What To Do?

WHAT TO DO_.jpg

People face tough decisions every day in a wide array of scenarios. It may relate to health, business, relationships or money. Should the aggressive cancer treatment be undertaken despite the risks? How many people should be trimmed now the business has been taken over? Do we send in troops against the enemy on foreign soil? Do I give her another chance despite her infidelity? Does this blue or pink shirt look better? President Obama explained that by the time a matter was referred to him for an outcome there was no easy decision.
This is because people are troubled by conscience. A conscience is that thing which causes you to frame your own decisions as if someone was watching what you are doing or thinking, even though you are alone. People make decisions tougher than they need be because they are worried how people will react, how it will make that person look in front of others, how it will impact on other people and whether they will be damned if they do and damned if they don’t. These considerations do not trouble my kind and me.
My kind and me receive a lot of bad press about the things we say and do. Of course you will not be holding your breath in the expectation of some kind of apology because that is just not going to happen. I do know however that you are a reasonable person who looks at matters in a balanced and fair-minded fashion (it is just that I tell everyone else that you are crazy harpy who is out of control). With that in mind, you really ought to give thanks for people like me because we can be relied on to make the tough decisions that have to be made.
For example, imagine there is a redundancy situation in your department and in one particular team four people are at risk of losing their jobs. Two positions have to go and one of your friends is in this pool of individuals at risk. How would you go about deciding who is selected for redundancy and who is not? That part of you that is dedicated to fairness and the correct way of doing things would decide that a prescribed selection criteria should be applied to all four who are at risk. You would apply scores for each person to the criteria and the two lowest would be then selected for redundancy. The empath in you knows however your friend will face serious financial consequences if he lost his job now, notwithstanding the redundancy package. You also fear you will lose your friendship if he is made redundant. You agonise over what you should do. Should you apply the scores fairly and then be beyond reproach in the event of a legal challenge to the decision but risk losing your friend and causing him severe problems? Alternatively, should you massage the scores bumping up a couple of his and reducing a couple of someone else’s? Who would know if it is just a few points difference? What about speaking to the head of the department and trying to save one of the jobs so there is only one casualty? In such a scenario you know your friend will be safe as one of the candidates is poor at his job and is nailed on to be chosen. I know that you would face quite a dilemma in trying to make this decision and ultimately you would probably pass it on to someone else citing a conflict of interest.
What about me? What would I do? Would I apply the criteria and the poorest two lose out? After all, surely we want the best employees and if there is dead wood it needs to be cut out irrespective of any friendship that may exist? Would I instead apply my own criteria of who will provide me with the best fuel in this office dynamic and allow that to influence the supposed objective scoring? Would I make the decision that suits me the best and then reverse engineer the situation to give it the veneer of legitimacy? I should imagine that you will be inclined to think that I would do the latter. If so, you would be wrong.
I would fire all four. Their work would be distributed to other people in the department on the basis that they would receive a small bonus if they achieve certain targets. The business makes a greater saving by losing the foursome and four other employees become very grateful to me, thus giving me plenty of fuel, as a consequence of this incentive. I then contact two of the four and explain that if they bide their time I will ensure they can be re-hired in a few months’ time, before the pay-off has been depleted and thus they will actually find themselves in a better position. I will recruit those two in the new financial year so the previous year’s savings remain good. The re-hired individuals will be eternally grateful to me, ensuring loyalty and further fuel, plus I shall ensure they become my lieutenants as repayment for me looking out for them. The hold I have over my higher-up will ensure the recruitments go through without incident and are done outside of the time allowed for the two who remain out in the cold to bring a tribunal claim.
What about the friend in all of this? Who cares? He should have fuelled me more and he might have been saved. As it is, I have found some new friends who are ever so grateful for my largesse and who are perfectly content to propagate my explanation that the friend was released as a consequence of some behaviour that cannot be expanded on but let us say is outside the range of normative behaviours of decent people in society. When the friend comes calling to vent his spleen at me, well his anger and insults are all good fuel aren’t they?
The way you are wired causes you to make decisions tough.
We, by contrast, make the tough decisions.
You really ought to thank us.

15 thoughts on “What To Do?

  1. Lisa says:

    This is fine in many areas of life but not in all areas. Non narcissists also have to carry out these decisions but are able to not behave in cold calculating ways with everyone in their lives .

