
Things I learned dealing with psychopaths in startups - algirau
https://medium.com/@AlexanderGirau/7-things-i-learned-dealing-with-psychopaths-in-startups-baaae513ee03#.8mg2rovpt
======
p4wnc6
To me, this article reads as an excuse for the company to behave in a
sociopathic way, and then turn around and try to pin the blame on some
employee when they (perhaps rightfully) stand up for themselves.

I've been in situations where people performed blatant religious
discrimination towards me, and also threatened to reduce my wage due to
discussing pay with a coworker (threatening any form of retaliation for
discussing pay is blatantly illegal).

The company easily could have raised some of these same complaints towards me
just to try to leverage their comparably greater resources to pin blame on the
worker rather than own up to the all too common sociopathic tendencies that
develop inside bureaucracies.

In the end, both this comment and the parent article are just anecdotes. But I
say it's a better prior to be more skeptical of managers/higher-
ups/bureaucrats who are willing to drop the "psychopath" nuke on behavior they
don't like, than the toxic employee.

~~~
algirau
Well to be frank, I am sharing an experience dealing with a problem member in
a 5 person startup. You are correct it is an anecdote. One I want to share in
hopes no one has to go through a similar issue. Your victimization does not
mean every member-company transgression is due to the company. Minority
members that have insider information can do serious damage and not care of
the legal ramifications when there are obvious consequence to them.

~~~
p4wnc6
I understand that not every member-company transgression is due to the
company. But sources like Moral Mazes give us a vast set of evidence to
believe that companies are intrinsically organized to be able to commit such
transgressions without ever bearing responsibility for them, and that
extraordinary effort is put forward to create organizational frameworks that
codify exactly this manner of villifying worker victims and coordinating
across organizations to create workplace cultural norms such that any action
of standing up for one's self is deemed "unprofessional" or "not becoming of a
true team player" or whatever other HR code word you want, all the way up,
apparently, to "psychopath."

In this sense, we ought to be more willing to apply skepticism to the company,
and more skeptical in general that things like company charter documents, HR
policies, company handbooks, or even just email memos about company culture
and policy (the more likely case in a start-up), are designed to create legal
deniability for the pursuit of illegal and irrational whims of executives, and
truly nothing more.

This is so much the modus operandi of companies in general, start-up or
otherwise, that until after we account for the huge base rate of company-
initiated transgressions, it just has little relevance to focus so much on the
"toxic" employee. In fact, one of the most successful scams of the
organizational HR world is to draw so much disproportionate attention to the
scarecrow "toxic employee."

Both of my worst experiences with outright fraudulent and corrupt managers
have come at start-ups, where there wasn't even the thin veneer of an HR
apparatus to even pay lip service to protecting us from executive whims.

Now, having said all that, I can certainly still agree that your case might be
an exception. But I would prefer if your article was written more that way:
that when this happens on the part of an employee, it's generally very rare
and the best thing for the company to do is try to learn how they could have
handled it better (read: publicly calling someone something as incendiary as
"psychopath" is not it, even if it were true), and voiciferously acknowledge
that in the vast, vast majority of cases, it is the company being toxic, not
the employee who responds by standing up for herself.

------
DanBC
> CEO & Founder

> psychopaths

> utterly insane

> psychopathic minority member

> latent craziness

> psychopaths

> broken psychology

> psychopath’s

> crazy will make the sane crazy

> their crazy existence

> psychopath

> crazy

I should stop being surprised when company owners leave themselves open to
litigation. MH is a disability, and disability is a protected characteristic
in US law.

------
adamzerner
Do you knoW that this person is a legitimate psychopath?

~~~
sandstrom
Good question. It feels like this term is being thrown around quite a lot.

Out of curiosity I browsed Wikipedia which had this to say:

    
    
        Psychopathy emphasize three observable characteristics to varying degrees:
        
        - Boldness. Low fear, high tolerance of stress, unfamiliarity and danger, and 
          high self-confidence and social assertiveness.
        
        - Disinhibition. Poor impulse control including problems with planning and  
          foresight, lacking affect and urge control, and demand 
          for immediate gratification. Low conscientiousness.
        
        - Meanness. Lacking empathy and close attachments with others, use of cruelty 
          to gain empowerment, exploitative tendencies, defiance 
          of authority, and destructive excitement seeking. 
        
    

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy#Definition](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychopathy#Definition)

~~~
algirau
I think this applies closely.

