Productivity Killers Series

Humanvirusesthatundermineproductivitythreatenorganizationsin
powerfulways.Inthisseries,FredKofmantakesalookathowthey
reachthecoreofbusinessandhowwecancombatthem.

1. Productivity Killers

2. Ethical Myopia

4. Ontological Arrogance

2011AxialentInc.Allrightsreserved.

3. The Victim Virus

5. Narcissistic Negotiation

6. Our Word Dishonored

PRODUCTIVITY KILLERS SERIES | 1

Productivity
Killers
By Fred Kofman

At a time when organizations seem to be bombarded with

new threats, I feel its worthwhile to consider this basic
paradox: a systems greatest danger often lies in its most
crucialorinherentpart.

individualexample:achildclaimsthetoybroke(heorshe
had nothing to do with it). An organizational example: a
manager says the project slowed down (he or she had
nothingtodowithit).

The Internet is rife with viruses, yet an offline computer is

rendered mostly useless in modern times. Houses are filled
withdangerouswiringandpipes,which,inturn,makethem
habitable. Composed of individuals and relationships, an
organizations most inherent threat is that of cultural
viruses,orthreatstoitsproductivity.

Ontologicalarrogance:thebeliefthatmyperceptionofthe
worldconstitutestheobjectivetruth;thatthosewhodonot
seewhatIseeareblind.Theinfectedpartyregardshimor
herself as the owner of reality and reason and hence
demandsobedience.Anindividualexample:achilddoesnot
not eat broccoli because its yucky, but rather because he
doesnt like the taste. An organizational example: the
customersarenotbeingdifficult,but
rather the salesperson does not know
howtomakeanattractivesalespitch.

To combat these risks, we install

antivirus
programs
onto
our
computers and get insurance on our
homes. Safeguarding organizations
from viruses like productivity killers,
however,isagreaterchallenge.

How do we safeguard
organizations from
cultural viruses?

First,howdothesevirusesreachtheorganizationaloperative
system? Hidden in a Trojan horse: in the mind of each
member.Howdotheyreachtheindividualmind?Peopleare
born with certain weaknesses that are exploited by
ideological viruses latent in the social atmosphere. Every
human being (and every human organization) suffers the
consequencesoffivevirusesthatwereinstalledinhisorher
biosoftwareduringearlychildhood:

Ethicalmyopia:valuesaresubordinatedtoimmediatesuccess
Victimhood:irresponsibility;beingavictimofcircumstances
Ontologicalarrogance:mytruthistheonlytruth
Narcissisticnegotiation:Ionlywiniftherestloses
Dishonoredcommitments:lackofintegrityandcreditorcare

Ethical myopia: the unremitting pursuit of immediate

gratification. An individual example: a drug addict. An
organizational example: a company addicted to quarterly
results,likeEnron.
Victimhood: a focus on factors that are beyond control; an
account in which one is a victim of circumstances. The
infected party regards him or herself as a play thing of
larger powers, and in doing so shirks responsibility. An

Productivity Killers

Narcissistic negotiation: the intention

of increasing ones selfesteem by
destroying the opponents. The
infectedpartyfeelstheneedtoprovehisvalueandpower,
and does so by demeaning and weakening the power of
everyone they deal with. An individual example: a pair of
siblings fight over a specific cookie, even though 10 others
are in the jar. An organizational example: managers fight as
theyattempttobuildtheirpersonalempires.

Dishonored commitments: the incongruence between what

we promise and what we do. The infected party promises
without the intention of delivering, and breaks his or her
promises without prior notice, apology or care for the
damaged party. An individual example: the saying Lend a
friend a book and lose both the friend and the book. An
organizational example: the typical delays of meetings
becausenobodyrespectstheagreedupontimeframe.
Atsomepoint,theseproductivitykillershavelurkedwithin
all of us, with different origins and consequences. The fact
thatmanyofthesethreatsareleftunansweredhasaserious
impactonoursocietyandthesuccessofourorganizations.In
this series, I explain how to develop the necessary defenses
tosuccessfullycombatthesethreats.

