3 ms·

Anger is the ego being upset that people and the world didn't do what you expected. It's natural, but it's absolutely not a good leadership quality to be angry.

bostonsre 5y ago
> Anger is the ego being upset that people and the world didn't do what you expected Why does ego play a role? Couldn't one be mad because of what they believe is wrong is being done? It's not right to be angry at someone that didn't know any better but there are individuals that I've worked with that aren't aligned with the company well, are lazy and do selfish things. Why am I not allowed to be angry at a person like that?
- peakaboo 5y ago
  You are allowed but there is a reason old people are not very angry anymore. They have learned to be humble though life, realizing people tend to do their best. If someone is not performing at work, it's usually because of motivation, and that's the job of a good manager to create. But I think the American culture is quite different from what I'm used to so maybe I sound weird in this context. :)
- lazide 5y ago
  Anger generally is anchored to something that is being threatened - it is a defense mechanism. Sometimes, like if you’re angry at an opposing tribesman for attacking your village, it can be helpful. Other times, it can lead to acting out in ways that hurt you (like being so angry you don’t pay attention to your surroundings and get ambushed while trying to counter attack said enemy). There are many possible scenarios - anger at the threat to his stock valuations, or anger at the threat to his public image, or anger at the threat to the illusion he personally held that everything was going ok, or anger and frustration at his inability to get control of the situation in a productive way, which is a threat to many of these things. Most abuse is when a person is unable to properly manage and avoid painful emotions (such as anger), and projects fault and bad intent onto others - to scapegoat for instance as a maladaptive behavior they haven’t learned an alternative to, among other reasons. What is being described in the article is classic abusive behavior, no matter the venue. It is not ok, in any environment, and it causes destruction and missed opportunities anywhere it is deployed. The reason I think you don’t see that in his public persona because he knows it isn’t ok - but can’t control it sometimes, or even worse, thinks it’s a good thing when he can do it in ‘private’. He ‘knows how to treat his woman so he gets dinner on time’, as it were, and she’d better put her makeup on better so he doesn’t look bad in front of his friends I expect there are many internal witch hunts ongoing for leakers after this, and have been for other leaks too. Since after all, in his eyes it is not the behavior that is wrong, it’s being embarrassed in public that is.

bostonsre 5y ago

> Anger is the ego being upset that people and the world didn't do what you expected Why does ego play a role? Couldn't one be mad because of what they believe is wrong is being done? It's not right to be angry at someone that didn't know any better but there are individuals that I've worked with that aren't aligned with the company well, are lazy and do selfish things. Why am I not allowed to be angry at a person like that?

peakaboo 5y ago
You are allowed but there is a reason old people are not very angry anymore. They have learned to be humble though life, realizing people tend to do their best. If someone is not performing at work, it's usually because of motivation, and that's the job of a good manager to create. But I think the American culture is quite different from what I'm used to so maybe I sound weird in this context. :)
lazide 5y ago
Anger generally is anchored to something that is being threatened - it is a defense mechanism. Sometimes, like if you’re angry at an opposing tribesman for attacking your village, it can be helpful. Other times, it can lead to acting out in ways that hurt you (like being so angry you don’t pay attention to your surroundings and get ambushed while trying to counter attack said enemy). There are many possible scenarios - anger at the threat to his stock valuations, or anger at the threat to his public image, or anger at the threat to the illusion he personally held that everything was going ok, or anger and frustration at his inability to get control of the situation in a productive way, which is a threat to many of these things. Most abuse is when a person is unable to properly manage and avoid painful emotions (such as anger), and projects fault and bad intent onto others - to scapegoat for instance as a maladaptive behavior they haven’t learned an alternative to, among other reasons. What is being described in the article is classic abusive behavior, no matter the venue. It is not ok, in any environment, and it causes destruction and missed opportunities anywhere it is deployed. The reason I think you don’t see that in his public persona because he knows it isn’t ok - but can’t control it sometimes, or even worse, thinks it’s a good thing when he can do it in ‘private’. He ‘knows how to treat his woman so he gets dinner on time’, as it were, and she’d better put her makeup on better so he doesn’t look bad in front of his friends I expect there are many internal witch hunts ongoing for leakers after this, and have been for other leaks too. Since after all, in his eyes it is not the behavior that is wrong, it’s being embarrassed in public that is.