If you have had feelings like those voiced above about your female colleagues, you are hardly alone. As Pat Heim and Susan Murphy have learned through twenty years of corporate consulting on gender differences, time and again professional women fail to support one another, and they even actively sabotage their female colleagues. While men will generally use direct action to attain a goal, women have been socialized to use indirect aggression to emotionally cripple those who are standing in their way. Even if the outcome is that no one gets what she wants!
The fact is, relationships can be either the best or the worst thing to happen to women at work. Studies show that women have a greater capacity than men to support and improve one another's professional performance -- with better results for all if their interaction is good, and worse results if it is not.
Presenting ground-breaking insights into the meaning of everyday behavior, In the Company of Women draws from the latest research on brain structure, evolution, and socialization to explain the unique challenges and positive opportunities that arise when women work with women.
A decade ago, in a male-dominated workplace, our primary concerns included surmounting communication differences between the sexes. By the year 2003, however, experts predict that women will own approximately fifty percent of American businesses. For the sake of our professional well-being, it has become imperative that we understand how women act differently among themselves when they are friends or enemies -- and use that information to reach new levels of excellence.
In the Company of Women addresses how and why female workplace relations break down as well as how women can inspire each other to new levels of excellence
More Reviews and RecommendationsIn their 20 years as consultants, authors Heim and Murphy gradually learned what gender studies have since confirmed: In the workplace, women frequently undermine one another. Real-world experience and recent research both show that when a goal comes into sight, men generally use direct action to attain it. Women, on the other hand, have been socialized to express aggressive actions through indirect means, such as shunning, stigmatizing, and gossiping. Such tendencies poison the work environment, reinforce "cat fight" stereotypes, and sabotage the efforts of women attempting to advance in male corporate environments. Offering straight-from-the-shoulder advice, the authors prescribe ways to turn conflict into alliance.
If you have had feelings like those voiced above about your female colleagues, you are hardly alone. As Pat Heim and Susan Murphy have learned through twenty years of corporate consulting on gender differences, time and again professional women fail to support one another, and they even actively sabotage their female colleagues. While men will generally use direct action to attain a goal, women have been socialized to use indirect aggression to emotionally cripple those who are standing in their way. Even if the outcome is that no one gets what she wants!
The fact is, relationships can be either the best or the worst thing to happen to women at work. Studies show that women have a greater capacity than men to support and improve one another's professional performance -- with better results for all if their interaction is good, and worse results if it is not.
Presenting ground-breaking insights into the meaning of everyday behavior, In the Company of Women draws from the latest research on brain structure, evolution, and socialization to explain the unique challenges and positive opportunities that arise when women work with women.
A decade ago, in a male-dominated workplace, our primary concerns included surmounting communication differences between the sexes. By the year 2003, however, experts predict that women will own approximately fifty percent of American businesses. For the sake of our professional well-being, it has become imperative that we understand how women act differently among themselves when they are friends or enemies -- and use that information to reach new levels of excellence.
In the Company of Women addresses how and why female workplace relations break down as well as how women can inspire each other to new levels of excellence
This book takes a critical look at the workplace relationships...and provides insight and tools that can help women become a strong, positive force in the workplace....
This book will teach you how to build the relationships that will help put you over the top.
Powerful, eye-opening, smart reading.
What a terrific and inspirational read!
Every women who works should read this groundbreaking book.
Now that women own nearly 50% of all businesses, the authors reason, women's worst enemies at work are just as likely to be other women. To support their thesis, which may offend some readers but will also generate attention, the authors both business consultants address differences between women's and men's behaviors. Declaring that women should be more conscious of their reaction if other women try to undermine a promotion or honor coming their way, they suggest, "that's the price we have to pay for the strong alliances we make with other women." This provocative, practical book deserves a wide readership. (Sept.) Copyright 2001 Cahners Business Information.
Why Successful Women Lose Their Women Friends
As a woman rises through the corporate ranks, she encounters more and more resistance and attacks - but not from the people she might expect. It is neither the misogynist boss who believes that women belong at home nor male peers in the management ranks who resent the competition who are most likely to become a successful woman manager's enemy. It is, according to authors Pat Heim and Susan Murphy, other women.
"Without fail," write Heim and Murphy in their book, In the Company of Women, "in our twenty years of conducting conferences and workshops about gender differences in business, almost every participant we've encountered has acknowledged that women damage other women's career aspirations." The authors back their assertion with statistics; according to a recent American Management Association survey of 1,000 women, Heim and Murphy write, 95 percent reported that women had undermined them at some time in their career.
