A pass? Depends. For the coffee... sure. Who cares, really.

Forget the particular examples. Do assholes finish first?

Do assholes finish first?

Looking at what I have seen those who finish first have a significant asshole factor with rare exception. For the quite successful, but not uber-successful, there has to be balance with some luck. Enough that you get what you want pretty much regardless and not so much that your really piss people off. With some luck, you can piss some people off and not get the reprocussions. I think the uber have generally had some great luck.

The particulars of the situation are going to determine how I view it. In the example, I might biew the person breaking the accounting procedures as weak or underhanded or backstabbing....or maybe I would them as powerful, like the CEO trusts them to do what needs to be done even if it involves going off procedure.

I would guess that a bit of rudeness would tend to make people view the person as more important or powerful.

1) Depends what you mean by "asshole" - to me that term means gratuitously nasty. Does not in any way correlate with confidence or power.

2) I don't think such people finish first. What goes around comes around. Nobody succeeds entirely on their own efforts.

3) This theory explains a lot about in-yer-face Israeli society...

Sure they do. For a perfect example, just look at the ex-head of the IMF, the guy currently accused of rape. Ignore the criminal charges, and ask yourself: what kind of person has sex with a random hotel maid, as a quick send-off just before boarding a plane to go home to his wife?

Power-hungry, anti-social, self-interested people who seek power over others, and who think that rules don't apply to them. This describes most professional politicians and too many corporate boardroom members.

So, yes, in that sense, the assholes finish first.

This study describes the TSA perfectly.

I don't finish first and I'm not an asshole (if one can self classify) so it must need be true! I should change my asshole orientation.

I've seen people I consider assholes have monetary success in life. I've seen the same for people I thought were class acts. I've heard Beethoven was a real dick but he still created great music. It's hard to answer this intelligibly because "finishing first" is really subjective. Some people do get away with murder. Are we talking about cops and politicians?

Don't you think evolutionary biology would tell us that most people are self selected not to challenge assholes?

In a modern democracy assholes do trivial things like steal coffee and other rude behavior. Less than a hundred years ago (and now in other parts of the world) challenging an asshole who happens to be an asshole in power can get you a quick knife in the gut or a trip to the gulag.
Most intelligent people want to live to reproduce and raise their children. You don't get to do that by challenging alpha males and females who can kill you or destroy your livelihood.

Also people who violate social norms with rude behavior are often perceived by others as being a little crazy. "Crazy" means that their behavior is unpredictable because they don't respond to the same expected norms as other people do, Unpredictability equals danger to the human animal

So, yes, in that sense, the assholes finish first.

Mebbe so, but I still hate 'em and still call 'em out on their bullshit. I don't tolerate ANyone stepping over my boundaries, and neither should anyone else. That people do tolerate them is what gives them their (perceived) power. I refuse to kow-tow to them, and I don't give a rat's ass whether they like it or not. I tell my girls all the time "stay away from the assholery and the dumbfuckery". It's too rampant these days and I'll do my damnedest not to get caught up in it.

I'm going with "it depends."

I've known a few like this in business, and they have all been run off. Fortunately, I've worked for two companies in my career, both ethical.

Some organizations tolerate them. You can look at the news and see examples every day. Closer to home, my wife had a manager who fit this description for a while, until he teed off on a handicapped employee in front of some customers and action had to be taken.

In the long run, outside of politics, I don't see it working.

When someone is boldly rude, I might assume she has no fear of consequences because she has power of some kind.

"That people do tolerate them is what gives them their (perceived) power."

I think this is key. Rude and entitled people only get thier power (perceived or real) because we as a society give it to them. We give it to them by being silent about their rude actions and behaviour therefore allowing them to believe that what they are doing is perfectly ok. We are silent because of fear, or because of the "I am a nice person" syndrome or just because some people are just to chicken shit to stick up for themselves.

Powerful people also often have a "me first" attitude that allows them to accumulate wealth and influence and become successful in their careers. Sure they succeed, but they are also often die alone and are not spoken well of behind thier backs.

There is also a vast difference in how women and men are viewed in these situations.

