Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM


Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.


Competent Jerk VS

No description

Nazlican Yoney

on 17 March 2015

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Competent Jerk VS

"Competent Jerk VS.

I. What is idea behind? Intro to the Research - Nazliı
According to HBR article by Casciaro & Lobo,
"When people need help getting a job done,
they'll choose a congenial colleague over a more capable one. "

IV.Work on the Jerk & Conclusion - Berkay
III. Leverage the Likable - Büşra
II. Likability bias & Manufacture Liking - Chitrali
"How do you ensure that
relevant information
gets transferred between
two parts of an organization
that have different culture?"
"How do you encourage people from units competing for scarce corporate resources to work together?"
"How do you see to it that the value of a cross-functional team is more, not less, than the sum of its parts?"
shapes Employees choices to work with.
"Informal networks"
Not competence of colleagues
How we choose work partner?
Why do choose to work with "person x"
ınstead of "person of y"
the prestige of being
associated with
a "star performer"
the hope that
spending time with
a "strategic" superior
2 main reasons to choose Person X to work with:
1. Competence at the job
"Does Nazli knows what she's doing?"
2. Likabılıty
"Is Nazli enjoyable to work with?"
1. the Competent Jerk
who knows a lot,
but unpleasant to deal with
2. the Lovable Fool
who does not know much,
but delight to have around
3. the Lovable Star
both smart & likable
4. the Incompetent Jerk
obvious enough!
(mostly avoided)
(mildly wanted)
(desperately wanted)
(desperayely avoided)
"Whom would you choose?"
If you were faced with the need to accomplish a task at work,
what sort of person would you pick to help you?
Good vs. Liked
3 kinds of measures:
* Likability
*work-related interaction.
"If I like you,
I'm more likely to rate you as
If we've worked together in the past,
I will tend to like you better.
* If someone is strongly disliked, it almost irrelevant whether or not she is competent; people will not work with her anyway.
By Contrast,
If someone is liked, his colleagues will seek out every little bit of he has to offer.
Is choosing 'the lovable fool' over 'the competent jerk' unprofessional?
Not always!
Justifiable Reasons to avoıd jerk!
not only dealing with his patronizing, snobbish attitude
deny jerk the satisfaction of lording his knowledge.
With a likeable person
Humble Brainstorming,
detailed explanations,
follow - up questions,
do not afraid to be vulnerable to "learn".
10,000 work relations
Work with the Jerk
COMpetent jerks
Lose of opportunities to the company
Most of their expertise goes untapped
Colleagues donot want to be bothered by them
Aggresive coaching stance in order to keep the Jerk in the company
Best performance from competent jerks when they are working independently
So, As a Manager
What can you do with such people?
The Rainmaker is an extremely talented producer of opportunities
But his qualities also caused alienation among his colleagues
Violates the company culture
Reassess theır contrıbutıon
So when the promotion time came for the managing director position, bank denies him
Improved behaviour from the Jerk
Lead to a promotion next year
Position him/her in a independent position but;
Access to his/her expertise is limited
Possibility to leave the company
Likability Bias & Managing tradeoffs
Likability Bias
* Likability is more a relative phenomenon.
* Rarely a person is liked
Likability Bias
We tend to like people
* Who are similar to us
Ever heard the phrase

"Birds of a feather flock together?"
* Who we are familiar with
* Who have positive feelings about us
We may also like people who are attractive
in appearance & personality.
* Smooth and quick flow of projects

* Produce a virtuous circle

* Know what to expect
* Liberal access to intellectual resources
and free flow of idea..
* Limited range of perspectives

* Loss of efficiency
* Dampens debates
Managing tradeoffs
A three pronged approach

* Manufacture liking
* Leverage the likable
* Work on the jerk
Manufacture Liking
How to foster positive feelings
toward one other?

*Promote familiarity
*Redefine similarity
*Foster bonding
Promote familiarity
* The mere-exposure effect
* Regular exposure to someone
increases comfort & pleasure of interaction
- Redesign office spaces
- ‘Peer assists’
Redefine similarity
Super-imposition of shared identity

Overrides natural differences

Increased cross-functional cooperation
Foster bonding
* Differences can be more deep-rooted than merely superficial
leverage the likable
* Need measures beyond office re-designs and cocktail parties..
Robbers Cave Experiment
Psychological experiment conducted 40 years ago by Muzafir Sherif

*What should managers do to make effective use of people- fools or otherwise- who are likable
*They can be the bridge between diverse groups simply because they are likable
* Likable people can be competent- Lovable star
* Because of the time they spend on relationships with peer, they might be slightly behind in terms of job performance
*Managers can do several things to get most out of such people!
Identify them
Protect them
*The best way to capitalize on likable people's personal qualities is to have them play the role of "affective hub"
*Attentive managers know if they have someone who could play or already playing "affective hub" role.
*But, they aren't aware of the importance of emotional dimension they bring.
*Employee in IT Department
Dealing with breakdowns of technical infrastructure
* Although she is less technical, she was the coral reef barrier between angry people's complaints and problem-solver geeks.
Position them strategically
*Even if affective hubs are known and considered valuable, sometimes their value seem less important than other qualitative ones
*He is the one that know everybody, liked by everybody and everybody happy to do him a favor.
*But, even being in this position doesn't save him from being one of the first to go in a round of downsizing
*You don't want to waste their talent
*They should be put in positions where they link other parts which normally would resist to be linked.
If contributions valueable
Try to transform him into a tolerated star but still
Improved behaviour of Competent Jerks is important because;
Work environments that people like each other are appreciated
By using likeable people as affective hubs
By improving the behaviour of competent jerks
Foster bonding through outward-bound style
off-site experiences
Thank you!
Any questions?
Full transcript