Indirect Intimidation
Although "catfight" is traditionally a chauvinistic term that describes a physical blow-up between two women, the authors use the term to describe the more common, indirect type of attack that women make on each other. While dogs lunge at each other, leaving each other wounded and bloody, cats use other means to intimidate an enemy: arching their backs, hissing at each other, baring fangs and claws, staring each other down, or making deep, threatening growls. Women will likewise use indirect but extremely hurtful and destructive attacks on other women, including gossip, spreading rumors and divulging secrets, publicly making insinuating or insulting comments,sabotaging another person's work, or purposefully snubbing and withdrawing friendship.
The price that women pay for these attacks is not only a personal price; as executives and companies witness these kinds of experiences they are less willing to promote women. Women, essentially, are hurting the advancement of women.
Why Attack?
If the personal and professional price for these attacks are so high, why do women continue to target other women?
The first explanation presented by the authors is what they call the Power Dead-Even Rule. There are three essential elements to a woman's happiness, the authors write: relationships, power and self-esteem. In order for a relationship to be strong, power and self-esteem must be equally balanced. If one woman gains more power or self-esteem, the relationship with the other woman is damaged.
The Invisible Rule
Although invisible, the authors insist that most women live by this unspoken rule. For example, women will often take steps to balance the power and self-esteem with a friend and colleague whenever an imbalance threatens. Imagine, for example, that Sandra compliments a colleague, Martha, for her great new suit. "This old thing?" Martha might say. "I got it on sale." By complimenting her colleague on the new suit, Sandra increased Martha's power and self-esteem. Martha immediately brought the power and self-esteem back into balance by denigrating her suit.
With promotions, however, the Power Dead-Even Rule is unambiguously broken. One woman has more power (and usually self-esteem) than another. And even - or perhaps, especially - if the women were friends or colleagues beforehand, the imbalance of power damages the relationship.
The authors offer scientific and cultural explanations for the Power Dead-Even Rule. Little girls' games, for example, are often win-win. If you're playing jump-rope, the worst that can happen is that you lose your turn, which will come back around again. In boys' games, whether it's sports or cowboys, there are winners and losers - and somebody has to lose. Little boys are taught to accept that not everything is even.
Why Soundview Likes This Book
Explaining the causes of conflicts between women is only the first half of this well-researched and authoritative book. In the second half, the authors address how women colleagues can work and compete together constructively, how to be an effective female executive and how to build dream teams of women.
In the Company of Women is an important book for both career women - who will discover in these pages that they are not alone in feeling targeted by other women - and company executives trying to better understand and resolve the source of conflicts in their management teams. Copyright (c) 2002 Soundview Executive Book Summaries
Patricia Schroeder
"One of the most important lessons I learned in Congress is how powerful the unified voice of women can be. As more and more women take on positions of power in the corporate world, the positive female-to-female dynamic becomes an even more essential component to their success. This book takes a critical look at the workplace relationships that we all deal with and provides insight and tools that can help women become a strong, positive force in the workplace by creating alliances out of conflict."
Patricia Schroeder, Former Member of Congress, President & CEO Association of American Publishers
| Introduction | 1 | |
| Part I | Conflict: Why Women Behave the Way They Do | |
| 1 | The Golden Triangle: Relationships, Power, and Self-Esteem | 21 |
| 2 | The Power Dead-Even Rule | 51 |
| 3 | From the XX Files: The Origins of Woman-to-Woman Conflict | 68 |
| 4 | Lessons from Childhood | 84 |
| 5 | The Bitch Factor: Indirect Aggression | 107 |
| Part II | Colleagues: Finding Powerful Allies and Friends Among Women in the Workplace | |
| 6 | The Goal Is the Relationship | 131 |
| 7 | Loosening Power Dead-Even Double Binds | 156 |
| 8 | How to Have Healthy Conflict with Another Woman | 187 |
| 9 | Handling Conflict with Style | 212 |
| 10 | How to Be an Effective Female Leader | 248 |
| 11 | Building a Dream Team | 281 |
| A Final Word | 306 | |
| Appendix A | Books on Self-Esteem | 308 |
| Appendix B | Conflict Styles Questionnaire Answer Key | 310 |
| Notes | 319 | |
| References | 326 |
It has become almost axiomatic that women live in a web of relationships. We have developed a great facility for relatedness, and we need these connections in order to maintain our sense of personal well-being. Jean Baker Miller, a clinical professor of psychiatry at Boston University of Medicine, explains that for women, "all growth occurs within emotional connections, not separate from them...To feel 'more related to another person' means to feel one's self enhanced, not threatened. It does not feel like a loss of a part of one's self; instead it becomes a step toward more pleasure and effectiveness."