If a woman were to do what coffee man did in the above example, or bend the rules in accounting, she'd be coined as a bitch, or difficult, or even incompetent. Women can become powerful and highly successful by being "rude", but they are viewed much differently in business compared to men when they are. They are called shrewds, ball breakers, man-eaters, etc.... Men acting in a similar manner are called go getters, ballsy, determined, etc... Men are basically allowed, even expected, to be assholes in business and women are not. The double edged sword of it is, that women will likley never get to the top of the food chain in business if they DON'T act what we consider rude and a man can get to the top without being rude.

Men are basically allowed, even expected, to be assholes in business and women are not. The double edged sword of it is, that women will likley never get to the top of the food chain in business if they DON'T act what we consider rude and a man can get to the top without being rude.

Do you work in a business environment? If anything, a lot of women seem to go out of their way to portray themselves as 'bitches'. This is especially evident among executives. I deal with women like this all the time. The men are typically more congenial than the women.

>> Do assholes finish first?

Not as a rule. Consider all of the assholes who sabotage their careers by their behavior. It may seem like they finish first because of the handful of asshole celebrities that people are aware of, but they're not a good sample of the entire asshole population. Celebrity assholes are people who combine being an asshole with other narcissistic traits and skills that enable them to succeed. But it's not their assholery alone that makes them successful.

I see overtly rude people ("I do as I please, like it's nobody's business"-types) as aggressive, inflexible, inconsiderate and pathological. Above all - not mentally well. I do NOT view them as powerful by any means - but I do see them capable of making a huge scene and headaches for everyone around. Any power perceived by them or others for this type of narcissistic personality is illusionary. The best thing I could do to a person like this is ignore them as if they were insignificant. Challenging them - usually gives them more power (this is for me personally since engaging them, in my own experience has never gone well).

I choose not to engage them not because I fear or respect their power, but because I've committed to myself to avoid entanglements with crazies at all costs.

Amy, assholes absolutely get ahead but their long run finish becomes problematic. They still get too far ahead in too many instances.
I was going to mention DSK as a_random_guy did but look at Barney Frank's approach to politics - browbeat, shout down others with complaints of "let me talk, let me talk!" Total asshole, corrupt as the day is long and yet still elected to Congress.

Hmmm. I am with Tito. Short-term, yes they may have some small wins, but I highly doubt the majority can accomplish this in the long-run.

Amy,

When people break a rule it's very reasonable to think that they may have more power. Just like if you see someone go into the 'Employee's only' door at a bank - you will figure they have the right - if only as the bank president's wife. That's perfectly natural and logical.

Do rude people succeed more often? I don't think so. I think it's more a matter of bitter people wanting it that way. I think things like awareness and social skills help people succeed. It's possible to succeed without them but it's certainly not an advantage. That's my opinion/guess.

If you really want to know you define 'rudeness', 'success' and start surveying. A very difficult task.

As Tito and others have said above, assholes may get ahead, and may even finish first, but it's not being an asshole that does it.

The topic got me thinking about three commanders I served under at a particular base while on active duty. All of them had drive and ambition -- that's what got them put in charge of fighter wings and got them their first stars on their shoulders. Of the three, though, only one of them was particularly inspiring -- I would have followed him to hell if he asked me. He had charisma and that hard-to-define leadership ability to match his drive and ambition. You could tell he supported his troops, who had gotten him where he was, and would continue to lift him higher.

The other two commanders, well, the impression I had was they were out for themselves. Ambitious, yes, but without the ability to match their people's interests with their own, they were mostly jerks. They were obeyed out of necessity, maybe, but not due to their inspiration.

The commander I remember most fondly retired with four stars. The other two didn't get that far.

I forgot to add -
Many of the most effective backstabbing, cheating people I have known were very polite - even while being two-faced and dishonest.

I think "balls" is a better descriptor than "asshole."

And yes, being ballsy can be both good and bad.

