Be Nice to Those Who Serve You
jacquesmattheij.com
jacquesmattheij.com
Obviously, saying that creates a degree of investment in this other person that isn't required. But it's a middle ground. Everyone seems to think there are two options: peace out completely (zero investment), or do business without saying anything (100% investment). If you just point out the behavior, you put the ball in their court. It's scary because you risk pissing them off, but really, what does that matter? You already made up your mind about not doing business with them.
There are two likely responses to such a judgment: the angry/confused/awkward denial ("What the hell are you talking about? I'm a precious flower and everyone loves me because they are so blessed by my presence! Now run away, and never return!") or reflection ("Really? What made you think so?"). If you get #1, well, you're no worse off than when you started, except some douchebag with a lot of money doesn't like you. But if you get #2, you have a real opportunity to nudge someone in a more compassionate and healthy direction.
It's up to each individual person, of course, but I think the potential opportunity is worth the risk.
I've seen it all the time, while working the floor at retail, or traveling abroad to fancy hotels and restaurants. A small "thank you", "have a nice day" or just "hi" goes a long way, even if you're there to complain about something.
"Do not answer a fool according to his folly, Lest you also be like him." Proverbs 26:4
After joining a company several years ago in an executive position, I witnessed the CEO treating other employees horribly, and remember thinking that I'd leave if he ever treated me like that. Unlike the OP, I didn't make a principled stand at the time.
By the time it inevitably happened and I was subjected to the same level of disrespect and disdain, I was too invested financially and too critical operationally to leave.
Even though I had enough leverage to push back, it still made for a miserable work environment to see the CEO disrespecting everyone else, and it was never pleasant having to fight to preserve personal boundaries every day.
Not shockingly, nearly every hire left within 6 months. It ultimately worked out decently from a financial standpoint, but I'm still torn on whether I would make the same decision again.
This seems odd to me. If the guy is really that much of an asshole, why do you care if you leave him holding the bag? Maybe he'd learn something from the experience.
The financial investment I totally understand, but you have to look out for #1.
An alternate explanation is possible though as well, which is that this person was trying to impress Jacques. I know it sounds weird but I've had folks who were insecure in their authority get like this to prove me that they could "get things done." Its a uncomfortable but important sometimes to have the conversation about their behavior.
The interesting experiment would have been to call aside on of the guys direct reports and ask if he was always like this.
I don't doubt that the guy was a jerk about it, but there's nothing wrong with the act in and of itself.
At a mom n pop diner, you're paying for food.
The breakfast restaurant I eat at daily? I didn't send back food that had a bit of saran wrap in it. (They did, however, notice it and give me the meal for free. I wouldn't have complained, though.)
A fancy overpriced restaurant? I'd have the manager over there in an instant. I paid for the service and quality, and I didn't get it.
He didn't give any other examples, so we can't be sure exactly how rude this guy was. Being 'brusque' with your managers isn't that bad. It's efficient and they can get back to their jobs, and you yours. Was he actually rude? Did he talk snidely to them, condescend, or call them names? Or was he merely efficient?
We can't know, and we have only those 2 examples above to go by.
Also, of all the times you've eaten the food in a fancy restaurant, what fraction of the time have you wanted to send it back (whether or not you sent it back)? I'm guessing a lot less than a hundred percent. So what are the odds that the writer happened to hit precisely that fraction of times when the restaurant actually did a substandard job (and only for one and the same guest) on two dine-outs in a row?
Both of these suggest that the guy just likes making people do more work for him because it can. Sick.
As for the odds that both things go awry; they are slim, but non-zero (these things actually do come in bunches; restaurants that have poor quality control for one aspect of the preparation will tend to have poor quality control for other aspects as well, or sometimes you just happen to be there when new staff is being trained). What is important (and not related in the story) is not the fact that he sent them back, but how he sent them back. Politely indicating that a meal is not what you ordered or is in some way flawed is fine. Being a jerk about it is being a jerk.
Of course, if you eat multiple meals with someone, and they find some excuse to complain about their food at all of them, then there's a good chance that they're simply a jerk, no matter how nicely they do it.
Sending it back in order to signal refinement is jerk behavior, agreed.
As to the other half of it, though, why should I have to be consistent? I am paying for a bottle of wine I like. I am paying more for it because society gives us the option of sending it back. If I don't like the wine, or don't think others at the table will, there's nothing wrong with exercising that option - it just needs to be done in good faith.
Edit: Thinking on it, I guess the other message from this article isn't in the headline: "Don't do business with people who treat their employees like crap." It's not just a jeremiad.
So he could have come to the complete opposite conclusion.
You can fool most people some of the time...
Flying to a different country just to say FU to a recently lost sale doesn't sound very afffable, and yet, the Siebel product line still exists today (under the Oracle umbrella - but then again, Oracle seems to just like buying out their competitors).
What would be most beneficial for these people is to confront themselves head on and examine why they don't feel comfortable and deconstruct their history, their reactions, their thoughts and their actions. But it's the strength of the fear they feel that stops them doing precisely this.
A natural protection system no? Move away from what you don't like? Counterproductive to force yourself to move towards it and know it, but I personally find the more I do it, the more I benefit. Of course sometimes it can take time for the penny to drop. That's why I meditate. The pennies drop faster, and as the noise drops away you slowly start to pay more attention to yourself, and can move away from destructive behaviour.
I like to focus on the benefit of all the free coffee and excellent conversation I get from my local barristas, though.
—Rev. Charles Bayard Miliken, Methodist Episcopal, Chicago.
Of course, "time to not be nice" is subject to interpretation, but I'm of the view that it should be a rare occurrence.
One thing I find interesting is how the actors in these situations tend to have the idea that such behavior is always going to end with their desired result. Or, to put it another way, the actions have gotten them what they want in the past so they continue to act in said manner because they believe it will deliver repeat results and it usually does.
I have been lucky to work for employers that have, I feel I can say, trusted and respected my decisions and abilities. And, with that preface, I offer you this... Challenge these actors whenever possible. Once I reached the emotional maturity where I was able to not allow such the actors actions to impact me emotionally, I decided that I was no longer going to allow myself to be attacked for trying to help or serve their needs. Instead, I put a smile on my face and refuse to help them unless addressed or treated in a respectful nature.
I have challenged these actors in many different types of situations and some of the results are what you would expect, dissatisfied and angry patrons/customers. But, that is exactly what they were before, right?? Many, though, upon realizing they weren't going to get what they wanted began to change their ways. At first, begrudgingly, but on the second or third visit/encounter with particular customers I could see that their actions were becoming more polite and sincere. It sounds weird, but it is almost like they developed a sort of respect for me standing up to them.
Of course, I understand this doesn't apply to every situation and is not going to be possible for a lot of people. But, it is food for thought. Maybe sometimes it is good to take the stance that the customer is NOT always right.
The traits of modesty[a] and a pleasant character are fairly common regardless of financial status. I think that first and foremost, we are people, and the yawning chasms we often see between our identified group and those groups we are not part of, are largely exaggerations of perception more than anything else and are miniscule compared to the differences you can find between two people who are supposed to be part of the same group.
There is an exchange between F. Scott Fitzgerald and Ernest Hemingway where Fitzgerald is supposed to have said "The rich are different from us."
To which Hemingway apparently replied, "Yes, they have more money."
I'm with Hemingway on this one.
[a] - well, modest for humans anyway. A lot of people think that their group is pretty special on the scale of the universe, which seems to be a normal form of a general species-level arrogance that is pretty funny if you really think about it for a while, but other than that, I think modesty is fairly common.