Thanks to Lynette Jones of New Day Talk Radio and EdwinDuterte of The Viral Publicity for the free interview from the recent Long Beach event. What fun! And great editing of the piece Edwin! You Rock!

See Edwin's interview on CNNLive here.

A very good day indeed when you can instantly download The Grownups' ABCs of Conflict Resolution to your iPad (with a kindle app); your Kindle, or simply to your computer.

And for only $7.99!!

I also learned today that you can loan your Kindle books to friends for a 14-day period (during which time they're  unavailable to you). But hey! this is what my husband always objected to in e-book usage - that you couldn't loan them to friends.

And now you can!

It's a PERFECT reading world!

I know I'm prejudiced in favor of my own book (who wouldn't be?) but I think it's got at least one dynamite chapter for everyone that will be worth far more to you than the slight price of this Kindle edition.

And, of course, you can always "lend" it to that troublesome neighbor of yours!

Over at Rolling Stone, Matt Taibbi chooses eight new members of the Supreme Court of Assholedom in his post The Supreme Court Named.

As anyone who follows this blog knows, we define asshole as a behavior not a person and not one person but two. Taibbi and his entrants make several attempts to define the state,

a big part of being an asshole is total self-absorption/indifference to surrounding people, a characteristic that very often manifests itself in taking for fucking ever to order food in line at fast food joints, or exit a subway car, or give a simple and prompt answer to a logistically important letter or phone call… Some people couldn’t even put this idea into words, and just had to e-scream about it, like the writer from South Dakota who talked about the lady who “spent five minutes writing a check in front of me at the grocery store: Asshole!”

Another candidate, a reality-show producer from Los Angeles . . . summed this idea [as follows]: An asshole , , , has “… an entirely self-centered worldview – nothing that happens outside of an asshole's personal sphere actually matters.  This is totally wide-ranging: assholes use this mindset in traffic, in business, in personal relationships.  Everyone else is a side character in the asshole's epic life story.  (A side note: should an outside event pierce the asshole's bubble, it immediately becomes the most IMPORTANT CRISIS EVER).”

Thanks to Taibbi for keeping the search for the perfect definition alive.

Picking up her SAG best actress award for Black Swan, Natalie Portman spoke earnestly of the lessons learned from her parents "who taught me to work my hardest and never be an asshole. It’s never acceptable.” 

Slate reports on a lamentable lack of freedom of speech in Germany where you can be fined for calling someone an "ass" or flipping them off in traffic.

In an extreme version of the swear jar, a regional German politician has been slapped with a hefty $2,060 or 50 days behind bars for allegedly calling an anti-immigrant author an "ass." Lefty pol Helmut Manz, 43, is said to have uttered the oath during a protest against author and former Bundesbank official Thilo Sarrazin, who has just published an incendiary book railing against Muslim immigrants. Sarrazin heard about Manz' slanderous screed, and filed a legal complaint.

That's it for the week in assholes. Join us next week for more of the same.

The book discusses damage done to organizations by bullying employees, including a chapter on “How to Implement the Rule, Enforce It, and Keep It Alive.” There are examples of how the rule (or a variation) is applied at companies such as Google, JetBlue Airlines, and Southwest Airlines. Sutton explains that “enforcing a no asshole rule doesn’t mean turning your organization into a paradise for conflict-averse wimps.” Positive approaches to problem solving, using evidence and logic, with argument over ideas, rather than personality or relationships, are effective.  The author emphasizes that none of this is easy, but the rewards are substantial.  Negative behavior tends to spread to others in a group.

I'm personally grateful to Dr. Sutton not only for teaching the world to sing in perfect harmony, but for breaking the asshole barrier in book publishing. If you want to keep current on ways to deal with bullies in the workplace, put the RSS feed of Sutton's Work Matters into your newsreader.

Update on Cromartie Still Speaking His Mind, Now Making Threats on New York Magazine's Sports page. We in the profession call this conflict escalation, one of the unhappy results of speaking your mind with epithets, almost guaranteed to raise the level of dispute heat in any room.

Which is the better response to a dispute?

A. Calling your negotiation partner an asshole?

B. Taking your negotiation partner to lunch?

Good work. No need, actually, to spend the money on lunch. Coffee or McDonalds will do. TED talk on taking "the other" to lunch below.

Which reminds me of one of my favorite Stan Freberg songs taken from Stan Freberg (Modestly) Presents the United States of America, Vol. 1,' a 50-minute Broadway musical for the ear with songs and sketches by Mr. Freberg, orchestrations by Billy May and the voices of the Freberg stock company, including Jesse White (the original Maytag repairman) and June Foray (Rocky the Flying Squirrel and countless other cartoon characters).

Take an Indian to lunch this week

Show him we're a regular bunch this week

Show him we're as liberal as can be

Let him know he's almost as good as we

Make a feathered friend feel fed this week

overlook the fact he's red, this week 

Let him share our Quaker Oats 

'Cause he's useful when he votes 

Take an indian to lunch 

The album's legion of fans have included the onetime chief of the Navajo nation and the likes of Steven Spielberg and Richard Dreyfuss, who passed time during breaks in the filming of ''Jaws'' by singing its songs. History teachers have used it for years to make the Founding Fathers come alive. Asked once where the Beatles got their sense of humor, Paul McCartney told Playboy magazine that it probably came from listening to Mr. Freberg and Lenny Bruce.

I discovered the blog Cooking for Assholes this week - the most recent recipe being "hipster pancakes." It's a damn good cooking blog written for men who employ the word "fuck" as all nine parts of speech (see below and read the chapter F is for Friend in A is for Asshole, the Grownups' ABCs of Conflict Resolution)

That's it for the Week in Assholes, Part Four. Do come back next week for further insights into the use of profanity in modern culture with occasional notes on its place in the escalation or resolution of conflict.