Relationships are such a critical element in the world of women that they are also central to our dealings in the business world. At the office we also tend to think relationally and work along relational, not hierarchical, lines (we'll get into this more in chapters 3, 4, and 5). Women often define career success by their ability to create affiliation with others and develop relationships in the work setting: "In my time at the Acme Company, my boss became my best friend, and ten years later, she's still my best friend." Organizational psychologist Carol Gallagher has found that the ability to maintain positive relationships was among the four critical success factors in the careers of the two hundred high-ranking senior executive women she studied. "The ability to develop relationships is imperative in crossing the threshold to the next level," she writes in Going to the Top. One of her interviewees explained, "On a scale of one to ten, I would give relationships a ten...I don't think you can get ahead without them."
The maintenance of relationships in the workplace is also far more important to women than to men. In Susan's doctoral research into twenty-one career values (such as risk taking, economic security, and altruism) across three generations of men and women (Gen-Xers, baby boomers, and mature workers), she found that no matter what the age, the importance of social interactions in the workplace is the most significant difference between the genders. Social relationships were also significantly more important to women than to men, ranking fourth out of the twenty-one values. Susan's research and dozens of other studies have proven that women value both social interactions and friendships significantly more than men do. They consider interpersonal relations important in their career development. They derive meaning in their lives predominantly through these interpersonal relationships and by observing and learning from others as well as their own life experiences.
Because of our focus on relationships, women are more likely to judge and care about people based on their innate qualities rather than their position in the corporate hierarchy. Consequently, female executives are more likely to adopt a collaborative leadership style, to share information and involve others in the decision-making process. We need our colleagues to make our work fulfilling and enjoyable, but also so we ourselves can be maximally productive. We therefore are more likely to pay attention to and address emotional issues at work. We often make concerted efforts to get along with our female colleagues. We share feelings and use heartfelt empathy to help assuage upset feelings or mitigate a difficult situation.
Women who have met with success in terms of concrete achievements but not what's called "affiliative success" often feel empty, lonely, and isolated. Susan consults in the financial industry with the senior women at a Fortune 100 company and was surprised to discover that what many of the female executives there want is not tactical advice such as "If Fred does this, and I respond in this way, what do you think will happen?" but empathy. During their consultations, the women pour their hearts out about the pain they feel, often from the other women in the company. For instance, two women had quit in Cynthia's department, and she believed their action was due to the way in which she had treated them. She spent almost an hour agonizing over how bad she felt, until finally Susan said, "Why don't you ask them why they left?"
The following week, Cynthia told Susan that she had phoned the women, and they both told her they had quit for other reasons. Whether or not her former employees were telling the truth, this executive certainly felt a lot better, believing her relationships had been preserved.
Because relationships are so important to women, it is all the more painful when they deteriorate. We will explore how this happens more fully in chapter 2.
Power is the ability to get things done. It is extremely important: without power you would find it impossible to reach your personal and professional goals. In 1959, psychologists John French and Bertram Raven at UCLA identified six kinds of power that both genders utilize inside and outside the workplace:
*Reward power: the ability to give something to someone. You can reward another with a promotion, gifts, or praise. You have something that she wants.
*Coercive power: the ability to punish someone, to demote her or otherwise harm her career progress. Derogatory comments can also fall under this category.
*Legitimate power: power conferred on you by the organization. You are given the title of vice president or appointed manager of the department or leader of the team.
* Expert power: power derived from your unique abilities or skills. You're the only person in the office who knows how to fix the computers, or perhaps you have expertise in managing the boss.
*Referent power: power based on your personal affection for or identification with another person or group. People do as you ask simply because they like and trust you. You have referent power over a friend who wants to please you.
* Associative power: power derived from whom you know and how you associate with them rather than what you know (expert power). You gain power by dropping names.
