Sucker or Saint?

The surprising ways we shore up our self-esteem when we feel foolish for not being able to say no.

By Wray Herbert | Newsweek Web Exclusive

Aug 6, 2008 | Updated: 6:47 p.m. ET Aug 6, 2008

« Return to Article

Discuss

Posted By: fsilber @ 08/11/2008 10:42:58 AM

Comment: This explains the weak, helpless, cowardly people who cannot imagine responding to muggers and burglars with anything other than abject submission -- who then shore up their self-esteem by congratulating themselves on their nonviolent, pacifist, moral superiority.

This is despite the fact that Gandhi's doctrine of passive resistance required followers to _refuse_ to submit to oppression. Gandhi described three ways of dealing with violent oppression: #1 Cowardly submission, #2 resistance via counter-violence, and #3 passive resistance in which you refuse to obey under the theory that the oprressor cannot kill _everyone_. He wrote his son that passive resistance was the most noble and virtuous, but admitted that if one were not courageous enough to do this, the use of counter-violence in resistance is preferable to cowardly submission.

That such a "nonviolent" person would dial 911 in a moment of danger, summoning a gun-armed cop to his aid, only confirms his contemptible hypocracy.
Posted By: John Luma @ 08/11/2008 1:11:58 AM

Comment: I think this "either-or" choice doesn't frame the real issue at all. It just makes it seem controversial.

What I've found in my own career is that "doing it all" -- the details as well as the major strategic thinking, and everything in between -- is what catapults you into becoming the go-to person. The one who sets the standard for teamwork and performance. Basically, all workers are either problem solvers, or they're part of the problem. Anyone who would ever tell me "it's not my job" I would consider not a team player and a short timer at best. Not someone you reward, not someone you want leading others.
Posted By: crazysam2 @ 08/10/2008 10:03:06 PM

Comment: Depends on your organization. In some places, team players -- people will take on emergency assignments, often menial -- are eventually rewarded. In some places, they're not. That's what determines whether the worker in question is a sucker or not. Good organizations -- where such menial, unexpected work will not happen often, but will be rewarded -- rely on team players to step in and get the job done. And when those team players become bosses, they have a tendency not to be capricious or abusive with their direct reports, and not dump menial work on people just because they can. It seems that one's view of the boss's request in this experiment is totally dependent on the culture of the organization they're part of.
Posted By: crazysam @ 08/10/2008 10:02:20 PM

Comment: Depends on your organization. In some places, team players -- people will take on emergency assignments, often menial -- are eventually rewarded. In some places, they're not. That's what determines whether the worker in question is a sucker or not. Good organizations -- where such menial, unexpected work will not happen often, but will be rewarded -- rely on team players to step in and get the job done. And when those team players become bosses, they have a tendency not to be capricious or abusive with their direct reports, and not dump menial work on people just because they can. It seems that one's view of the boss's request in this experiment is totally dependent on the culture of the organization they're part of.
Posted By: wmherbertking @ 08/10/2008 3:13:45 AM

Comment: You tell it Wray Herbert.
Posted By: SF Prof @ 08/10/2008 12:50:39 AM

Comment: Dear Mr. Herbert, I realize the researchers don't read a lot of Nietzsche, but they're rewriting The Genealogy of Morals, which discusses "master morality versus servant morality, and maintains that the traditional ideals set forth as holy and morally good within Christian morality are products of self-deception, since they were forged in the bad air of revenge, resentment, hatred, impotence, and cowardice." (Stanford Encyc Phil.) Now there's empirical evidence of this "transvaluation of the values," as a human tendency? Interesting.
Posted By: FrenchieinNY @ 08/09/2008 3:30:13 PM

Comment: What this article calls wimpy or helpful has gotten me results at two consecutive jobs. I have always considered that helping my superiors helps the company and me. Things need to get done and someone has to do them. The result is now im reporting to the gm and i run my own store. "not in my job description" around here means you just shot your upward mobility right in the foot. So i guess wimps make it and rebels stay in the cubicle.
Posted By: FrenchieinNY @ 08/09/2008 3:25:14 PM

Comment: What some call spineless and/or nice actually does yield advantages. I have always had the view that nothing is out of my job description and if something needs to get done, its best done if i do it myself. I have always offered assistance to my superiors and the result, now in two consecutive jobs, is that now i only have one boss instead of many, and i run my own store. "Thats not my job description" usually means you just shot your upward mobility right in the foot.
Posted By: sumpingrey @ 08/09/2008 3:41:46 AM