At New York Magazine,

Amy Poehler achieved hero status forever when she called Jay Leno a "fucking asshole" in a mad wicked Beantown accent

Remember you inherently suck just as much as everyone else, so forgive people for their shortcomings. Unless someone's bad behavior goes beyond the small annoyances in life, forgive your trespasser and let it be. Save your battles for when they actually matter and accept that you suck, too.

What's capable of making you an asshole, also over at Lifehacker

It's inevitable: somewhere, at some point in time, we all transform into an asshole.

In music at Shalom Life, Macy Gray: Boycotters are Just Assholes

After posting a Facebook status asking her fans for their opinion on whether she should go ahead with two planned concerts in Tel Aviv, and later confirming she would in fact be performing, Macy Gray is now dealing with the backlash from her decision.

 

Gray confirmed that she and her band would be coming to Israel as planned on her Twitter account Wednesday night stating: "Dear Israel fans. Me and the band will be there in 20 days. Can't wait. See you then. Peace."

 

Soon after, she was forced to defend her decision from those claiming she was supporting apartheid, and even a Nazi-like regime. . . 

 

It appeared that Gray was taken aback by the aggressive tone of some of the posts. In response to a poster claiming to be "passionately Palestinian" she wrote: "See I'm willing to listen - really listen - but some of you so called boycotters are just assholes."

There's a good article at the Sydney Morning Herald ~ Say it Again, Sam ~ on memorable movie lines including Aaron Sorkin's use of two "assholes" in The Social Network:

Dumping him, girlfriend Erica (Rooney Mara) explains: ''You're going to be successful and rich. But you're going to go through life thinking that girls don't like you because you're a tech geek. And I want you to know, from the bottom of my heart, that won't be true. It'll be because you're an asshole.''

 The scene is neatly paired with the emotionally confused Zuckerberg's closing conversation with the second-year law student (Rashida Jones) who's been assisting his counsel.''You're not an asshole,'' she says to the young man looking for a shoulder to cry on.''You're just trying terribly hard to be one.''

That's it from the Week in Assholes. If you're interested in why this word appears in the title of my book, wander on over to Amazon.com and pick up a copy. It will soon be on Kindle so stay tuned!

Over at the New York Press, the irresistible Flavor of the Week: The Year of the Asshole, final words below without giving away the ending of this online dating confessional.

It felt like a breakup without the relationship.

I didn't need to consult the Chinese zodiac to know that this was a very bad portent for the rest of the year. 2011 will be the Year of the Asshole.

In Houston, at Culture Map, Why Women Love Assholes. Below an excerpt but you'll want to read the full article if you're under 35.

We like asshole guys not because they're assholes but despite it.

See, when you're smitten with a man then you're willing to put up with all kinds of bullshit. In my experience I'm too busy falling in love with a guy's good qualities to heed red flags like that I've caught him snooping through my text messages and e-mail. "But I have nothing to hide!" I'll tell myself. "Besides, we're, like, so in love!"

Then months later — surprise! — he turns out to be a controlling dipshit.

Cromartie was asked by the Daily News if he's ever seen Brady pointing after the Patriots score.

"We see that a lot. He does it a lot," Cromartie said. "That's the kind of guy he is. We really don't give a damn, to tell you the truth."

Okay, what kind of guy is Brady?

"An asshole. Fuck him."

Krugman a "flat out asshole" over at Fox.

Aaron Sorkin takes it back: Zuckerberg not an asshole at New York Magazine.

Shawn Ryan (The Shield) on network language limitations at the Hollywood Reporter.

We couldn't really use jag-off and we couldn't use asshole, so we came up with jackhole.

Not every network bans the word "asshole" - this from Deadline Hollywood on David Kelley's new legal series with Kathy Bates:

And what about the role appealed to Bates? "I read in the script where the character had her feet up on the desk smoking pot and watching Bugs Bunny, and after I saw that I was in," she said. Bates also gets to use some salty language in a clip shown critics at the TCA gathering, calling someone an "asshole" (a word that Kelley admits he couldn't have gotten away with at ABC during his Boston Legal days). "NBC is very good about content and lenient with dialogue," Kelley said, "much more so than ABC was. We have broadcast standards battles with every script, but 'asshole' cleared."

That's all from The Week in Assholes. If you'd like to know how a conflict specialist defines one, mosey on over to amazon and pick up a copy of the book!

Gawker Calls Scalia an 'A-Hole' as He Questions Women's Rights Under the 14th Amendment at Legal Blog Watch.  I grew up in Impeach Earl Warren territory - San Diego in the late 50's and early 60s, then primarily a Navy and defense industry town - read:  None Dare Call it Treason-Duck 'n Cover-Fallout Shelter-Flouridated Drinking Water as Communist Plot-John Birch Society pre-Tea-Partyville.  So I'm happy to begin an Impeach Scalia Campaign based on his recent statement that he "doesn't have to read the briefs" to pen Supreme Court opinions on the most controversial issues before the Supreme Court today. Just sayin'. See Boehner's House, Scalia's Pizza at the New Yorker, hereby cutting my demographic in half.

Reuters reports that thanks to the ever-vigilant ACLU, it's no longer a crime in Pennsylvania to shout the word "asshole" at passing motorists or even to the police officer who's hassling you. Also see Swear Freely In Pennsylvania: It's Your #$%^&*^ Constitutional Right at NPR.

Nice guy James Van Der Beek styles himself as an "Asshole for Hire" at Funny or Die.

ESPN Reporter Ron Franklin was fired for calling reporter Jeannine Edwards an "asshole" but only after she asked him politely not to call her "sweet baby."  I think this had more to do with gender politics than profanity.