|1

PRODUCTIVITY KILLERS SERIES | 2

Ethical Myopia
By Fred Kofman

The most difficult challenges oftentimes sprout from one,

hardfixedfoundation:thehumanstruggleofbalancingwhat
we know intellectually against our natural desire for instant
gratification.
Survival of the human race has depended on the instinctive
response to danger or opportunity, a capacity rooted in a
shortcircuitinthenervoussystem.Insituationsofemotional
intensity, the part of the brain in charge of rational thought
(whichistheslowestandmostreflectivepart),goesoffline.
For example, if a truck were rushing towards you, your
rational thought functions (luckily)
would turn idle. The most atavistic part
ofyourbrain(yourinstincts)wouldtake
control over your body, guiding the
organism away from the threat of pain.
(And,thisisthesameinstinctthatwould
guideyoutowardpleasure.)

restonourdiscipline,forexampleresistingthetemptationof
aneasyorfastsolution.
Similarly, companies can reap positive effects by exercising
disclipine. For instance, organziations that subordinate
seemingly urgent matters to important matters generate
greaterprofitability,growthandvalueforshareholdersthan
those that focus only on the current issues. As Jim Collins
explainsinthebookGoodtoGreat,extraordinarycompanies
have disciplined people, disciplined thought and disciplined
action.
Homer provides an example of
disclipline and forwardthinking in The
Odyssey when Odysseus sails near an
island of Sirens, famous for their
enthralling song that lures sailors to
their demise at the reefs. To avoid
disaster,Odysseusplugsthesailorsears
withwax,tieshimselftotheshipsmast
and tells the sailors to ignore his next
orders. This restriction allows him to experience the
temptationwithoutfallingpreytoit.

In many ways, our

happiness and
success rest on
our discipline

These survival mechanisms, however,

sabotage our rationality or intellect in
the workplace, especially under intense circumstances like
time pressures. Because we are biologically programmed to
focus on the issueathand, future consequences of our
actionsremainoutoffocus.
This shortsightedness is more than just a productivity
killer in teams and organizations; it also puts our values at
risk,whichiswhyIrefertoitasethicalmyopia.

People infected with ethical myopia act in pursuit of

immediate gratification, despite knowing that their actions
are counterproductive in the long term and oftentimes
directlybetrayingtheirownvalues.
Healthy people know the benefits of different behavior. In
fact, scientists have found a remarkably high correlation
between our capacity to delay gratification and our physical
andmentalhealth.Inmanyways,ourhappinessandsuccess

Ethical Myopia

OrganizationalseasareplaguedwithSirens.Theirsongssay:
To make this sale dont tell the customer that you cant
possibly meet the promised delivery date; To get the loan
donttellthebankthatoneofyourmajorcustomersisgoing
bankrupt;Ifsomeonedoesntsupportyourideas,consider
that person an enemy and get him out of your way. For
manymanagers(andtheirorganizations),thesesongsareas
irresistibleastheyaredisastrous.
We cannot afford to plug our ears we need to use all our
sensestonavigateturbulentwaters.Towhatmastcanwetie
ourselvestostayontherighttrackwhiletheSirenssing?The
only enduring security is the commitment to transcendent
values like responsibility, honesty, respect, and integrity.
Whenweare notundercharms,weknowthatthesevalues

|2

PRODUCTIVITY KILLERS SERIES | 2

hold the key to our success, happiness and selfesteem.

Without a deep commitment to them commitment that
mayseemirrationalatthemomentoftemptationpeople,
organizationsandevennationssinkirremediably.
Thus, it is fundamental that the leaders of any group tie
themselves to the mast of ethics. It is only by embodying
these values that a leader can set an example and guide a
teamsafelyandsuccessfully.

Ethical Myopia

|3

PRODUCTIVITY KILLERS SERIES | 3

The Victim
Virus
By Fred Kofman

If you tune in to what your colleagues say when they arrive

late to a meeting, you may be able to detect a grave
infectionthatcanmanifestitselfaspassivity.
Its not that your colleagues reasons heavy traffic or long
meetingsarentvalid.Rather,itstheirstorysnarrowscope
that makes them ineffective,
illustrating one of the most pernicious
productivitykillers,thevictimvirus.
Beyond the excuses provided, your
colleagues personal choices and
actions may have helped cause their
delay(i.e.theydecidedtostaylateina
meeting.) But by focusing on the
factors that are outside of their
control, they shirk responsibility and
adoptvictimhood.