Power exists in relation to someone or something else but never in a vacuum. It can be a double-edged sword, especially for women in the workplace, because it's much more straightforward for men to wield power on the job than for women. When men take command of a situation, they're perceived as resolute and authoritative. They are focused on winning and will often take charge. These can be positive, even comforting, attributes in a crisis. We might respect a powerful man, especially if he can provide structure and direction to a group during a time of confusion.
But women are in a more precarious position when they try to appear powerful. Unfortunately, power and friendship don't easily mix among women; acting as if you have power can skew female relationships. Friendship implies giving to another person and sharing, whereas power can result in your taking from the other person or directing her activity. To women, these do not feel like friendly actions. In fact, these behaviors could be perceived with downright hostility. Consequently, if you exert your power on the other women at the office in the same way that men do, you can easily provoke a catfight.
Men more often experience "friendliness" with their co-workers, rather than friendships. They tend to be guarded when it comes to divulging intimate information about themselves to co-workers for the sake of their own survival in the hierarchical business world. Moreover, they are more apt to focus on their professional goals as well as on their own political survival in a corporation while women are often more focused on keeping their relationships with others intact.
Because relationships are so important to women, referent power (the power of friendship, mutual affection, and trust) can be more important to us than to men. And it's also the type of power that may be the most problematic. Women have much higher expectations of power sharing with those they are closest to than men do. Consider the following scenario: Your friend and former co-worker is promoted. She suddenly has more conferred legitimate power than you do. Chafing from the imbalance, you may feel tempted to withhold affection (your referent power), and a destructive conflict can ensue.
Or the opposite can occur: You genuinely like one of your employees and give her lots of leeway in her use of time. Such an employee can have a good deal of referent power over you. In fact, you may fear disturbing the friendship if you speak up, but you do eventually note that her work is slipping. Using your legitimate power, you talk with her about her unacceptable performance. You begin to use coercive power when you bring up her yearly evaluation. (She knows there are negative consequences to your disapproval.) As a way of evening out the power play, she withdraws her referent power from you. She goes to lunch with others without inviting you, throws work on your desk instead of handing it to you, and responds curtly when you ask about her family.
Some women managers will even back off from following through on discipline because they fear the damage it will do to their relationship with a female employee. The bottom line: you can't let referent power drive your management behavior, even though it may be attractive.
It's wise to approach power in a distinctively female way in order to make it work for you. For example, consider the use of what Patricia Palleschi, a vice president at the Walt Disney Company, calls Chip Theory. This is based on a sense of equity: each of us is endowed with a certain number of chips of power-positive attributes or actions-that we constantly exchange with others. We possess, give, and get these power chips in three ways:
*Interactions: Saying "Hi, how are you?" whenever you meet a co-worker. Taking a genuine interest in her family, vacation, or new project at work.
*As a birthright: Some people are simply born with lots of chips-think of the Rockefellers. Fortunate chip-rich folks may be blessed with good looks, talent, great intelligence, athletic prowess-inherent qualities.
*Active acquisition: People proactively seek out chips. They will obtain an MBA or Ph.D., or they'll strive for the title of vice president. Some may marry handsome or rich significant others to increase their store of chips, or they'll frequent plastic surgeons who can artificially enhance their chip bank accounts by tucking their tummies or lifting their sagging eyelids and chins.
Although you may not have been aware of it until now, everyone with whom you interact keeps a chip bankbook on you. All day long you are gaining and losing chips with your direct reports, peers, and higher-ups. They know where you stand with them at any given moment, and you know where they stand with you.
Indeed, one of the most important rules in Chip Theory is that we always make it equal in the end-that is, if someone tries to take away our chips, we will find a way to even the score. For instance, if upon arriving at work, your warm and friendly greeting to co-worker Brenda is met with a flat "Oh, hi," you will probably greet this person much less effusively in the future. In fact, you may eventually stop saying hello to Brenda altogether. Conversely, if that colleague is kind and generous with her chips, most likely you will feel inclined to return them in kind.
Pat learned that lesson as a university professor. Her secretary, Sarah, worked in a windowless cubicle all day, and Pat knew that she valued relationship chips-the simple "Hi, how are you?" "What are you doing?" "What's new?" interactions.
One day, Pat was working with her boss, Kim, in Kim's office. Sarah came in, dropped off some typing for Pat, and left. Perturbed, Kim turned to Pat and asked, "When did you give her that typing?"
"This morning."
"Does she always bring it when she's done?"
"Yes, of course," Pat responded, surprised at this line of questioning.