In book news,

• there are only three days left in the Good Reads A is for Asshole, the Grownups' ABCs of Conflict Resolution giveaway here.
• we've been added to Don Philbin's fabulous ADR Tool Box here.
• The New York Real Estate Lawyers' Blog posted a blurry version of our home-made flyer for the SDNY Federal Bar Association Book Launch Party (and gave the un-blurry details below)

Vick[ie] Pynchon, Chair of the Federal Bar Association's ADR Section, will be reading from her entertaining & illuminating new book: "A is for Asshole - The Grownup's ABC's of Conflict Resolution [on] January 11th at Pierre Loti (www.pierrelotiwinebar.com), which, named after a wanderer and writer, is an appropriate venue for this book reading.  It would be great to see you, and enjoy Vick[ies]'s words over some wine, together! Click here for the full sized flyer with details. We got a good review over at the Business Conflict Blog, despite what appears to be criticism for our "unfortunate" use of "a vulgarity in naming the volume," which makes good sense, you know, since lawyers never use the word "asshole" as in "we're going to cut him a few more assholes with this motion" or "opposing counsel's such an asshole," things like that, words that appear to have vanished from attorneys' vocabularies since I left the profession in '06, but then I entered the profession when my superiors called women "muffs" (when the "muffs" were around) and accused anyone of insufficiently combative temperament a "faggot" (when possible "faggots" were around).  I'm so glad we've become so much more civilized in the succeeding years. Newsday's Money Fix column gave a shout out to the book along with some of my recommendations for cutting consumer bills in 2011 The Long Island Center for Business and Professional Women announced my upcoming appearance, with the book, at an event titled She Negotiates . . . and Everything Changes scheduled for next Monday, January 10 at 6 p.m. in Woodbury, New York, also announced at Networking Magazine's website. Other upcoming book events can be found here.

So that's The Week in Assholes (cross-posted at the ABCs of Conflict).  Come back next week to see who is and who isn't, as well as who's permitted to utter the word without adverse consequences.

A treat for my Week in Assholes' readers - Thank You Mask Man. This is what we do when we do not understand generosity. And, as in most Lenny Bruce routines, it is about prejudice.

The independent theaters used to play this cartoon with a Lenny Bruce soundtrack as a short before independent and foreign films in the early '70s.

Thank you Mask Man.

• When: January 10, 2011
• Where: 7725 Jericho Turnpike, Woodbury, NY
• Time: 6:00 p.m.

Federal Bar Association (S.D.N.Y.) Book Launch

• When:  January 11, 2001 at 6:30 p.m.
• Where:  Pierre Loti, 53 Irving Place, New York City 10003

(details to follow)

She Negotiates to Win! in Boston

• Date: January 18, 2010
• Time: 6:00 pm (networking until 6:30, book signing to follow program)
• Location:     YWCA - Library, 2nd floor, 140 Clarendon Street,Boston, MA 02116
• Tuition:    $35     includes workshop and autographed copy of the ABCs of Conflict Resolution (a portion of your tuition will benefit Massachuesett charities)

Catch us over at ForbesWoman on the battle of the Gens and why peace and gratitude will bring prosperity to all in 2011.

With gratitude to all of our ForbesWoman She Negotiates Bloggers:  Lisa Gates, Katie Phillips, Roxana Popescu and our kindly editor Caroline Howard.

The theory that all good things come in three's (Gold, Silver, Bronze) was once again proven last week by the winner of the newly created Bronze Asshole Award, Steven Pesner of Akin Gump. We'll be awarding the Bronze Medal on an ad hoc basis to the lawyer who best demonstrates the dangers of hitting the "send" button on any email written when s/he is Hungry, Angry, Lonely or Tired ("HALT"!!)

Exhibit A for the Bronze can be found in several places, including the email boxes of anyone who ever landed on the AmLaw Daily's website which today covers the email event in an article entitled Explaining Bad Behavior.

The Bronze Award Winning Behavior

It's year-end and everyone's a little bit tired and cranky, particularly Mr. Pesner who last week circulated a firm email threatening to publicly fire any random associate "on the spot" for failing to get his/her time sheets in on time. The heart of the verbatim rant follows:

9. For those of you who think you are exempt from doing time sheets on a daily basis, I'd suggest that you reevaluate your importance and get ready to prove that (a) you are busier than I am on legal work, (b) you are busier than I am on client development work, (c) you are busier than I am on firm work and (d) [Redacted] and I do not have better things to do with our time than beg you to be responsible."

"10. Candidly, I'd put every future material violator's name in a hat, randomly pick out a name, and publicly fire the person on the spot--to demonstrate that time sheet compliance is serious business. And incidentally, it is my understanding that the job market is not so good right now in case you did not know."

"11. Also, please remember that I have a long and excellent memory.

Why Email Increases the Chance of Assholery

Other than reminding Mr. Pesner that the internet has a far longer and a much more excellent memory than his own, I'd like to take the opportunity of his outburst for a teaching moment.

"an increase in the intensity of a conflict as a whole.” Escalation is important . . . because when conflict escalates it “is intensified in ways that are sometimes exceedingly difficult to undo.” One reason why escalated conflicts are so hard to undo is that when more aggressive tactics are used by one side they are often mirrored by the other side, producing a vicious cycle.

Email, Friedman argues, unnecessarily, and often drastically, escalates conflict in ways none of us fully appreciate. Unlike conversation -- in person or by telephone -- we are not

 physically present with others, can’t see their faces or hear their voices, and can’t give or get immediate responses. The lack of contextual clues . . . impose high “understanding costs” on participants in e-mail interactions, making it harder to successfully ground the interaction. . . . [T]the inability to carefully time actions and reactions . . . makes communication less precise.

As far as management is concerned, the attorneys' failure to get their time sheets in on a regular basis is tantamount to a store clerk's pocketing money paid for goods with a promise to put it back into the till later. In other words, there was good reason for Mr. Pesner to be irritable. When one's calm entreaties to follow the rules are ignored, we are well-advised to escalate the conflict proportionally to induce compliance. As the ABCs of Conflict explains, rule-breaking requires management to be "responsibly non-cooperative."