Comment: Hi, i cudnt read the rest of the article, so overcome was i by the office example u gave. gosh, it has happened to me so many times...yes i feel like the lowliest scum on the planet afterwards...and yes, towards the end i have really learnt to say NO...though i STILL start out with a umm-yes-maybe-lemme think - er - maybe not - no!
Posted By: dmcbriar @ 08/09/2008 12:03:04 AM

Comment: Sorry, but I don't see how the test proves that the people that chose to help others in need are spineless. You're basically saying that if someone has the desire to do something helpful for their coworkers, they're doing it out of insecurity every time. It may be true sometimes, but have you considered if everyone at the office are friends, it's a casual atmosphere, "it's a slow day, and I'm bored so what the heck?" You're throwing out so many possible factors. You could just as inaccurately have done the same test to prove that people that tend to not help out are generally selfish or lazy.
Posted By: pizzymcgith @ 08/08/2008 10:11:37 PM

Comment: OMG! talk about removed from reality. only one who worked at a 9-5 unsalaried job could write an article where an answer like "not in my job description" didnt result in immediate termination. honestly - what a joke on the part of the editors. how about a greater understanding that these sort of issues apply to those of us who do not work 9-5?
Posted By: ikempls @ 08/08/2008 4:23:59 PM

Comment: Every job I have had in the description has had a clause "and tasks as assigned". If the boss asks me to do something he or she is the one responsible for my paycheck so it is my belief the answer is yes I would be happy to do it. This idea of I'm to good to something is pervasive in our culture. It has nothing to with self-esteem which as a parent of two teenage boys I'm finding I spent to much time worrying about and not enough time putting a boot in their sit downs for being lazy. Try getting a middle class kid to take a job doing something unpleasant. They look at you like you are nuts. We built this country on doing what has to be done. Now we are outsourcing many of the unpleasant jobs or look down upon those who do them that is where worrying about self esteem has put us. We even have the gall to complain about the people who come here that want to work and might not speak that good of English. This is where worrying so much about self esteem has got us in a place that is starting to make me ashamed of parenting job this generation has done me included
Posted By: ikempls @ 08/08/2008 4:23:23 PM

Comment: Every job I have had in the discription has had a clause "and tasks as assigned". If the boss asks me to do something he or she is the one responsible for my paycheck so it is my belief the answer is yes I would be happy to do it. This idea of I'm to good to something is pervasive in our culture. It has nothing to with self-esteem which as a parent of two teenage boys I'm finding I spent to much time worrying about and not enough time putting a boot in their sit downs for being lazy. Try getting a middle class kid to take a job doing something unpleasent. They look at you like you are nuts. We built this country on doing what has to be done. Now we are outsorcing many of the unpleasnt jobs or look down upon those who do them that is where worrying about self esteem has put us. We even have the gall to complain about the people who come here that want to work and might not speak that good of English. This is where worrying so much about self esteem has got us in a place that is starting to make me ashamed of parenting job this generation has done me included.
Posted By: ash25mn @ 08/08/2008 11:24:31 AM

Comment: I completely agree with this article. I'm not an overpaid secretary. When someone in my office (who wasnt even my boss and quite frankly is a huge b*tch) asked me to complete a menial task for her, I bowed out. I might not have been blatant about saying no, because I know how you "saintly" people are, but I am not her direct report, she is the same level as me, and I have other things to do. That is not to say that you should only stick to your own job description. I am always ready to take on additional tasks. I think what the article is pointing to are the tasks that are clearly things that others are just trying to shluff off b/c they are tasks that those people dont want to do either.
- Posted By: reisbergsgal @ 08/08/2008 6:08:27 PM
  
  Comment: I agree to some extent-- I am a "green" secretary-- much, much younger than the other secretaries I work with and obviously with much less experience. I have had situations where many of them have asked me to due something THAT THEY, AND I KNOW IS NOT MY RESPONSIBILITY-- but because I'm the newbie, they hand it to me anyway.
  
  Being a whimp/saint has it's pros and cons; obviously the cons are that there are times when you're work sucks. There are also pros, i.e., when it is time for you review. Luckily I work in an office where the administration notices if you go the extra mile (they also notice if you don't). It can be incredibly rewarding when you're HR Director thanks you for all of your hard work and notices that on occasion you are not too lazy to step outside of your job discription (this repore is also nice when it's time for a raise!). I don't think that this makes me a whimp-- I think it makes me smart. In the workforce, it can give you a head up and help you stand out. Also, it can be an opportunity to learn something outside of your job discription.
  
  In my mind, being a whimp comes to play in relationships, sports, spicy food-- but in the workforce, it can be one of your greatest assets. You just have to pick who you say yes and no to carefully.
Posted By: Justmethinking @ 08/07/2008 2:33:06 PM

Comment: 1: 333ceasar. WTF are you talking about?