Regrettably,manypeoplechoosetofocustheirattentionon
theaspectsoutsidetheircontrol.Thesepeopleareinfected
withthevictimvirus,andwhensomethinggoeswrong,they
explain blame away as fate or
somebody elses fault, just as my
daughter did in regard to her broken
dolls.

Regrettably, many
people choose
to focus their
attention on the
aspects outside
their control.

Our typical notion of responsibility is

causal we are responsible for the consequences of our
actions.Inthefaceofsuccess,wemaybeproudofourrole.
However, when applied to failure, responsibility becomes
deeplyassociatedwithguilt.

Fromanearlyage,wearetaughtthatresponibilityandguilt
are intertwined and that both should be avoided at all
costs. In my house, this became evident through dialogues
withmy5yearolddaughter,whosebeheadeddollsIusedto
fix. What happened? Id ask when she would bring me a
doll.Itbroke,shedsay,distancingherselffromanycausal
role. It seems that her dolls had a habit of committing
suicide
Unfortunately, examples of victimhood also abound among
adultsandintheworkplace.Forexample,anITmanagerwho
receives a complaint from a customer may blame the
programmers. His story may be true, but it also may
conveniently overlook his role in supervising the
programmers work. In another case, an account executive
may claim to have lost a client because the logistics
department fell behind with the order. Though true, the
explanation may omit that the executive never asked the

TheVictimVirus

logistics department if they would be able to deliver on the

termshepromisedtotheclient.

This defence mechanism shields

victims selfesteem. By zoning in on
factorsthattheycannotinfluence,they
provethattheyarenotguilty.

But the price of this innocence is

impotence. When attributing causality
touncontrollablefactors,victimsannul
their ability to change the situation.
And,sincetheydontseethemselvesaspartoftheproblem,
theycannotseethemselvesaspartofthesolutioneither.

Take the case of Steven, for example. A sales manager, he

wasfuriouswhenHumanResourcesapprovedhisemployees
vacationswithoutconsultinghim.
Thisisunbelievable!heranted,Howcouldtheyhavegiven
mypeoplevacationduringourbusiestmonth?
After a few moments of silence, I asked, Steven, whose
problemisthis?
Human Resources, of course, he snapped. They should
haveaskedmefirst.
But,whoissufferingduetothissituation?
Iam,hesaid.Then,afterapause,heprotested,Butthey
madethemistake,whyshoulditbemyproblem?
Here,Ipointedoutanimportantdistinction:whocausedthe
problem is irrelevant. If you are suffering, you have a
problem.Thisisthemantraofplayers.

|4

PRODUCTIVITY KILLERS SERIES | 3

Unlikevictims,playersseethemselvesasanintegralpartof
thesystemthatgeneratedanunwantedresult,andassuch,a
leveragepointforchange.
By simply changing our perspective, we can shed light on a
fundamental truth: we have the unconditional power to
chooseourbehavior.
Playersrejectthecausaldefinitionofresponsibility.Rather,
they take on responseability, or the ability to respond in
thefaceofanysituation,interpretingfactorsoutsideoftheir
controlaschallengesinvitingaresponse.

and our expectation that others will take care of our

problems.OnceStevenwasabletodetachfromtheapparent
unfairness of what had happened, he was in a position to
take charge of his situation and fix the problem with pride
andintegrity.
Myexperiencewithleadersfromallaroundtheworldisthat
the victim virus is universal. Luckily, its cure is also common
to all cultures. When people start seeing themselves as the
maincharactersofthehappeningsintheirorganizationsand
theirlives,theybecometrueplayersandstartexpandingwith
arenewedsenseofpower.

Goingfromvictimtoplayerentailsachangeofconsciousness
thatrequiresleavingbehindourattachmenttobeingright

The Victim Virus

|5

PRODUCTIVITY KILLERS SERIES | 4

Ontological
Arrogance
By Fred Kofman

MyclientMarcelooftenremindsmeofmydaughterMichelle
whenshewasjust5yearsold.Atthatage,Michellerefused
toeatbroccoli,claimingitwasyucky.Marcelo,ontheother
hand, refuses to discuss business issues with Gustavo,
claiminghesanidiot.
Of course, Marcelos behavior has significantly more serious
consequences.HeisthemarketingmanagerforLatinAmerica
ofawellknownmultinational,andGustavoisinchargeofthe
companys most important line
of products for the region. If
Marcelo acts unilaterally, he will
causeadisaster;notonlywillhe
create operative problems, but
he will also jeopardize the
relations between his function
andGustavosdivision.