Firm boundaries and a slap on the wrist [are] necessary for uncooperative participants. We [may] continue to ingratiate, to threaten, to promise and to demand commitments [from oppositional players]. We just need[] to be conscious of what we [are] doing, and of the effect our escalating tactics w[ill] inevitably have.

In societies governed by a strong rule of law, there is no need for the disproportional responses demanded by an honor culture (the subject of R is for Romeo in the ABCs of Conflict Resolution) Reasonable graduated penalties are generally sufficient to obtain compliance. A harsh word from a superior might do the trick for the occasional offender and year-end bonuses might be reduced or denied altogether for the worst miscreants. Over-reactions, particularly when unmitigated by a light tone of voice ("fired on the spot" wink wink) reduce rather than enhance the effectiveness of the admonition. And when we put our over-reaction into an email that can be forwarded to all of the world, we unnecessarily expose ourselves not only to the ridicule of the firm's attorneys, but to the entire legal profession in perpetuity.

I do not think there's anyone in authority who hasn't over-reacted to disobedience on at least one occasion. Word to the wise: just don't do it in email which has not only a "long and excellent memory," but also an astonishing reach.

Since we lawyers rarely have management training, I'm linking to an excellent short article on Informal Authority in the Workplace.

You don't take it personally.

But your clients do.  

And the attorneys who most commonly say that the dispute is "not personal" or "only about money" are often the ones who resolutely refuse to sit in a room, at a table, across from their (doesn't-take-it-personally) adversary in an effort to use the litigation as an opportunity to make a business deal while at the same time relieving one's clients' grinding sense of injustice.

That's why I'm talking about Poland and enemies today.  To shine a light on our common human tendency to demonize our adversaries, particularly when we've been opponents for so long that opposition, rather than productivity, has come to define us.

Today's New York Times reports on the sorry state of a country so used to defending itself against enemies that their absence has made it turn on itself.  Poland, Lacking External Enemies, Turns on Itself, should also shed some necessary light on post-Cold War American politics, as Red and Blue Americans eat their own young in a frenzy of fear of and hate for the unseen enemy who laid them off, put their homes into foreclosure and decimated their life savings.

Listen to the wisdom of an ordinary Polish citizen on the current troubles there:

"Poles always feel they need to have an enemy," Urszula Slawinska, 38, said one day as she walked along a sidewalk in Warsaw, an average citizen headed home, uninvolved in politics, yet keenly aware of what was happening around her.  "Because of our history we define ourselves, to be Polish meant to protect our country.  So now that we don't have to protect ourselves, we still need to find an enemy."

"That's got nothing to do with my legal practice," you say, thinking I've singed my brain on the open fire I've been roasting marshmallows over for too long.  And yet I've talked to your clients - hundreds of them by now - and most of them - whether middle managers, sole proprietors, or even CEO's - have come to define themselves as justice seekers in opposition to the devil on the other side of the "v."  

If you find your opponent's legal or factual positions "ridiculous" or "outrageous" or simply "beyond understanding," it's not usually a sign of some ulterior nefarious purpose, but a signal that the case is not settling or progressing as it should because you and your client have become the enemy, a dark presence intent on blinding your opponent just before robbing him of the remainder of his worldly goods.  

When adversarialism drives national politics as it does in Poland today, you're courting "disaster" as

political infighting [] divert[s] the public debate from issues to vitriol [and] [t]he driving force is politics and public relations. . . [as] the government continues to avoid making tough decisions in an effort to preserve its popularity in the fractured political environment.

The story of Poland's troubles is instructive for lawyers only if we are able to acknowledge that, yes, there's some irrational demonizing going on; and, that, try as we might, we're victims of confirmation biasand fundamental attribution error because we're human beings, not Spock-like extraterrestrials without human feeling, particularly when our efforts are being countered by our adversaries on a daily basis.  

As I note in "E is for Enemy" in A is for Asshole, the Grownups' ABCs of Conflict Resolution,

With or without a reasonable basis to distrust and demonize others, we will do so anyway, creating in- and out-groups with remarkable ease and rapidity. Children and teenagers naturally divide themselves up by beauty, physical prowess or charm (popular kids); by interests such as music, theater or the visual arts; by clothes and grooming (goth, punk or hippie kids); or by the use of alcohol or drugs (party kids and stoners).

We use these identifiers (jocks, stoners and the like) as cognitive shortcuts to quickly identify people who are likely to be friendly, loyal and comprehensible without much study. They are our “homies” – our gangs or tribes. When we grow up, they become members of our political parties, churches and occupations. More perniciously, they become our genders, our sexual preferences and the colors of our skin.

The benefits of in-groups are many – community, safety, expansion of opportunity, friendship and the sharing of work and resources. The detriments are also many. Once we become identified with one or more groups, we tend to view outsiders with suspicion and distrust, even hostility. To maintain a positive image of ourselves and our own in-group members (Christians, Americans, or even simply Pittsburgh Steeler fans) we tend to ignore our own shortcomings or misdeeds while emphasizing the negative traits of others.

When misfortune befalls us and fortune favors them, we too often fall into the naming, blaming and claiming behavior that gives rise to active disputes and expresses itself in stereotyping and scapegoating.

What to do?  

Talk to one another.  A topic I'll cover (again) in tomorrow's post, this time with a very personal anecdote about how the "joint defense dweebs" (myself included) became far less stupid and venal once a petroleum company attorney was forced to join the insurance carriers' defense team.

Sound familiar?  A love story.