"Well I gave Sarah typing to do three days ago, and she still hasn't finished it. She never brings my work to me when it's done. I always have to ask her for it." Kim hadn't been paying Sarah her interaction chips, and Sarah had found a way to make it even in the end.
The exchanges that occur at holiday time are another way to understand Chip Theory. When we receive a greeting card, we usually feel compelled to send one back. Gifts must be of equal value-when they're not, both the giver and receiver become uncomfortable. (Some people even keep extra presents around, just in case someone surprises them with an unexpected one.) Men usually don't value the exchanges of greeting card chips as much as women do; they will rarely send male friends birthday cards. Men will exchange tickets to Lakers or Yankees games, however, which hold much greater meaning and value to them.
When we talk about Chip Theory, people sometimes say, "But isn't this manipulative?" Our answer is, "Yes, indeed, it is." But consider this: We all started manipulating other people at the same moment-Day One, when we realized there was a connection between screaming and getting fed-and we have continued to manipulate every day of our lives since then. We have just become unconscious of it and more graceful at it.
We all need to manage our relationships with people, and wielding chips is simply an automatic tool to accomplish that end.
Female managers often believe that because they're in charge, employees have to do what they say. But we've found that somehow, in some way, someday, female employees will always make it even in the end. Jill was hired to manage a group of people who had to travel to relatively undesirable cities. When employees took these business junkets, they were allowed a "safe-arrival call"; that is, once they reached their destination, they could phone home to say "I made it" on the company's dime.
Soon after Jill took the job, she discovered there was supposed to be a dollar limit on these safe-arrival calls. She diligently went through old files and found that several of her employees had spent more money on their safe-arrival calls than was allowed. Rather than simply let this go but make an issue of enforcing company policy in the future, she went from desk to desk and collected $3.10 from Lila, $7.45 from Terri, and $11.52 from Debbie, and so on ad nauseum.
Until this moment, this had not been a particularly high-energy group, but the electric charge that ran through it and the team building that suddenly occurred were astounding. Mysteriously, employees soon began turning up at the wrong place at the wrong time with the wrong equipment. Over and over again. Jill was putting out one fire after another, which cost her far more in time and energy than the $100 or so she had collected from her profligate and loquacious employees. She kept thinking there was some glitch in the scheduling procedure and didn't realize that the glitch resided in the chip deficit she had created with her pettiness. That's what she really needed to fix.
Women have really good memories. We tend to hold grudges for a long time. The game is never over for us, so chip deficits can last a lifetime if they're not rectified.
Ostentatious displays (see the box below)-the furs, the showy diamonds, the luxurious house, the flashy car-although they might not get you far if you're stranded in the Kalahari Desert, are all symbols of power in our society at which other women may take umbrage and seek to even the score. These various displays must be cautiously managed because female co-workers may become resentful of them.
Status symbols can entail more than simple material wealth. Suppose you have been promoted to manage your former co-workers. In such a case, it would be wise to manage your symbolic display of power. At least for the first few weeks, you might, for example, choose to do your own copying and pick up your own faxes rather than ordering a subordinate around. And when you are ready to ask for assistance, you might phrase your request as "Could you do me a favor and..." New hires might not have the same difficulties with you and would be coming on board with a different set of expectations for the relationship. But, as we'll elaborate in chapter 7, some management of the symbolic power display may be called for when your former peers become your subordinates.
Body language (an open posture, head held high, expansive use of personal space), a confident air, and a condescending tone can also be construed as displays of power. At one of Pat's workshops held in Chicago, when a question about leadership styles came up, one man asked about Mike Ditka. Pat had to confess that she didn't know who he was-to her, an insignificant lapse-but at lunch later, a group participant sought to rub her nose in it. "I can't believe you don't know who Mike Ditka is," Diana said in a disparaging tone.
Pat explained that she isn't from the Midwest, and that she usually doesn't read the sports section of the newspaper, to which Diana coolly replied, "I would know who the coach is if you were talking about Los Angeles or San Diego."
"But I don't really care about football," Pat protested.
"I don't either, but I stay well informed on all topics" was this woman's haughty response.
Immediately, Pat had the impulse to go into full power-display mode and raise a subject such as the intricacies of the human genome project with this snooty individual, hoping that Diana wasn't knowledgeable on that topic, just so Pat could even out the conversation and the score. Instead, Pat held her tongue and tried to understand how Diana's world looked to her. She decided that if Diana did this to her, she probably did it at work too. Pat was running the workshop and had a great deal of legitimate and expert power that might have felt threatening to Diana.