What color do you think I see? Children aged four or five

unhesitatingly responded green, reflecting an age
appropriate belief that their experiences defined reality.
Interestingly, Piaget discovered that children between ages
six and eight developed the cognitive capacity to adopt a
different perspective than their own. (They would correctly
deduce that Piaget saw red on the other side of the block.)
GivenPiagetsexperiment,ImustadmitthatIhavemetmany
executives, like Marcelo, who,
rather than being 45yearsold,
aremorelike5yearoldswith40
yearsofexperience.

we must learn to inquire

about the thought
processes behind the
other persons opinions
and the recommendations
derived from them.

Michelle and Marcelo display

symptoms of the productivity
killerontologicalarrogancethe
belief that ones personal
experience defines reality. Ontologically arrogant people
think,Iseethingsthewaytheyare,soifsomebodythinks
differently, the natural deduction is that they are wrong.
Forexample,MarcelocallsGustavoanidiotbecauseGustavo
seesthingsdifferently.Likeallontologicallyarrogantpeople,
Marcelobelievesthatheistheuniqueholderofthetruth.To
him, his opinions reflect the truth rather than his version of
thetruth.

Jean Piaget, the famous cognitive psychologist, performed a

fascinating experiment with children that demonstrates this
productivitykiller. He would give achild a cubecoloredhalf
red and half green and let the child get acquainted with it.
Thenhewouldsitoppositethechildand,holdingthecubein
hishand,askhim,Whatcolordoyousee?Thechildwould
correctly respond, green. His following question was,
Ontological Arrogance

The customer is a sponger or

the IT people are a pain are
some phrases that reflect
ontological arrogance within
organizations. These phrases
and, especially, their underlying
ideology,
preclude
any
productive
dialogue.
They
generateconflictsandalackofcommunication,harmingthe
effectivenessofthetaskathandaswellasworkrelations.

But,sinceitisimpossibletooperatewithoutopinions,whatis
the alternative? How do we express an opinion without
arrogance? The key is adopting a humble attitude, and
accepting that our perspective is not the only possible one.
Our opinions reflect our personal reactions to facts rather
thanthefactsthemselves.Andourreactionsareconditioned
byouraccesstoinformation,ourinterestsandneeds.Ifother
people are otherwise informed, or have different needs or
interests,itfollowsthattheiropinionswillbedifferenteven
regardingtheexactsamefacts.
Thus follows that the language of ontological humility is
based on the appropriation of our opinions and the
considerationoftheopinionsofothers.Inordertoestablisha
|6

PRODUCTIVITY KILLERS SERIES | 4

dialogueofmutualacceptanceandrespect,wemustnotonly
learntoexpressouropinions,butalsothethoughtprocesses
behind them and their consequences. Similarly, we must
learn to inquire about the thought processes behind the
other persons opinions and the recommendations derived
from them. These are fundamental competencies that most
professionalsfailtoacquire.
A persons maturity is reflected by his or her capacity to
integrate different points of view. To achieve this, we must
overcome our attachment to our own perspectives and

accept foreign ones. Dialogue is richer and more productive

when all opinions are considered, that is, when no single
opinionispresentedastheonlytruth.
Aproblemthatpresentsitselfisthatthegreaterpermission
peoplehavetospeaktheirminds,thegreaterthediversityof
opinions is, and the more conflicts arise. Thus, it is
fundamental to learn how to deal with this kind of conflict
productivelyandrespectfully.

