The No Asshole Rule

The No Asshole Rule Plot Summary

Introduction

Every day, millions of people wake up and head to workplaces where they'll encounter colleagues who make their lives miserable. These toxic individuals drain energy, crush creativity, and damage both personal well-being and organizational performance. You've likely experienced them yourself – the boss who publicly humiliates subordinates, the coworker who takes credit for others' work, or the team member who spreads negativity like a virus. This pervasive problem costs companies billions in lost productivity, increased turnover, and damaged morale. Yet this widespread workplace issue remains largely unaddressed. Many organizations tolerate or even reward such behavior, especially when the perpetrators are high performers. The good news is that creating a civilized workplace isn't just a pleasant ideal – it's a practical, achievable goal with tremendous benefits. By establishing clear standards for interpersonal behavior and implementing specific strategies to maintain them, we can transform toxic environments into places where people thrive, innovation flourishes, and everyone wins – including the bottom line.

Chapter 1: Recognize Toxic Behavior and Its Damaging Impact

At the heart of workplace toxicity is behavior that leaves others feeling belittled, humiliated, or de-energized. These interactions aren't merely unpleasant – they're destructive to both individuals and organizations. The "asshole test" provides a simple but powerful framework: after interacting with someone, does the target feel worse about themselves? And does the perpetrator aim their venom at those with less power rather than peers or superiors? Consider what happened at Stanford University during a faculty meeting about fifteen years ago. The small department was discussing potential new hires when one colleague proposed recruiting a renowned researcher from another institution. Another faculty member immediately responded, "Listen, I don't care if that guy won the Nobel Prize... I just don't want any assholes ruining our group." This sparked a genuine conversation about protecting their collegial culture. From that point forward, when discussing potential hires, it became legitimate to question whether a candidate would violate their "no asshole rule." This informal rule made the department a better place to work. While other workplaces might use more polite language like rules against being a "jerk," "weasel," or "bully," the underlying principle remains: creating an environment where people treat each other with basic dignity and respect. Some organizations enforce this rule explicitly, while others maintain it as an unspoken standard. The damage from toxic behavior extends far beyond hurt feelings. Research shows that victims experience decreased job satisfaction, reduced productivity, difficulty concentrating, and serious health problems including anxiety, feelings of worthlessness, chronic fatigue, and depression. Bystanders who witness such behavior suffer ripple effects, including increased stress and decreased productivity – even if they aren't directly targeted. Toxic behavior also spreads like a contagious disease. Studies show that when people experience contempt or anger from others, they're likely to "catch" these emotions and pass them along. One toxic person can create a downward spiral that poisons an entire team or department. Organizations that tolerate such behavior face higher turnover, increased absenteeism, diminished commitment, and impaired performance. Understanding what constitutes toxic behavior – and recognizing its profound costs – is the essential first step toward creating a workplace where civility prevails and everyone can do their best work.

Chapter 2: Calculate the True Cost of Assholes in Your Organization

The financial impact of tolerating toxic employees is far greater than most leaders realize. While many organizations justify keeping difficult people because of their technical skills or contributions, the hidden costs of their behavior dramatically outweigh any benefits they bring. A Harvard Business Review reader suggested that more companies would enforce standards of civility if they calculated their "Total Cost of Assholes" (TCA). This framework helps quantify the organizational impact in terms of retention, recruitment, lost clients, and wasted organizational energy. When a Silicon Valley executive actually calculated these costs for one difficult but high-performing salesperson, the numbers were staggering. The company analyzed the costs associated with "Ethan," one of their top-producing salespeople who consistently ranked in the top 5% of performers. Despite his results, Ethan's behavior was consistently problematic – his temper was legendary, he routinely insulted colleagues, sent infamous late-night email rants, and drove away multiple administrative assistants. His last assistant lasted less than a year, and no one else would work with him, forcing an expensive search for a replacement willing to endure his treatment. The company methodically calculated the weekly costs of Ethan's behavior compared to other, more civilized salespeople. Their final tally: approximately $160,000 in a single year. This included 250 hours of his direct manager's time ($25,000), HR professionals' time ($5,000), senior executives' involvement ($10,000), outside employment counsel ($5,000), recruiting and training costs for a new secretary ($85,000), overtime costs for his last-minute demands ($25,000), and anger management training ($5,000). This figure likely understates the full damage, as it omits physical and mental health effects on victims, time lost by witnesses, and the negative impact of the fear and dysfunction he created. When presented with this analysis, Ethan reacted predictably – flying into a rage and blaming others for being unable to meet his expectations. The TCA calculation should include numerous factors: distraction from tasks, reduced psychological safety that undermines innovation, lost motivation, stress-induced illness, absenteeism, turnover costs, diminished cooperation, damaged reputation, and legal expenses. Even one toxic individual can contaminate an entire system, as their behavior normalizes incivility and inhibits the honest communication necessary for organizational health. Organizations that rigorously enforce civility standards report dramatic improvements in performance, innovation, and financial results. Implementing such standards isn't merely compassionate – it's smart business that produces measurable returns in productivity, retention, and customer satisfaction.

