to listen to any questions or confusion with your whole attention, without interruption or derisive, insulting comments.
It makes good business sense to get the best from the WHOLE workforce without alienating those who are not in the “in group”. It is simply good manners to try to communicate clearly and to work at it ‘till you succeed.
One last thought: If you don't understand team sports and games, does that necessarily make you a poor employee where gameplaying behaviour is prevalent? Is there a place for all personality types which makes for a richer work environment?
.
Elgin is writing about business communication and mentions the fact that dominant adult males control most of the power in America and that many of us spend large amounts of time interacting with dominant adult males. (I have no reason to think things have changed since 2000 or are significantly different in Australia.) She explains that “… most American men today define anything that involves negotiation as a game, at least temporarily, and they switch to gameplaying behaviour for the duration of the negotiation.”
She states that women, other nationalities and different ethnic groups don’t always agree on the meaning of ‘negotiation’ or understand the terminology of gameplaying behaviour and that this leads to massive communication breakdowns in many business settings.
What is your experience at work? Certainly in the workplaces I’ve been in, gameplaying terminology is prevalent. Such comments as “The ball’s in your court”, “Are we all on the same team here?” “We’ll get some runs of the board with this one”, “Don’t waste the play”, “That meeting was a bit of a free for all” or “Good play”, are commonplace.
Often there are a lot of non-verbal signals too, with the action of passing a ball to others at a meeting to denote the next person to speak. There are visual gags and asides that leave the non-initiated perplexed, out of it and wondering what on earth is going on.
Sometimes it’s even more pronounced with the expectation that personnel will attend football, tennis and cricket matches and entertain clients at these venues on weekends and in the evening. If this fills you with dread or loathing, perhaps you and that particular workplace aren’t entirely suited.
I want to make three points relating to games, sports and teams.
Firstly: What does the word game mean to you? Is it something light-hearted and perhaps trivial? Did you love sport at school? Or was it a time of purgatory? Does it matter one way or the other if you win or lose? How do you view the language of games?
Are games to be taken seriously, to be won, do they mean something to you? If they do to everyone but you in the office, what will the effect be? If you’re not speaking the same language, how does this affect your workplace dynamics?
If we don’t understand or relate to the language that is being used, where does that leave us?
Secondly: How do significant people at your workplace use game playing terminology? Does it pepper their speech? Are you talking the same language? Do you know how they view games? Do they love team sports or do they prefer non-team sports? How does a boss’s love of sport, the fact that he or she takes sport extremely seriously affect everyday work interactions and negotiations?
 |
| Do you like being part of a group or team? |
I listened to an interview a while ago where two groups were debating the benefit of team sports at school. They were rational adults, full of goodwill and respect for the ‘opposition’, but it was glaringly obvious that they simply couldn’t (not wouldn’t but couldn’t) understand the perspective of the other side.
Those in favour of team sport were adamant about the many benefits of belonging to a team that weren’t easily achievable elsewhere. They talked about the pleasure of belonging, being part of a team (that word again) working towards achieving something together, of having a goal, focus, discipline and purpose. They revelled in the joy of winning! Their entire lives, on field and off, were viewed in a sporting context.
Those against spoke about the pain of not being chosen, of being reluctantly included when the Phys Ed teacher insisted, of being clumsy, not fitting in and of being perplexed about the rules, confused and uncomfortable. They remembered doing anything to get out of dreaded sport at school, forging notes, faking illness - anything to avoid the humiliation of participating. I think it is fair to say they abhorred sport and everything to do with it.
Neither side understood the others perspective, they weren’t being difficult, there was simply a deep gulf separating them.
How do these perceptions, prejudices and beliefs about teams carry into the workplace where sporting terminology and game playing is prevalent? If you hated sport at school, how does that affect you in a workplace? How does your disinterest and lack on knowledge affect the sport lovers?
What do the words team sports mean to you? What images thoughts and feelings arise? “ Be a good sport” (and do something you don’t want to do) “It’s not winning, but how you play the game”, “Don’t be a sore loser”, “This game is for the boys, we don’t want sissies here”, “It’s a bit of a boy’s club here”, “Can’t take the rough and tumble?” (said in a derisive tone)
 |
| You might like sport but prefer to work alone. |
Like Elgin, I firmly believe effective workplace communication matters. When the terms are unfamiliar and come from the world of sport and games, which not everyone is familiar with, mis-communication can and will take place. Expectations about roles can, as Elgin says, lead to outright confusion and clashes; there will be hurt, baffled and angry people. Unlike her, my experience is that both men and women can be alienated by game terminology - personality type is more relevant than a division along gender lines.
It’s a bit like being in a foreign country for those who aren’t natural games people. They don’t understand the terminology. At best, they may watch and listen with curiosity, but it’s a closed book, which needs courteous, patient, respectful explanation.
 |
| Some turn tail and run when team sports are mentioned. |
I also believe it’s incumbent for all people involved to listen to any questions or confusion with your whole attention, without interruption or derisive, insulting comments.
It makes good business sense to get the best from the WHOLE workforce without alienating those who are not in the “in group”. It is simply good manners to try to communicate clearly and to work at it ‘till you succeed.
One last thought: If you don't understand team sports and games, does that necessarily make you a poor employee where gameplaying behaviour is prevalent? Is there a place for all personality types which makes for a richer work environment?
.
Tuesday, 27 April 2010
CDAA Workshop: 2. Personality, type, preferences
(This post forms part of a series of powerpoint slides from a presentation I gave at the Career Development Association of Australia Conference 2010 entitled: The Roller-coaster Ride from Permanent Part-time Employee to Private Practitioner.)Personality has a big bearing on where you feel comfortable working each day. I shared my preferences in these 3 instruments so participants could understand where I was coming from.
I'd like to explore the interrelationship between personality, values, and goal setting sometime in the future.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)