Don’t Be One of These Guys – Part 2

My last blog generated suggestions of other unproductive characters found in the work force. Here are three more examples.

Dick. His name was Dick but he wasn’t one; he just looked the part. He was a terrible dresser, a Full Cleveland swathed in polyester, distracting people from noticing his 1950s hairstyle. On casual Friday, he wore his shirt open to the third button, drawing attention to a big ankh on a leather strap around his neck. Wherever he went, he left the scent of bad cologne and Marlboro cigarettes. When he wanted to make a point, he would illustrate it, using his ever-present #2 mechanical pencil and pad of graph paper. When he spoke he would regularly mispronounce words, Shreveport became Shreezeport and stastistical replaced statistical.

Though Dick didn’t inspire confidence when he walked in a room, he was reliable and did good work. He was a walking, talking lesson on the importance of looking and acting like a professional. When we walk in a room or open our mouth to speak, we want people to be receptive to what we have to say. Looking like Dick won’t create a powerful first impression.

Bob. He claimed to be descended from a Civil War general who was know for his recklessness and it seemed Bob had inherited some of that recklessness. Like the co-worker described above, Bob generally did good work and never missed a deadline. He had one fatal flaw; he was a pleaser who “massaged” his research findings to fit a preferred narrative. As a friend who responded to my original blog noted, Much as we all liked the guy; Bob would sometimes distort his presentations by skewing the findings to reinforce what he thought management wanted to hear — especially on “hot potato” topics. I think he felt like some kind of hero when he did this. Drove me nuts. Very unprofessional. In any case, this happens in the working world. Young marketers are vulnerable to giving researchers carte blanche in guiding strategy by assuming they’re information gurus…truth-tellers beyond reproach. It empowers people to do damage unchecked.

Charlie. A woman named Céile told me about a work colleague she calls Charlie, a mocking reference to the boss you never saw in the TV show, Charlie’s Angels. Though the TV Charlie was unseen, you couldn’t miss the three stunning angels who worked for him. Céile’s colleague has hired three attractive women who are a decade younger than he. They follow him from meeting to meeting; their talent is unknown because unlike the Charlie of TV fame, this Charlie hasn’t delegated much responsibility to his angels. Charlie’s a narcissist who favors status over results. It shows in his focus on titles, the photos of himself that appear in his PowerPoint presentations and in his hiring practices. He loves the spotlight and has never heard the adage about hiring people who are smarter and more talented.

If you missed my earlier blog about the first six unproductive characters, you can read it here.