Today we're creating a Silver Asshole Award for the individuals (there will always be two) who best illustrate the proposition that an asshole is not a person but a behavior and not one person but two.  Given the reduced qualifications for the Silver Medal, we'll be sending the winners a .pdf of the first chapter of the ABCs - A is for Asshole.  This month's winners are an unidentified yawning student at Cornell (whose name, rank and serial number I will keep confidential if s/he wishes to pick up the prize) and his/her professor, Senior Lecturer Mark Talbert.

What is an Asshole?

As the first chapter of the ABCs of Conflict explains, an "asshole" is a person who has broken the social compact of civility. Because uncivil behavior tends to lead to fisticuffs, everyone tends to discourage it and many people make an example of others who engage in it.  Take the unwritten folk rule of "first in time, first in right."  The guy who steals another motorist's parking place is violating that rule. He doesn't own the space, but he's been waiting the longest for it so he gets to grab it before anyone else. This "first in time, first in right" rule is so important to us that people are killed every year in fights over parking spaces. (see, e.g., Detective Killed in Fight for Parking Space).

Break these rules and people lose it.  

Another folk rule meant to avoid the violence that can arise from incivility is the imperative that we do not shout at one another no matter what the provocation. We do not use profanity and we do not hurl insults or epithets at the other guy's crew. Check out "R is for Romeo" in the ABCs of Conflict Resolution for the fatal consequences of the Prince's failure to police uncivil behavior on the streets of Verona.  

Rarely, however, does anyone violate these rules without provocation. If our dinner party companion interrupts our story about our trip to Viet Nam to tell his story about his trip to Aspen, he's breaking a different turn-taking rule ~ the one that says conversation is a dialogue not a monologue. Everyone gets to talk and everyone gets to be heard.  Shoot, that's pretty much a complete distillation of procedural due process!

The Story at Hand

The story of the Cornell "Professor" (sic) shouting at a yawning student is all over the news, the blogosphere and the social networks (Facebook, Twitter and the like) this week.  A teacher who shouts at his students may be uncivil, but it rarely makes the local, let alone the national, news.  Nevertheless, the Huffington Post picked up the story last week in an item entitled Cornell Professor Freaks Out.  This unremarkable event did not became news because it happened. It became news because it was uploaded to YouTube. ("The way the camera follows us in slo-mo, the way we look to us all, oh yeah.")

The "Teaching Moment"

The Huffington Post correspondent purposely - for "news" value - or inadvertently - due to Fundamental Attribution Error (?) - mis-told the story of the Cornell "Professor."  If you watch the video, and listen to it very carefully, you'll hear a "yawn" that seems more one of derision than an unstifled inhalation arising from sleep deprivation. If you listen to the "Professor's" rant, you'll also hear him say that this is not the first time he's suffered this particular form of disrespect. He wants to know who the yawner is and demands his identity.  When that tactic fails, he tries talking about civility.  But his inability to out the miscreant only makes things worse. He asks his students for help.  They sit mum.  

Then he loses it.  

Why We Care

The Cornell professor video has been viewed 482,366 times.  Other videos of everyday, non-newsworthy uncivil behavior include the incident in the car park (3,360,599 views); the old lawyer fight (297,252 views); and, the bus driver fight with the kid (21,602,339 views).

Why are we drawn to this behavior?  Is it simply the car-wreck phenomenon? Rubber-neckers at freeway accidents, we are horrified but morbidly interested in this brief preview of a catastrophic loss we all fear. Seeing the wreckage allows us to continue believing that misfortune of this magnitude is visited upon others, not ourselves.

(for other reactions see the Cornell Insiders' post ~ Talbert's POV here and Stephanie West Allen's Idealawg post here)

As scholars Baumeister, Zhang and Vohs explained in their 2004 paper entitled Gossip as Cultural Learning,

On the surface, gossip consists of stories and anecdotes about particular other people, perhaps especially ones that reflect negatively on the target. . . [A] less obvious function of gossip is to convey information about social norms and other guidelines for behavior.  [G]ossip goes beyond educating the hearer about social norms; it also affirms them.

The very act of repeating a particular story implicitly signals that the teller regards it as significant, and this significance is often elaborated further insofar as the teller comments on the behavior as proper or improper. . . [G]ossip serves a valuable function in helping people learn about life in their culture, and so nature may have instilled a penchant for gossip as one generally useful adaptation toward cultural life.

[G]ossip can be effective regardless of whether it presents the target in a positive or in a negative light. We would therefore predict that some gossip would not be derogatory or pejorative. Still, the cultural learning view would predict that the majority of gossip would be derogatory. Norms are perhaps best conveyed by focusing on violations, as are laws and other rules. A story about law-abiding behavior may fail to reveal what the underlying laws were, whereas a story about breaking the law illustrates the sense and intent of the law.

What We Can Do About It

Anthropological explanations for our fascination with people-gone-bad videos aside (see drunken Las Vegas Lawyer here) what could Mr. Talbert have done better here?  

First, like any good negotiator, he could have learned what student interests were driving the behavior, including their refusal to "out" a misbehaving student (folk rule #357 ~ you don't rat out your own kind). He could have paused in his teaching to have a heart-to-heart about civility in the classroom.  He started down that path when he began talking about the difference between casual conversation and disrespect. He didn't, however, appear to know where to go from there.  

Professors, Judges, and others in positions of authority are so used to "teaching" and telling and exhorting and judging that they forget to ask their students, subordinates or petitioners to explain the source of the trouble being voiced for many by a single member.  Teachers from elementary to graduate and professional schools continue teaching in the manner they were taught ~ a teaching style suited for a culture that ran at 33-1/3 rather than right this second. 

This is not entirely, or even primarily, the fault of poorly paid "Senior Lecturers" who are required to teach more than 100 students at any given hour of the day.  The University itself should be investigating, experimenting with, and giving workshops about new technologies and teaching methodologies that fit the lived experience of their students ~ an experience so vastly different from our own that we can barely imagine what it must be like to be a student in the 21st Century.

