

Why Nice Guys Finish Last at Startups? - cwan
http://www.pehub.com/84587/why-nice-guys-finish-last-at-startups/

======
bluesnowmonkey
_Speak with power – without being profane. Also, interrupt. [...] Also, make
sure you’re permitted to complete your sentences, and use vivid emotion-
producing language._

I've worked with this type of person. He could have written the book on power
dynamics. Unfortunately, his insistence on interrupting and not being
interrupted pushed the people around him toward fighting rather than
cooperating, even when there were no real disagreements in the room. Yes, it
will help you get ahead, but at the same time it will destroy the organization
around you.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
Know when the situation is important to "getting ahead", and when its just
work - and use appropriate language for each.

------
lsc
It seems like every business owner should be aware of this sort of thing...
aware so that he or she can recognize and fire the employees who play these
destructive games to get ahead.

As a business owner, though, I think the rules for playing power games are
quite different; First, I care about how well the company does more than how
"powerful" you think I am. I mean, if I don't let you finish what you are
trying to say, why the hell am I still employing you?

besides, you know I can fire you. I have the metaphorical 'big stick' in the
situation; there is no reason to lord my status over you.

~~~
helmut_hed
The guys who do the interrupting power dynamic thing don't do it to their
bosses - only their subordinates and competitors. This, too, is part of the
"skill set" they bring. The attitude of their manager is extremely important
in this - some people actually admire the people doing the bullying and think
it shows potential for advancement. I'm not sure why, but it explains a lot...

~~~
lsc
right; my point was that if you have significant ownership, becoming a bully
likely hurts you (because it hurts the company) more than it helps you
(because who is going to promote you? you own the place.) My point is that the
traditional rules for office politics are designed for an environment where
the actual owners are absent, and what you have left are the middle managers
arguing over control of other people's money. The equation works out quite a
bit differently in a startup where the boss usually owns a pretty significant
chunk of the company.

It's the "at startups" bit of the title (which doesn't seem to be supported by
the rest of the article) that I object to.