Ontological Arrogance

|7

PRODUCTIVITY KILLERS SERIES | 5

Narcissistic
Negotiation
By Fred Kofman

Whetherornotyouhavekids,thisconversationwillprobably
soundfamiliar:Thecookieismine.No,itsmine.Isawit
first.Iclaimeditfirst.andsoon.
As basic as it sounds, I believe its worth giving this childish
conflict deeper thought. Whats happening beneath the
surface here points to widely unacknowledged challenges
lurking in our own, adult conversations, from everday
communicationtohighstakesnegotiations.
Thechildrensargument(andanyother)canbeexplainedin
two ways, maintaining one key principle of negotiation
theory:conflictisalwaysbornfromscarcity.(Inotherwords,
when there is enough for everybody,
there is no conflict.) The kids could be
having a straightforward conflict over
materialscarcity,orthesinglecookiethat
theybothwanttoeat.Ifenoughcookies
for both were provided, the conflict
would only continue due to a deeper
source emotional scarcity. In this case,
thechildrenwouldengageincompetition
staged around the cookie(s), with the
scarce resource simply being the act of
winning(andbydoingso,provingonesworth).

While narcissistic negotiation plays some role in many

materialbasedconflicts,itdominatesinthefaceofsufficient
resources (or insufficient influence). In these cases, the
conversation rests on the sole objective to defeat the other
person.
An example of a conflict that is entirely emotional is the
eternal discussion among sports fans regarding coaches
strategic decisions. Even though the fans have no say in the
decisions (illustrating insufficient influence), the debate
thrives. Why? Because the real discussion is about who is
right,moreintelligentorbetterinformed.

The party that

negotiates
narcissistically
suffers from low
self-esteem.

This behavioral pattern is not exclusive to children. Many

adult conflicts constitute variations of the same pattern
because negotiation is viewed as a confrontation in which
onepartywinswhattheotherloses.Thisdynamicmakesup
narcissistic negotiation, a productivity killer in which
there are only two outcomes winning and losing.
(Unfortunately,theresnoplacefortheconceptofwinning
togetheramongthesepolarextremes.)
Despiteappearances,thepartythatnegotiatesnarcissistically
suffers from low selfesteem. To increase their selfesteem,
narcissists try proving their superiority through conflict.
Naturally, they are much more concerned with defeating
theirpeers,orwinning,thancollaboratingwiththem.

Narcissistic Negotiation

Operational conflicts, on the other hand,

tend to appear entirely material. Take a
debate about resource allocation in a
company centered on deciding whether
the company should have embarked on
an international expansion scheme or
growinthedomesticmarket.Sinceitwas
impossible to do both, the material
scarcity was the choice that must be
made:oneortheother.

Butitsnotsosimple.Withinthisseeminglymaterialconflict
hidvolatileemotionalelements.Thesearecommonlycaused
by people identifying closely with their positions and
reacting defensively in the face of threatening
modifications.
Imagine someone telling you that your proposal was stupid.
Howwouldyoufeel?Despitethecommentsreferencetothe
proposal rather than the person presenting it, most of us
wouldtakeitasapersonalattack.Ourdefensivereactionhas
the following base logic: only a stupid person makes stupid
proposals; therefore, calling my proposal stupid amounts to
callingmestupid.
By the same logic, anyone opposing my position necessarily
opposes me, and becomes a threat to my wellbeing, public
image and selfesteem. Thus, it becomes paramount to

|8

PRODUCTIVITY KILLERS SERIES | 5

neutralize that person, proving (if not to him/her, then to

everybodyelse)thatImrightandhe/sheiswrong.
This narcissistic attitude, moored to a rigid position,
precludes the creative resolution of conflicts. To operate
under the winwin philosophy, we need to go beyond
individualpositionsandaddressunderlyinginterests.
Intheresourceallocationexample,hadthemanagersbehind
those differing opinions been more discerning, they would
not have engaged in conflict. Instead, they would have
exchanged view points in a productive way, asking Why do
you believe expanding internationally would be more
profitable than expanding domestically? and vice versa. By

sharing arguments for and against each idea, they become

partners (rather than adversaries) in the effort to find the
bestexpansionstrategyforthecompany.Whatsmore,each
person detaches his selfesteem and identity from his initial
stance on the issue, thereby stifling narcissism and making
spaceforwinningtogether.
Toachievethisradicalchangeofperspective,itisimportant
for people to find a genuinely common goal. Once this is
accomplished,collaborationdulyfollows.Inthatspace,there
will be no winners or losers but collaborators contributing
theirbestargumentswithinaframeofmutualrespect.