Chapter 3: Implement and Enforce the No Asshole Rule

Transforming organizational culture requires more than just declaring a "no asshole rule" – it demands consistent enforcement backed by concrete policies and visible action. Without follow-through, such statements become empty rhetoric that breeds cynicism rather than change. The Men's Wearhouse demonstrates how to effectively implement the rule through both policies and actions. CEO George Zimmer didn't just talk about mutual respect and team selling – he backed it with decisive action. In one revealing case, the company fired one of its most successful salespeople (measured by individual sales dollars) who consistently "stole" customers from colleagues, bad-mouthed the company culture, and refused to help fellow employees. This decision proved that Men's Wearhouse truly valued collaborative behavior over individual star performance. Interestingly, after this toxic performer left, the store's total sales increased by nearly 30% – no single salesperson sold as much as the departed "star," but the store as a whole performed dramatically better without the dysfunction he created. Southwest Airlines similarly embeds their standards in hiring and firing practices. The company hires and fires explicitly for attitude, not just skill. Former head of human resources Ann Rhoades emphasized that at both Southwest and JetBlue (where she later worked), toxic employees "couldn't get away with it" because "there is no place for them to hide." When a pilot applicant was rude to a receptionist during the interview process, Southwest immediately rejected him despite his technical qualifications. As founder Herb Kelleher explained, "You can't treat people that way and be the kind of leader we want." Organizations that successfully enforce the rule weave it into everyday interactions and systems. They screen out potential jerks during hiring by involving multiple interviewers from different levels and departments. They apply the rule to customers and clients – Southwest has banned hundreds of passengers who treat employees or fellow travelers disrespectfully. They also teach constructive conflict resolution, allowing people to disagree productively without personal attacks. The most effective implementations focus on conversations and interactions rather than just formal policies. When the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs undertook a major initiative to reduce workplace bullying across eleven sites, they succeeded by addressing seemingly small slights like glaring, interruptions, and treating people as invisible. These interventions produced substantial reductions in 32 of 60 measured negative behaviors and increased productivity – the Houston Cemetery, for example, reported both a 31% decrease in aggressive acts and a 9% increase in productivity. The lesson is clear: creating a civilized workplace requires connecting big policies to small decencies. When leaders model respectful behavior, apply standards consistently regardless of someone's status or performance, and empower everyone to uphold these norms, the rule becomes woven into the organization's DNA rather than just words on a wall.

Chapter 4: Control Your Inner Jerk and Avoid Toxic Contagion

Even naturally kind and mentally healthy people can turn caustic and cruel under the wrong conditions. The key to maintaining civility is understanding that acting like an asshole is a communicable disease – once unleashed, it spreads like wildfire through emotional contagion. This phenomenon was vividly demonstrated when a respected management professor joined a dot-com era strategy group led by a renowned but difficult guru. During Sunday meetings, the professor found himself competing with other experts to establish dominance – interrupting, bragging about accomplishments, and battling for airtime while ignoring or talking over others in the room. One management consultant aptly described such behavior as "like watching apes in the zoo throwing feces to assert dominance." Even more troubling, the professor's wife noticed that when he returned home from these gatherings, he continued acting like an "overbearing and pompous jerk" – suffering from what she called "testosterone poisoning." Research confirms this pattern. Experiments by Leigh Thompson and Cameron Anderson showed that even compassionate people, when placed in groups with aggressive "alpha dog" leaders, transform into "carbon copies" of these bullies. Dr. Michelle Duffy found that hospital workers with "morally disengaged" bosses often became jerks themselves within six months. As researchers put it, "A wise man associating with the vicious becomes an idiot." To avoid catching and spreading this toxic contagion, several strategies prove effective. First, follow Leonardo da Vinci's advice that "it is easier to resist at the beginning than at the end." Before joining any organization, do your homework about its culture. If you discover a den of toxicity, don't give in to the temptation to join, regardless of other perks. One Stanford colleague declined a seemingly perfect job after discovering during pre-employment meetings that her prospective boss repeatedly interrupted her, belittled her ideas, and wouldn't take time to discuss her concerns. Second, reframe your perspective on workplace competition. Research on "framing" by Stanford's Lee Ross demonstrated how language profoundly affects behavior. When students played identical games labeled either as "Community Game" or "Wall Street Game," those with the community frame were dramatically more cooperative and honest than those operating under the competitive frame. Try focusing on "we" rather than "I" and recognize the ways you're similar to rather than different from colleagues. Finally, develop awareness of how others perceive you. As executive coaches Kate Ludeman and Eddie Erlandson discovered while working with "alpha males" like Michael Dell and Kevin Rollins at Dell Computers, collecting feedback from colleagues can reveal destructive patterns you don't recognize. Dell was surprised to learn subordinates saw him as remote and unappreciative, while Rollins didn't realize how his critical style and poor listening skills bred fear throughout the company. The most powerful protection against toxic behavior starts with self-awareness – recognizing your own triggers and tendencies before they damage others. As one student's button wisely proclaimed: "Admitting you're an asshole is the first step."