For the immediate problem in Mr. Talbert's classroom, I'd recommend the creation of small discussion groups to ascertain the many sources of conflict that have resulted in marked disrespect for the Lecturer over an unknown period of time.  Mr/Ms Yawn is the canary in the mineshaft not only of Mr. Talbert's pedagogy, but of the entire University learning experience. 

Use the conflict - the dispute - as a means of exploring frustrations of both students and teacher.  What challenges other than openly rude students does Mr. Talbert face?  Are his students (like mine) cruising the internet during class, texting their friends, staring out into space, chatting with their neighbors?  The teacher-student relationship is not a one-way street any more than any other relationship is.  If the students are to learn, they must be engaged.  What do they believe might engage them?  And if they stop thinking about Mr. Talbert merely as the authoritarian "adult" with the power to reward or punish them with the all-important grade, and start thinking about him as just another human being with the same need for respect as they have, we are on the road to resolving the very human problem shown in such a raw form here.

A .pdf of the first chapter of the book will be winging its way to Mr. Talbert and if the Yawner will send me an email address, I'll be happy to send it along to him/her as well with a promise of complete confidence.

Priming Legal Negotiations is the winner of this week's Golden Asshole Award. /*  

Thanks to the Legal Writing Prof Blog for the head's up.

As I left for work one crisp, sunny April morning, I spotted a five-by-seven printed form on my car’s front windshield. The form’s message proclaimed, in large, bold letters, “youparklikeanasshole.” The form had a checklist of infractions like “two spots, one car,” “that’s a compact?” and “over the painted lines.”The bottom of the printed form said,

Parking is far too limited in our overcrowded streets and parking lots, and you happened to park like an asshole. Go to the above web site to see why someone else thought you parked like an asshole. Don’t be too offended, we all do it one time or another—it just so happens you got caught.

My next-door neighbor, who evidently put the note on my car, listed my infraction as “other” with a follow-up explanation written by hand: “You are parking too close to my garage. It’s hard for me to pull my truck in.” I studied the note for a few moments. I felt my heart start to pound and my whole body became uncomfortably warm. I wadded the note and tossed it. I was angry. When I arrived at work twenty minutes later, I was still angry. I told my co-workers about the note.

They all agreed with me; it was rude and inappropriate.

When I returned home that evening, I visited with neighbors who were not complaining about my parking. I showed them the note, now crumpled and dirty. They, too, became angry. One neighbor suggested exacting revenge on the note’s author by letting the air out of his tires. Another neighbor excitedly suggested something involving Crisco. Although I am a trained mediator, I became giddy about the prospect of getting even.

Perhaps it was a moment of self reflection that led me to question why I was even thinking of revenge. But that written demand evoked intense emotions in me and in my neighbors. We did not care about investigating appropriate responses or attempting to resolve the problem; we wanted to make my neighbor pay for his rude behavior. Instead of encouraging me to change my behavior in the way my neighbor requested, the note had an entirely different effect. The written demand prompted me to make my neighbor regret placing that note on my windshield.

This incident led me to question the legal demand letters lawyers write. I wondered if demand letters often evoke similar negative emotional reactions in their recipients. And, if so, do those emotions influence the recipients’ behaviors in ways that hinder settlement?

I'll be providing a template for a negotiation request letter later today.

And all kidding aside, this article should be required reading for every legal writing class in every law school in the country!

Cross-posted at The ABCs of Conflict Resolution Blog.

__________________

*/  The Golden Asshole Award is given once a month to the individual making the greatest contribution to reducing assholishness in the profession.

I have to tell you that I believe every one of our She Negotiates graduates understands and knows how to use the bullet point takeaways from Extreme Negotiations below.  Let me also say it's not enough to read about these techniques ~ you must practice practice practice practice.

Get the Big Picture

• avoid assuming you have all the facts
• avoid assuming the other side is biased but you're not
• avoid assuming the other side's motivations and intentions are obvious and nefarious
• instead, be curious ("help me understand"); humble ("what do I do wrong?") and open-minded ("is there another way to explain this?")

Uncover and Collaborate

• avoid making open-ended offers ("what do you want")
• avoid making unilateral offers ("I'd be willing to . . . "
• avoid simply agreeing to or refusing the other side's demands
• instead ask "why is that important to you?"
• proposed solutions for critique ("here's a possibility - what might be wrong with it?")

Elicit Genuine Buy-in

• avoid threats ("you'd better agree, or else . . . "
• avoid arbitrariness ("I want it because I want it."
• avoid close-mindedness ("under no circumstances will I agree to - or even consider - that proposal"
• instead appeal to fairness ("what should we do?")
• appeal to logic and legitimacy ("I think this makes sense because . . . ")
• consider constituent perspectives ("how can each of us explain this agreement to colleagues?"

Build Trust

• avoid trying to "buy" a good relationship
• avoid offering concessions to repair actual or perceived breaches of trust
• instead explore how a breakdown in trust may have occurred and how to remedy it
• make concessions only if they are a legitimate way to compensate for losses owing to your nonperformance or broken commitments
• treat counterparts with respect, and act in ways that will command theirs.

Focus on process

• avoid acting without gauging how your actions will be perceived and what the response will be
• ignoring the consequences of a given action for future as well as current negotiations
• instead talk about the process ("we seem to be at an impasse; perhaps we should send some more time exploring our respective objectives and constraints."_
• slow down the pace:  ("I'm not ready to agree, but I'd prefer not to walk away either.  I think this warrants further exploration.")
• issue warnings without making threats:  ("unless you're willing to work with me toward a mutually acceptable outcome, I can't afford to spend more time negotiating")

I'll be blogging on each one of these steps in the negotiation process for the next two weeks so stay tuned.

Cross posted at She Negotiates and the ABCs of Conflict Resolution.