Narcissistic Negotiation

|9

PRODUCTIVITY KILLERS SERIES | 6

Our Word
Dishonored
By Fred Kofman

Togetbyintodaysworld,wedependonthecooperationof
an incredible number of people. Consider, for instance, just
how many people contribute to your morning coffee:
producers,carriers,retailersandsecondaryserviceproviders,
amongmanyothers.Allofthemindividualsandcompanies
alikeformanimpressivenetworkofcoordinatedactionsto
eventuallydeliverthatfinaloutcome.
This coordination directly influences the success of our
businesses and economy. As the economist and philospher
Francis Fukuyama said, Economic life depends on moral
bonds of social trust the unspoken, unwritten bond
between fellow citizens that
facilitates
transactions,
empowers individual creativity,
and justifies collective action.
Thesocialcapitalrepresentedby
trust is as important as physical
capital.

Ahighlevelofconsciousnessisessentialtomakingeffective
commitments and avoid entering into agreements lightly.
We must be aware of the impact that we have, not only on
the outcomes of specific projects or tasks but also on our
relationshipswithothersandourpersonalintegrity.Itiskey
that we exercise the concsiousness and care that
demonstrate this broader understanding and this includes
establishinglimitsorsayingnoratherthansettingyourself
upfordishonoringyourwordlater.
A clear commitment begins with a clear request: To obtain
(A),Iaskapersontodo(B)during(C).(A)isadeclarationof
objectivesitcanbeasbroadas
youwish;eventoreduceworld
suffering would work here. (B)
is a specific, verifiable action or
result, also known as a
condition of satisfaction. An
example is I ask Charles to
donate to the Red Cross USD
$10permonthforayear.(C)is
atimeframe,forexample,next
month.

Too often, we mindlessly

make promises without
ever intending to fulfill
them, or we break them
without prior notice,
apologies or care

To preserve this social capital,

we must come to understand
the importance of our
commitmentsandmanagethem
consciously.Toooften,wemindlesslymakepromiseswithout
everintendingtofulfillthem,orwebreakthemwithoutprior
notice, apologies or care for how our actions have affected
others. In other cases, our commitments may fail due to
miscommunication and a lack of clarity. In either case, the
contrastbetweenapromiseandwhatisultimatelydelivered
isaprevalentproductivitykillerthatIcalldishonoringour
words.
To avoid this, our commitments must have two key
ingredients: clarity and consciousness. Clarity is essential
because compliance is best reached by a person who
understandswhatisexpectedofhim/her.Whenpeopleknow
exactlywhattheyarecommittingto,theynotonlyfeelmore
secureaboutgivingtheirword,buttheyalsobecomecapable
ofcomplyinginaconsciouswaywhichshowsintegrityand
inspirestrust.

Our Word Dishonored

Many people do not make explicit requests for fear of

revealing their dependency on others or their own lackings,
or for exposing themselves to the frustrations that
coordination can entail. Adding to that frustration, many
people, when faced with a request, choose to only half
commit for example, saying Ill do the best I can, Ill
try,orLetmeseewhatIcando.Thesemaneuversserveto
avoid responsibility, and they radically reduce efficiency and
erodetrustandintegrity.
Instead, in effective commitmentmaking, clear requests
shouldbeansweredwithmatchingclarity,inoneofsixways:
Yes, I promise. (This implies an absolute and
comprehensivepromise.)

| 10

PRODUCTIVITY KILLERS SERIES | 6

No, I cant commit. (Even if the person tries to fulfill the

request, he/she is not in a position to guarantee its
completion.)
BeforeIcommit,Ineedtounderstandyourrequestmore
clearlyorinmoredetail.
Ipromisetoanswerbyaprecisedate.
I cant promise to fulfill your request, but I can make a
counteroffer. (The person woud then offer something
similar).
Iamwillingtocommitaslongasyoucommitto(D).(This
promiseisconditional.)

Making clear requests and utilizing one of these responses

cancertainlyguideusthrougheffectivecommitmentmaking,
but at the heart of the matter is really our own integry and
ethics. There are two minimum conditions concerning
commitments:neverpromisewithoutmeaningtodeliverand
honor your commitment by fulfilling or renegotiating it. The
bestantidoteforthisproductivitykilleristomakethesetwo
rulesthebaseofyourpersonalandorganizationalethics.The
benefits of doing this will extend far beyond networks of
coordination, reaching people and influencing the broader,
finaloutcome.

Our Word Dishonored

| 11