Chapter 5: Develop Strategies for Surviving in Hostile Environments

Sometimes escape from a toxic workplace isn't immediately possible. Whether trapped by financial necessity, geographic limitations, or awaiting a better opportunity, millions endure environments where demeaning behavior prevails. In these situations, strategic coping techniques can help preserve both sanity and dignity. One Silicon Valley executive developed what she called the "Satan's Cesspool Strategy" after becoming entangled in a political battle with colleagues who routinely put her down, interrupted her, and criticized her work. Her approach drew inspiration from advice she'd received years earlier as a teenager from a river rafting guide: If you fall out of a boat in rapids, don't fight the current; rely on your life vest, float with your feet out in front, and conserve your energy. That way, if thrown against rocks, you can push off with your feet while protecting your head. During particularly brutal meetings where colleagues unleashed personal attacks and blame, she visualized herself floating through rapids with her feet extended. Instead of fighting back or feeling victimized, she remained emotionally detached – letting their attacks bounce off her while conserving her energy. This reframing technique proved so effective that she shared it with a fellow executive also enduring similar treatment. Both made it through with their confidence intact, unlike her earlier experience that had left her physically and emotionally exhausted. Psychological research confirms the power of such reframing. Martin Seligman's work on "learned optimism" shows that viewing difficulties as temporary rather than permanent, specific rather than pervasive, and external rather than personal helps protect mental health during adversity. Disney uses similar techniques when training theme park employees to handle irate guests – teaching them to imagine what might have sparked the anger and not take it personally. Additional survival strategies include limiting exposure to toxic individuals. Schedule shorter meetings with difficult colleagues, use technology as a buffer when possible, and create "pockets of safety" where you can retreat. Hospital nurses studied by researchers created a sanctuary in their break room where doctors weren't allowed – a place to decompress, share stories, and receive emotional support. Fighting small, strategic battles can also help maintain a sense of control. A Los Angeles bus driver described how she calmly educated an angry passenger who claimed drivers "do nothing but drive" by explaining her numerous responsibilities. The passenger apologized, demonstrating how gentle reeducation can transform hostility into understanding. Others find relief in carefully chosen acts of resistance – like the producer who made chocolates from laxatives after her boss repeatedly stole food from her desk despite requests to stop. While these techniques help survive toxic environments, the healthiest long-term solution remains finding a workplace where civility is the norm. As Walt Whitman advised, "Dismiss whatever insults your soul" – sometimes the wisest strategy is knowing when to walk away.

Chapter 6: Balance Assertiveness with Respect and Civility

Enforcing the no asshole rule doesn't mean creating an environment of conflict-averse wimps. Effective organizations need healthy debate and constructive criticism to thrive – the challenge lies in fostering passionate disagreement without personal attacks or disrespect. Intel, the world's largest semiconductor maker, addresses this balance through training all employees in "constructive confrontation." The company teaches that while excessive conflict is harmful, the absence of confrontation is equally problematic. Employees learn to approach problems with evidence and logic, attack issues rather than people, and focus on facts instead of personalities. The company's motto – "Disagree and then commit" – acknowledges that arguing after decisions are made wastes energy and undermines implementation. This approach reflects research from Kellogg, Wharton, and Stanford business schools showing that "task conflict" (disagreeing about ideas) enhances team performance, while "relationship conflict" (personal animosity) devastates it. Stanford's Kathleen Eisenhardt found that high-performing teams "base discussion on current factual information" and "develop multiple alternatives to enrich debate." This constructive approach was exemplified at Xerox PARC, where a team led by Bob Taylor developed many technologies that made the computer revolution possible. As described in Michael Hiltzik's book "Dealers of Lightning," Taylor created an environment where "impugning a man's thinking was acceptable, but never his character." Finding this balance isn't easy. Even at Intel, executives admitted they constantly struggled to prevent teams from "swerving" toward either destructive personal attacks or conflict-avoidant timidity. The key lies in focusing on what happens in every conversation and meeting, constantly reflecting on interactions, and making real-time adjustments. Robert I. Sutton himself acknowledges this challenge: "When Jeff Pfeffer (my frequent coauthor) criticizes one of my ideas, my first reaction is often 'that asshole,' and I have to take a moment, calm down, and then respond to his logic and facts." This honest admission reveals the ongoing effort required to maintain the distinction between challenging ideas and attacking people. University of Michigan professor Karl Weick offers a perfect guiding principle: "Fight as if you are right; listen as if you are wrong." This balanced approach enables the vigorous debate necessary for excellence while preserving the mutual respect essential for collaboration. Organizations that master this balance enjoy tremendous advantages. They benefit from diverse perspectives, rigorous examination of ideas, and continuous improvement – all while maintaining the psychological safety that enables creativity and risk-taking. By teaching people how to fight fairly and productively, leaders create environments where both ideas and relationships can flourish.