Here's the book at Amazon.  

I used to practice law with Rick years ago; Kathleen, Jackie and Rita are in my writers' group, and Cathy, her sister, my sister and I formed a kids' writers group Sisters of the Pen a zillion years ago on 71st Street in La Mesa, California (1963 or so).

That’s what A is for Asshole is all about ~ that “assholes” and bullies and enemies are not people but behaviors and not one person but two.

You can imagine that I’ve had spirited discussions with other lawyers about this ~ the existence of people who are the embodiment of evil.  Hitler perhaps.  But few of us have actually met such a creature face to face.

As a result of these conversations, I realize the need to differentiate between people with personality disorders (sociopaths - Tony Soprano;  borderlines - Burton and Taylor in Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf; and, narcissists - film noir femme fatales such as Barbara Stanwyck in  Double Indemnity) on the one hand and the “rest of us” on the other.

It’s “the rest of us” that the ABC’s of Conflict Resolution is about.  I don’t have a degree in psychology so I’m not qualified to opine about borderlines, sociopaths or narcissists though I surely believe I have met some. I’m talking about those of us who are capable of behaving like assholes without being one.  And anyone who is prepared to say they have never behaved badly enough to qualify should call the Vatican to put the beatification wheels into motion.

Our Part in It

When someone cuts in front of us in line; drives 50 miles an hour through a school zone; behaves boorishly at a party; or, shouts at workplace underlings, is there anyone to blame other than the “asshole”?  Before I attempt to answer this question, let me first say that we are all blinded to the part we play in disputes by cognitive biases. 

• fundamental attribution error (over-attributing intention and under-attributing circumstance to another’s harm-causing behavior while over-attributing circumstance and under-attributing intention to our own harm-causing behavior ¹

• clustering illusion (seeing patterns where none exist); and,

• confirmation bias (selecting from a vast amount of data only that which confirms our pre-existing opinions)

Mistakes about the intentions and motivations of our fellows, as well as the constraints under which they are working, are so common in the litigated disputes I mediate that I’ve been forced to acknowledge just how much of other people’s behavior is colored by my untested assumptions.  It naturally follows that my part in disputes has loomed much larger in their resolution than they ever did before. 

When a fight is poised to break out between me and my husband, I am far more likely to ask myself whether I’ve made enough inquiries to determine the source of his distressing behavior; whether I’ve been avoiding the matter at hand because addressing it might prove “difficult” or reveal a weakness in my own character; whether I’m taking something personally that’s not directed at me; whether I’m nursing a grudge long after he’s forgotten the event that caused it; and, whether there’s a cry for help beneath his accusation.

I have friends in 12-step programs who tell me that “the program’s” recommended practice is to keep their own side of the street clean and leave the other guy’s faults to himself.  They quote me chapter and verse from their “Big Book”:

Putting out of our minds the wrongs others had done, we resolutely looked for our own mistakes. Where had we been selfish, dishonest, self-seeking and frightened? Though a situation had not been entirely our fault, we tried to disregard the other person involved entirely. Where were we to blame? The inventory was ours, not the other man’s. When we saw our faults we listed them. We placed them before us in black and white. We admitted our wrongs honestly and were willing to set these matters straight.

What then creates an asshole?

First, we tend to judge the behavior of others by assuming that their injury-causing behavior was meant to harm us.  Opposing counsel filed his ex parte application at 5:00 on the evening before Thanksgiving for the purpose of making our lives miserable.

Second, we see patterns where none exist.  The practice group leader’s decision to take associate X to a client meeting following associate X’s assignment to a high profile case, means that associate X is being groomed for partner while you are being marginalized.

Finally, we believe our own B.S., which prevents us from accurately assessing the true situation so that we can deal with it effectively.

And that’s what I mean when I say an “asshole” is not a person but a behavior and not one person but two.

Cross posted at the ABCs of Conflict Resolution Blog.

_______________

¹ That we do this even with animals whose minds we can’t possibly know was brought into sharp relief when pundits pondered whether a killer whale “meant” to kill his trainer or was only “playing” with her.

² The social scientists have recently discovered that we actually feel more physical pain when we believe we’ve been intentionally struck.  Not surprising.  Even a dog knows the difference between being kicked and stumbled over.

(pictured:  the Queen of the ADR Blogosphere ~Diane Levin of the Mediation Channel and the World Directory of ADR Blogs)

I began to blog on ADR topics in 2006 when I stumbled over local mediator Jeff Krivis’ blog (thanks Jeff!) I’ve often said that the blogosphere is a small Midwestern town where the residents feel safe enough to keep their doors unlocked at night and everyone has carte blanche to walk into the neighbors’ kitchens, open their refrigerators and taste whatever gustatory pleasures await their curiosity.

Chief among my guides and colleagues in this generous and collaborative world were and are the brilliant and savvy Diane Levin whose Mediation Channel andWorld Directory of ADR Blogs set the standard high enough to keep me blogging in an effort to reach it. Others in the blogosphere who directly or indirectly contributed to the book include Tammy Lenski (Conflict Zen),Stephanie West Allen (Idealawg and Brains on Purpose), Geoff Sharp(formerly of Mediator Blah Blah and now of the m3 blog); John DeGroote(Settlement Perspectives); Jan Frankel Schau (Mediation Insights), Phyllis Pollack (PGP Mediation Blog), Jeff Thompson (Enjoy Mediation), Karl Bayer,Victoria VanBuren, and Holly Hayes (Disputing Blog), Lee Jay Berman (Eye On Conflict Blog) and the Professors behind the ADR Prof Blog (Andrea Schneider, Michael Moffitt, Sarah Cole, Art Hinshaw, Jill Gross, and Cynthia Alkon).