I am surprised that the tendency to compulsively lie is not also in the
Wikipedia definition.

~~~
p4wnc6
But when it comes to something as medically severe as psychopathy isn't it the
whole point that it shouldn't matter what you, or me, or any layperson thinks?

If you already don't like this coworker because of disagreements and actions
at work, you're very likely to overestimate these symptoms, or believe that
someone who is only a little ways along the spectrum to psychopath is actually
much further.

Imagine if we believed everyone who went through a bad breakup or divorce and
called their ex partner a psychopath out of anger (even justified anger). It
just seems really extreme to use some armchair diagnosis from someone
emotionally invested in believing bad things about the other person.

~~~
algirau
This isn't as juvenile as a dislike. I spent my PhD on the technology for this
company and licensed it from a tier 1 university and started the company. This
individual (hindsight is 20/20) coerced me to make probably the worst decision
by giving him fully vested equity only to leave for a different opportunity
after and yet wish to have a say on issues that are Board issues.

Again this post was a message to any founder finding a partner. Things may be
rosy in the beginning but if you are paired with someone who fundamentally is
only motivated by money they will always choose their own interest over the
company. Even if that means actively sabotaging and slandering.

Again I do not want to air dirty laundry but I was landed the unfortunate
worst case scenario.

Anyone who thinks that I am being one sided is allowed to have that
prerogative. I cannot give full details but please imagine the worse situation
you can get into with a first partner, I am talking them trying to smear your
reputation and sabotaging the company in order to get their way, not just some
friendship that went bad. Please proceed with caution and do not be overly
trustworthy.

If anyone wants to know more I would be happy to talk directly. But I'm
sharing this because founders with genuine intentions and the ones who get
damaged the most by individuals like this.

~~~
dfraser992
Hi, I am quite sure I have a good idea of what you're going thru (see my
comment history for my rants). I have vented enough over the past 2 years and
all the stress has burned out, so I'm over it all (I think). But I can't help
but offer support whenever someone raises this sort of topic...

Your problem seems, based on what you say, a lot more narcissistic than the
guys I had to deal with - yes, that is actually a positive, believe me. The
problem is obvious... I lost 5 years of my life to this stupid startup and got
little out of it except some harsh life lessons.

Good luck, and if you don't have a lawyer, get one.

------
dfraser992
Based on my experiences, I would say this person the article speaks of is more
probably a schzoid type personality, or borderline personality disorder? I
think the popular media driven depiction of psychopaths as bombastic assholes
to be click-bait - real psychopaths are a lot more like Patrick Bateman
("American Psycho") - cool as a cucumber and always in control of their
emotions

And thus the interaction they have with people. They're like an information
black hole - little leaks out of them, but they are sucking up every bit of
non-verbal etc info out of you and consciously processing it. Thus they see
your blind spots and can devise ways to take advantage of your 'shadow' side
or hidden psychological needs.

~~~
DanBC
> Based on my experiences, I would say this person the article speaks of is
> more probably a schzoid type personality, or borderline personality
> disorder?

What the fuck.

This tiny little article gives you nothing with which you can make those
claims.

~~~
dfraser992
no, it does. Psychopaths are a lot more calculating, less emotional, and from
how the OP wrote it, it seemed like there was a lot more emotional stuff going
on with the trouble maker. I have a mother with borderline personality
disorder, so I am very experienced with how these types of disorders look. The
situation reminded me of my own experiences.

ok, I have no idea why I wrote schizoid. I was probably drunk at the time... I
stand corrected on that. I still say 'psychopath' is the wrong term to use
though. On the face of it, it seems to be something different - certainly some
anti-social personality disorder.