Chapter 7: Transform Your Workplace Culture with Small Actions

Creating a civilized workplace doesn't require grand gestures or massive reorganizations. The most effective cultural transformations happen through consistent small actions that gradually shift norms and expectations throughout an organization. James Sinegal, co-founder and CEO of Costco, exemplifies how small actions can create profound cultural impact. Despite leading a major corporation, Sinegal maintained a salary of just $350,000 – approximately ten times what his hourly employees earned and roughly double a typical store manager's pay. This modest compensation (along with covering 92.5% of employee healthcare costs) sent a powerful message about valuing all members of the organization. Sinegal also regularly visited hundreds of Costco stores, mixing with employees and asking how he could make things better for them and customers. These actions drastically reduced the "power distance" between leadership and employees, creating a culture where everyone felt valued and respected. The results speak for themselves: despite continuing skepticism from analysts about "wasting money on labor costs," Costco enjoys rising earnings, profits, and stock prices. Their employee theft rate is just two-tenths of 1% – ten to fifteen times lower than other retail chains – because employees feel fairly treated. Small interactions between colleagues similarly shape culture. When the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs implemented their workplace civility initiative, they focused on seemingly minor behaviors like eliminating glaring, interruptions, and treating people as "invisible." These small adjustments produced dramatic results – reducing reported acts of aggression by 31% at the Houston Cemetery while simultaneously increasing productivity by 9%. Individual managers can transform team dynamics through tiny adjustments in their communication style. Research shows that when discussions are framed as "Community Games" rather than "Wall Street Games," cooperation increases dramatically. Simply shifting from "I" language to "we" language signals inclusion and shared purpose. As management guru Peter Drucker observed after his 65-year consulting career, the most effective leaders "thought and said we rather than I." The power of small gestures extends to how organizations handle mistakes and failure. Amy Edmondson's research with nursing units discovered that teams with the best leadership reported ten times more errors than poorly led units – not because they made more mistakes, but because they felt "psychologically safe" to admit them. Leaders created this safety through small daily actions: responding to errors with curiosity rather than blame, treating mistakes as learning opportunities, and demonstrating vulnerability about their own imperfections. By focusing on these seemingly minor interactions rather than sweeping initiatives, anyone can begin improving workplace culture immediately. As the VA project manager James Scaringi noted, "Some of us were skeptical at first that such little changes could make a difference, but the evidence convinced us otherwise." The cumulative effect of these small decencies creates environments where people flourish and organizations thrive.

Summary

The quest for a civilized workplace ultimately comes down to a simple truth: life is too short to spend it surrounded by people who make us feel diminished, demoralized or disrespected. Throughout this journey, we've seen how toxic behavior damages not just individual targets but entire organizations through reduced productivity, increased turnover, and diminished innovation. We've also discovered practical strategies for implementing and enforcing standards of civility that benefit everyone involved. The most powerful insight may be what Robert Sutton calls "the power-performance paradox" – the understanding that while organizations naturally have status differences, deliberately reducing those differences produces better results. When leaders like Costco's James Sinegal minimize the distance between themselves and employees, they create cultures of mutual respect that outperform more hierarchical competitors. As Sutton reminds us, "The true test of an organization's rule comes when things are going badly." Anyone can be civil when everything's going well, but maintaining respect during difficulties reveals an organization's true character. Today, take one small step toward creating a more civilized environment – whether by modeling respectful behavior, addressing a problematic interaction, or simply refusing to tolerate demeaning conduct. Remember that the journey toward a better workplace begins with how you treat the person right in front of you, right now.

About Author

Loading...

Robert I. Sutton

Read more