Special thanks also goes to anonymous Ed. of Blawg Review for whom I spent many happy months as a “sherpa,” finding and recommending the best law blog posts of the week for inclusion of that mainstay of the legal blogosphere. Though I personally know Ed. to be bold and forthright, because he has remained anonymous all of these years, I am irresistibly drawn to dedicate to him the chapter P is for Paranoid.

And if you're looking to purchase the ABC's ~ you've come to the right place! ~ here they are ~ A is for Asshole, the Grownups' ABC's of Conflict Resolution.

That we accomplish anything whatsoever without the support of our friends and families and colleagues and even the random kind stranger is a particularly American delusion.  Whenever I read a book, which is often, I always read the acknowledgements because I want to know how someone accomplished the extraordinary thing I have wanted to accomplish all of my life ~ write and publish a book.

Now that I have, it is not enough for me to allow my acknowledgements to languish inside the book.  My gratitude requires a bit of shouting and so I am laying it forth here and elsewhere in the blogosphere that has treated me and all my adventures so kindly.

As Joseph Campbell wrote, when you reach a certain age and look back over your lifetime,

it can seem to have had a consistent order and plan, as though composed by some novelist. Events that when they occurred had seemed accidental and of little moment turn out to have been indispensable factors in the composition of a consistent plot. So who composed that plot? Schopenhauer suggests that just as your dreams are composed by an aspect of yourself of which your consciousness is unaware, so, too, your whole life is composed by the will within you. And just as people whom you will have met apparently by mere chance became leading agents in the structuring of your life, so, too, will you have served unknowingly as an agent, giving meaning to the lives of others. The whole thing gears together like one big symphony, with everything unconsciously structuring everything else. And Schopenhauer concludes that it is as though our lives were the features of the one great dream of a single dreamer in which all the dream characters dream, too; so that everything links to everything else, moved by the one will to life which is the universal will in nature.

I begin with the leading agent of this book. He is the grace note that begins the symphony of the book and its final melody. He has been the book’s biggest noodge (“how’s the book coming?”) and its most enthusiastic cheerleader. He is my husband Stephen N. Goldberg.

The rest is this minor history. Friends pre-exist, endure, and follow marriage. Truly, nothing whatsoever could be accomplished without them. Dr. Anne LaBorde is this book’s best friend and and my soul sister. When the conversation veers into the sort of girl talk that involves how frustrating men can be, it is Anne who reminds me that Stephen is my Zen Master.  To Anne, I dedicate the letter Z.  Stephen's loving support aside, I still would never have had the courage to of any kind without the love and support of my writers’ group, a more loyal and constant group of friends than I ever imagined having. If the book is free of awkward phrases, lapses into irrelevant detail, and stultifying prose, much of the credit goes to these generous people who patiently listened to and commented on many early drafts. In the sixteen years I’ve been part of this glorious group of writers, we have all published. Some in the small literary press and collections of short fiction (Birute Serota); some in hauntingly beautiful and deeply felt memoirs (Rita Williams and Jackie Gorman);in an award winning novella that could make Faulkner weep (Emmy-award winning lyricist, Kathleen Wakefield); and teacher, actor and writer Russel Lundy whose WWII novel has not been published only because he cannot seem to let it go.Jan Bramlett, who introduced me to this extraordinary group of people has since left town to perform her lyric work with her voice and her guitar.

To all of these generous and talented people, I dedicate the letter “C” which stands not only for Coward, but also for Courage.

My essay on the joys of being in a writers group can be found in the back issues of the Journal of Southern New Hampshire University, Yeah, we're her writers' group.

Yes, the ABC’s of Conflict Resolution is nearly a reality.

I’d be cool and calm about it as if it were no big deal to write a book, gee, everyone has one these days, don’t they?  I mean, we live in Los Angeles and every week when we put our garbage out some mysterious stranger tucks pages of his screenplays in the handles of the plastic trash cans, blue, green and black, as if we lived in Spielberg’s neighborhood.  Just one turn of the wheel of fortune and he’ll be signing a three picture deal with Paramount.

But I’m not cool, calm and collected.  I’m so excited I can hardly breathe!

Listen, I started writing fiction when I was 8 years old on an old Remington Rand manual typewriter.  I LOVED that typewriter and dreamed of a day when one of my books with my name on the spine could be pulled by some kid my age off the shelf of the local public library.

I can almost smell the typewriter ribbon and feel the sturdy thwack of the metal keys beneath my fingers.

“What’s your book about honey?” my mom would ask before collapsing into gales of laughter as I explained the story of the illegitimate runaway child living under the roller coaster at Belmont Park in Mission Beach San Diego, something like A Tree Grows in Brooklyn but with a beach angle.

I’ll let you know the launch date!

In the first chapter of A is for Asshole, the Grownups’ ABCs of Conflict Resolution, we dissect and illuminate why an otherwise sober member of the Fourth Estate might resort to the purchase of a paintball rifle in response to the asshole who cuts into the long line of cars “crawling toward the exit for the Brooklyn Bridge.  See Line-Cutting, on Four Wheels from today’s New York Times here.

Note that reporter Alice DuBois’ first imagined response to this violation of the social norm “first in time, first in right” is the contentious dispute resolution technique of shaming (You should be ashamed of yourself.  You cut in front of this line of decent citizens) after which she immediately resorts to the imagined pseudo violence of a paintball rifle (well within my budget).

In point of fact, real people suffer real injury, and some of them death, in fights over parking places every year.  As I point out to friends who do not understand conflict between Israelis and Palestinians in the Middle East, “you’ve owned that parking space for what? all of sixty seconds?  a minute?  two? and yet people are moved to violence when someone steals their place in line. Multiply that by a few thousand years of perceived entitlement and what you get is intractable violent conflict.”

What to do?

Buy A is for Asshole, the Grownups’ ABCs of Conflict Resolution due out in November. 

Cross-posted at The ABCs of Conflict Blog.