Old RPM daddy, my experiences have been much the same as yours. There are a lot of "manager" assholes in the military but few of them are leaders who inspire commitment and loyalty in their people. However, a lot of the asshole managers are as successful or sometimes more successful than the inspirational nice guys. I find LTC is the rank that most of the assholes seem to congregate at. A few of them make it further especially if they are smarter and cover their assholeishness better, or if they have some other asset such as the protection of a powerful sponsor, then they tend to go further than they otherwise would.
I think Jimmy Carter was a good example of this. His classmates at the Naval Academy hated him so much that they would not even talk to him at class reunions but when he was on active duty he had a patron in Admiral Rickover who protected him and advanced his career.

Also, RPM daddy, my father in law is a retired two star, and former C-130 pilot. I would describe him as kind of hot tempered and occasionally a jerk but also inspirational and a good teacher. My husband did not inherit any of the jerkishness. Got the best from both his parents without any of their negatives.

I think it's too easy to conflate can-do with f-you attitudes, especially on rule breaking. It's subtle to look and see if the goal is self-serving or purpose-serving. Cutting if front of line because you are late for something, we all hate that. But if you ask me if you can, and give a reasonable excuse, I'll prolly let you. That's purpose driven. Cutting in front like it's your perogative to do so, and then acting like I should keep my nose out of it? Yeah, I'm going to get into your selfish face.

Finish first? Yeah, what d'you call first?

Isabel, I have to agree with you on that! O5 is where all the assholes stay in the military. I have meet few O6s that are anything less than polite and considerate (with some glaring exceptions). But again, the O6+ level promotion boards are those that receive the most scrutiny (and attention to personality in addition to competency). I have met (during a recent all-expenses paid vacation in the desert) a general who would say hello to and chat with anyone. He would give you a causal smile and 'Hows it going?' which would lead to an immediate smile and reply of 'whuzzup man?!' from myself--and the dawning horror that I just said 'whuzzup' to a two-star general. He took many officers and enlisted off-guard with his concerned, kind and laid-back style (although he took care of any real business on the base that needed taking care of).

Same with medicine: I have cared for multi-multimillionaires who were the most unassuming, kind and respectful people: grateful for your care and thankful for your concern. Conversely, the most demanding and annoying tend to be the Medicaid bunch who pay nothing for medical services.

Doc Jensen, That you for your service. My husband has done two tours in the sandbox in the last three years. He is a little old for this but he is a USMA grad and an engineer. He worked in a office in Baghdad who reported directly to Petreus, who IMHO is a fine example of a leader.

I am right now facing a serious problem as the primary decision maker regarding medical care for an 86 year old relative who unfortunately has excellent insurance. I could use some advice as to what to do to keep them from effectively torturing her to death.

I have a lot of respect for military doctors as their decisions are less clouded by liability issues and also the bottom line. I got great care for the seven years I was in the army.

If you have time to provide me some straight answers or could refer me to someone who could I would be most grateful. kischaumann "at" gmail.com

Tito...
I do work in a business and I don't exactly disagree with you. Some women do go out of their way to portray themselves as bitches. But the "nice girl" bosses have never been the ones to make it to the executive team even if they are more qualified then thier male counterparts so they have to play the game just like the men do. Only no one is calling the men "assholes" like they are calling the women "bitches" for behaving in a similar manner. It also depends on the industry I think. I don't want to get into the "glass ceiling" argument becaues that doesn't really apply here but women are still percieved differently than men in certain businesses. A 'nice' girl doesn't make it to the top on Wall Street but she might make it as an exec in a Healthcare company.

I don't disagree with the overall assesment that most people here think that long term assholes don't "get ahead" but they do accumulate short term success and that's usually enough to give them a lifelong feeling of power. Once you have it, it's hard to let it go. And because they have a me first attitude they always want more so they go out and get it. I agree that its not thier assholery alone that gets them power, but that in combination with other traits does. Besides whether or not they have power isnt the point. They think they do therefore they act like it by being assholes. Doesn't mean that we all believe they are powerful, but that's the image they are trying to put out.

"Conversely, the most demanding and annoying tend to be the Medicaid bunch who pay nothing for medical services."