Ironically, had Pat responded to Diana's power play, it would have backfired. Pat didn't feel diminished because she was ignorant about Mike Ditka-this was not something she cared much about. But Diana's seemingly arrogant display of power could have quickly triggered a destructive conflict with someone less aware or cautious, and it also might have made her seem unattractively supercilious to her assembled co-workers.
Self-esteem refers to how well you think of and value yourself, how much you're worth in your own eyes, and the power you allow yourself to have. Matthew McKay, psychologist and clinical director of Haight-Ashbury Psychological Services in San Francisco, explains in his book Self-Esteem, "One of the main factors differentiating humans from other animals is the awareness of self; the ability to form an identity and then attach a value to it. In other words, you have the capacity to define who you are and then decide if you like the identity or not."
When you evaluate the level of your self-esteem, you look at intrinsic qualities such as whether you believe you're a useful person, how much you trust yourself, and how self-satisfied you feel. Are you pleased or unhappy about what you've accomplished in your life so far? How well do you relate to others? How comfortably do you accept responsibility for your actions? Whether your self-esteem level is high or low depends on how you feel about the following:
* Your sense of value: Do you feel that you have good qualities? Do you accept yourself and your emotions?
* Your accomplishments: Do you believe that you reach the goals you've set for yourself, you receive recognition for your efforts, and you continually work to develop your capacities?
* Your relationships: Are you able to get close to others, share, and establish a sense of trust?
* Your abilities: Do you have faith in your productiveness at your work and your capacity to act with self-control, make decisions, and shape your own destiny?
* Your sense of responsibility: Do you hold yourself accountable for your own failures? Do you take an active role in resolving any conflicts you are involved in?
* How others perceive you: Do your friends, colleagues, and family members treat you with respect? Do they appreciate your talents, abilities, and uniqueness?
As with your Power Profile, you can't define who you are in a vacuum. Rather, you do so through a world of cues that give you feedback about how the world sees you. It would be hard to hold a positive self-image if all those around you sent messages to the contrary-even if they were wrong. Sometimes others may even be spitefully wrong. They know they're being cruel in putting forth a negative assessment of you, but they somehow feel justified in their vindictiveness. Sometimes people will do their darnedest to make you feel bad no matter what, and once you take their opinion of you personally, your sense of self-esteem can be mired in an accelerating downward spiral.
All humans strive to feel good about themselves, and when our self-esteem is toppled, everyone feels a natural urge to right it. But self-esteem plays into our equation among women in quite a different way than it does for men. Women are more likely to "be hard on themselves" and "beat themselves up," therefore lowering their self-esteem. They are more likely to engage in negative self-talk ("I'm so stupid. How could I have said that?") and advertise their flubs ("You won't believe how I screwed up today!"). These self-defeating behaviors may be a temporary outlet for our feelings of frustration, but they almost invariably result in lowered self-esteem.
Interpersonal conflict can also diminish self-esteem. Says Carol Gilligan, author of In a Different Voice, "Women not only define themselves in a context of human relationship but also judge themselves in terms of their ability to care." Since women highly value their caring relations with their colleagues, when they experience interpersonal discord, they often disparage themselves as inadequate, which cuts into their positive sense of self. This is especially true because women's conversations touch so many levels of one another's lives beyond the world of work: friends, family, menstrual cycles, restaurants, travel...When relationships break down, women are affected much more than merely at work.
One of the respondents to our Web site questionnaire described how complicated life became when she found herself enmeshed in a destructive conflict with her supervisor. "A woman boss gave my business partner and me our first break and became our mentor," she wrote. "But when we felt it was best for us to move on and 'spread our wings,' our mentor took it personally. She literally felt we'd betrayed her and couldn't understand how we could 'do this to her.' We ended up going to see her therapist with her to resolve this issue, but our relationship has never been the same." It was very likely that this supervisor's self-esteem was damaged when these two people decided to make a break. Perhaps she felt they'd personally abandoned her.
From In the Company of Women: Turning Workplace Conflicts into Powerful Alliances by Pat Heim, Susan Murphy and Susan K. Golant. (c) September 2001, J. P. Tarcher, a division of Penguin Putnam, Inc, used by permission.
loading...
loading...
loading...
Terms of Use, Copyright, and Privacy Policy
© 1997-2009 Barnesandnoble.com llc