2: This 'experiment' has no value in the real world, where work place dynamics, including fear, play a large role in the choices one is forced to accept. Obviouls anyone participating in the experiment knew they weren't going to be penalized, condemned, or fired due to saying yes, no, or it ain't my job dude. So arrange to do it for real in a large corporation where the management nhave bought into the experiment, and unknown to the employees, there are guaranteed to be no reprecussions, then see what happens.

It won't be want was seen in this waste of time.
- Posted By: annatall1 @ 08/07/2008 3:42:28 PM
  
  Comment: I agree. Simply removing it from the real results of making such a choice invalidates the choice. Experience teaches one to read the boss and determine whether such a choice will have a longterm negative impact. An occasional request is tolerable. A consistent assignment can be taken more seriously.
- Posted By: Justmethinking @ 08/07/2008 2:40:03 PM
  
  Comment: Obviously, I didn't spell check before hitting Posty. :(
  Obviouls = Obviously
  nhave = have
  want (last sentence) = what
  
  :)
Posted By: badbuddha @ 08/07/2008 10:46:57 AM

Comment: Hmmm...I see neither sucker nor saint, but a common acknowledgment on the human condition. It seems a wee bit of self preservation (self-esteem) comes into play here. Nothing surprising but expected. I'd have to say I agree with 333ceasar.
- Posted By: Dallas-Cowboys @ 08/09/2008 3:20:01 PM
  
  Comment: I do not see what any published report of specific work ethics has to do with employment enviroment.There has been many situations where I helped co-workers get done defore the end of the shift.They returned the favor as well.I do not know what is taught in yankee land.In the south we help other people.I still prefer working for smaller business companies where old fashioned work ethics still exist.
  Ask someone who works in a back-stabbing workplace what the conditions are like.Comparing big business to our current political system it no surprise nothing gets done because of stupidity and constant complaining about doing real work once in a while.
  As far as obama speaking about the christian's he needs to look hard at the koran and call the muslim religious leaders murdering hate preaching terrorist.The koran is a direct copy of the bible in almost every way.Where in the bible does it say hatred for your fellow man is exceptable behavior.There is nothing in the ten commandments that says commiting genicide because of hatred is exceptable under god's laws.
Posted By: 333ceasar @ 08/06/2008 8:17:09 PM

Comment: 1.mr. wray herbert,me and my Boss see EYE to EYE.
2.the people of AMERICA ,THAT CALL THEM SELFES CHRISTIANS SHOULD TAKE SEN.OBAMA WORDS
TO HEART. BECAUSE HE HAS SAID TO HEAVEN ,IN THE REPORT HE TOLD YOUR PAPER,
I AM A BIG BELIEVER IN NOT JUST WORDS(BIBLE)BUT DEEDS AND WORKS.I WILL EXPOSE WHAT HEAVEN HAS TO SAY ABOUT SEN. OOBAMA FAITH.HEAVEN
Posted By: 333ceasar @ 08/06/2008 8:10:35 PM

Comment: HEY,WRAY HERBERT,HELLO, I Am REV.larry JOHN cazer of st.louis,mo. and i have a story to tell the WORLD>
1. me and my BOss,see eye to eye
2.i read in yall paper some things that SEN.OBAMA said about his faith.AND i believe what he said is true. ANDAND I AM GOING TO EXPOSE THOSE VERY WORDS OF MR. OBAMA
Posted By: artistgreg @ 08/06/2008 7:31:16 PM

Comment: I can't say I agree with that argument at all. Did ALL of the test subjects agree to do the menial task? They did it because it's the right thing to do. The person who said, "No" had to be a plant. Otherwise, he would just be an ***. It's not a question of weakness. It's a question of doing your job and being nice and lending a helping hand.
- Posted By: MotherLuscious @ 08/07/2008 5:57:59 PM
  
  Comment: The value of a person who agrees to an extra task or says no, that's not my job is completely subjective. Does this make the person who throws trash in the proper container a ***? Is it more reasonable to throw it on the ground and say no, that' picking it up is somebody else's job? Come on! *** vs. saint is divisive, unproductive, waste of intellect. Go study revenge killing or "honor" murders of rape victims. This is nuts.
- Posted By: MotherLuscious @ 08/07/2008 5:51:32 PM
  
  Comment: I think the interpretation says more about the researchers than the subjects. The value of a person who agrees to add a menial task or says no, that's not my job is absolutely subjective. Does one value individual or team work? ***? Saint? Come on!