That comes from more a feeling of entitlement then rudeness (although that is in itself a form of rudeness). They don't think they have power, only that they are entitled to whatever they want because "government dad" has been giving it to them. I don't necassarily think they fall in the same bucket.

Paul Graham, the entrepreneur and venture capitalist, posted a while back on What We Look For In Founders. One of the 5 characteristics was what he called "naughtiness," which he defined thusly:

"Morally, they care about getting the big questions right, but not about observing proprieties. That's why I'd use the word naughty rather than evil."

I vote it depends on the rules. If the rules are stupid/silly I'd probably give the rulebreaker a vote ofhaving confidence. If the rules are to me valid then I'd be more likely to give them a vote of immature idiot.

The observation that assholes tend to reach a plateau in the military is interesting. I've noticed the same in other fields, typically at middle and lower-middle management and admin roles. Which suggests to me that there are negative consequences, though some benefits as well. Maybe their behavior is effective until the people who are promoting them have to deal with them more directly.

"But the "nice girl" bosses have never been the ones to make it to the executive team even if they are more qualified then thier male counterparts so they have to play the game just like the men do. Only no one is calling the men "assholes" like they are calling the women "bitches" for behaving in a similar manner."

I completely disagree....even the guys who behave badly are called assholes. And many times on their face...while the women are called bitches only behind their backs. And most of the "nice guy" bosses also never make it to the executive team even if they are more qualified than their less civil counterparts. The few nice guys who make it to the top make it there because they are exceptionally skilled or have something critical like patents or something proprietary and hence are there due to the bargaining position that it brings. There are hardly any exceptionally skilled women around, so they don't get there.

And the women who do get to the top are pretty unprofessional and openly favour women over men regardless of the quality of work and they do try to make sure their successor is a woman regardless of merit.

and openly favour women over men regardless of the quality of work

Not to distract the topic, but that's definitely something that I've noticed. I'm in a variety of offices, at different companies, over the course of a years. It's very common to encounter all-girl teams surrounding a female executive. If there are men, they're typically gay or young entry level straight guys - usually good looking. I wouldn't be surprised to see some litigation arising from this phenomenon. It's likely that both sexes have a tendency to prefer people of their own sex to work with, but men have come to recognize that they need to make an effort to include women. Women still see themselves as exempt from this obligation.

Frankly I think that it's a good idea to break up all girl teams because the ones I've dealt with typically haven't been very effective. They generate an amazing amount of busy work, and have a hard time getting things done. Every project seems to end in a death march.

That sounds hot

Crap, just realised you wrote death march, not death match

>> Crap, just realised you wrote death march, not death match

LOL. Believe me, if it were hot I wouldn't care. The girl gangs don't like pretty girls, they hate the pretty girls.

A death march is when you're approaching a deadline without the required deliverable and are forced to work crazy hours under extreme pressure even though it's likely that you still won't be able to deliver. Like the Bataan Death March. I have the suspicion that some people actually like death marches because it makes them feel like their work is more significant than it really is.

St. Jimmy, what you say is very true. In general I have noticed that men tend to be linear thinkers who can see the big picture.

Most women on the other hand are detail oriented and also become emotionally attached to their "pet" details and ideas.

This leads them into the whole death march scenario where you fight for your portion of the project until you quite literally "die on that hill" Most men won't do that.

>> Most women on the other hand are detail oriented

Yes. I used to work for a very nice lady who would drive everyone crazy because she wanted lists and outlines for every little thing. Anything that you were to deliver required all this stupid documentation, that she didn't really have any use for. We'd joke that we should put together an outline of the lists of outlines to the lists that she would want. Again, a very nice woman but a good example of the peter principle.

I'd read some advice from a female exec at Amazon once who basically warned other women that being too process oriented was holding women back in the workplace. That it was a big reason that women tended to get stuck at a certain level. Judging by the comments to her article, you'd think that she'd recommended that women cut their heads off. Her point was that process is a means to an end, not an end in itself. For her critics, this was impossible because there was no way to get results unless someone had defined a process and you went by that process step by step. They didn't seem to consider how the process should be defined in the first place.