  2. Diva says:

    In reading this article I am realising that I have more than likely worked directly for a narc or two myself…….and I gravitated towards them or maybe they gravitated towards me…… I am not sure why that is, but I am sure of this…… I enjoyed working with them, even though they may have reacted in ways that I wouldn’t have done myself. I never fell out of favour with any of them, but they expected you to give them your all, and loyalty was a given, anyone not prepared to commit to the task as if their life depended on it, paid the price in more ways than one. I learned a lot from them and in many ways admired them. Although I had no idea what they were until now……I knew that they were different from the majority.

  3. robins359 says:

    Yes, you make the best decisions, just like our buffoon of a president. Every time I see his face I want to puke!

  4. 𝑪★ says:

    this is also a great example of how “logical” thinking could be much more effective to put into practice vs “emotional” thinking. easier said than done though if you are not accustomed to being logic as your default… thank you for the inspiration HG!

    1. HG Tudor says:

      You are welcome and you are correct.

  5. Oops says:

    Based on that premise, I’m a narcissist when it comes to work. Maybe I have a split personality, who knows.
    If I could apply my work ethic to my relationship, I’d be better at no contact.

  6. Twilight says:

    What to do hmmmm
    Read HG Tudors book
    Now wasn’t that easy

  7. Lori says:

    Lol sneaky, but similar to what the low-level did….he moved me into a lateral position. To benefit him. Except I don’t now. He screwed himself.

  8. MLA - Clarece says:

    I’m friendly with, but do not make friends with people at work if I’m to be in charge of their performance. It is not a factor in my current position in a small family owned business but was in the past when I worked for a larger law firm. My limited friendships were with lateral peers. I make that conscious choice going in like separating church and state. I could fire all four and not even have to offer to bring anyone back. I’ll give the good ones sterling recommendations. What does that make me? lol

    1. HG Tudor says:

      Someone who applies logic rather than emotional thinking in a business environment.

  9. June says:

    (cringe) Reading how you make decisions was actually pretty scary. Especially because I’m waiting for a response on a letter coming out to my brother (already gave it to him); it’s kind of terrifying to imagine his thoughts on whether or not to screw me over being ANYTHING like this. And “kind of” terrifying is a major understatement.

    I’m just trying to to calm my nerves by picturing a very young version of him stuffing Halloween candy into his mouth…us playing pretend and laughing until one of us had to run to the bathroom…exchanging looks after running out of the basement because our father had flew into a rage over nothing AGAIN.

    He he…I think I’ll picture him at his 1st birthday. He stuck his face into his chocolate cake and started licking it up. 😀 It’s perfect. Nobody can be scared of someone who stuck their face in a cake. It’s the very antithesis of intimidating. 😀

    Wow. Looking at that…when, exactly, did it come to the point where I actually became afraid of the person who used to be the person I was closest to in the world?

  10. 12345 says:

    HG, to me, this doesn’t sound mean or cruel. It sounds like strategy except for when you bring in the fuel piece.

    From a corporate standpoint, firing all four does mean that you can overload others in the company for less than the other four were making upon hiring (which happens every single day all over the world) thus allowing executive management to receive larger bonuses and get you a big fat pat on the back for doing so.

    Corporations like to refer to it as having a “lean” company which is bullshit. It just means you do more work for less pay. There is the issue of the four filing for unemployment but that would only be for a short time because that will not pay their bills.

    Firing all four would also allow you to have fresh, enthusiastic new employees. If you only fired two then the remaining two might bring moral down by talking shit about you. This would flow onto all the other employees eventually. Some would resent you and some wouldn’t.

    All the fuel is just a residual benefit. But you are absolutely right. I would leave all these decisions to the people I refer to as being heartless money grabbers. However, I do wonder where this world would be if we didn’t have people who make those seemingly heartless decisions every day.

    I think outside of the corporate world is where it really matters. You fire your girlfriends all the time. That’s probably not the best place to think strategically and corporately.

  11. Bliss says:

    Whoa, are you sure you’re not the narcpath I was with…? I guess all narcs think alike and seldom differ.

    1. HG Tudor says:

      I can state with total confidence I am not the narcpath you were with.

      1. Bliss says:

        That’s what he would’ve said. Gas lighting and all, followed by swift devaluation in my state of confusion then a brief respite with charm. Over and over. No wonder I’m screwed up. Evil swine!

Vent Your Spleen! (Please see the Rules in Formal Info)

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Previous article

Infatuation

Next article

Spoiler Alert