Why having a massive public row with your boss rarely ends well
Analysis: The spat between Donald Trump and Elon Musk is a vivid example of how a massive blowup with your boss can be destructive and dangerous
The increasingly bitter spat between Donald Trump and Elon Musk has dominated the news cycle of late. Until a few days ago, they presented the appearance of being best buddies, but Musk's criticism of the "Big Beautiful Bill" that Trump is trying to get through Congress (which would enact tax cuts, cuts social funding, increase defense spending and lead to a substantial increase in America's already massive deficit) led to a serious breach between these two self-styled titans.
Trump and Musk are now trading insults on their respective social media platforms (X and Truth Social), with Musk claiming that Trump would not have won the election without his help and Trump musing that it might be time to cancel Musk's many contracts with the US government. This has quickly degenerated into the type of brawl usually seen in the schoolyard, and pundits are having a field day.
From RTE Radio 1's Brendan O'Connor Show, former journalist Mark Little on why he's backing Elon Musk in his schoolyard brawl with Donald Trump
Beneath the childishness of their feud, there are serious issues. It is certainly an expensive fight for Trump and Musk, with Tesla stock losing over $150 billion and the Trump crypto coin $Trump losing over $100 million in value over the last few days. It is also a vivid example of one of the most destructive and dangerous events that can happen in an organisation: a massive blowup at your boss. These rarely turn out well.
There are usually two scenarios that lead to this blowup with your boss. First is the case where you are completely in the wrong and probably in very hot water. For example, you make a mistake, your boss appropriately calls you out and you tell your boss to go soak his or her head (or something considerably more colorful). There is little to do here but hope that your boss is generous and forgiving.
From RTÉ Brainstorm, my boss is a psychopath: why bad people get good jobs
The second, and much more difficult situation, is where a blowup with your boss is the result of his or her unreasonable behavior. In a paper in Harvard Business Review, Annie McKee notes that many bosses lack the emotional stability to monitor and control their behavior.
These bosses can be abusive, and they can make their subordinates' lives miserable by yelling, displaying hostility toward their subordinates, insulting and denigrating them or simply sabotaging their work by withholding information resources needed to perform their jobs. These are the bosses who are most likely to provoke a blowup - and also the bosses least likely to forgive and forget.
Blowing up at an abusive boss can be dangerous in many ways. McKee suggests that the most important thing to do in this case is to protect yourself. If your boss is so abusive that you often feel on the verge or blowing up at him or her, it is a good bet that the culture of the business tolerates abuse, in part because the organisation is strictly hierarchical. This means that the presumption will often be that the boss is always right, and that no matter what the boss does, subordinates have no right to challenge it.
From RTE Radio 1's Brendan O'Connor Show, how to deal with a toxic boss
In this case, protecting yourself might start with developing a strategy for dealing with the fallout of a blowup. Do you have powerful allies? Do you have a realistic exit strategy? If the answer to both these questions is no, you must do whatever you can to avoid a blowup.
A strategy for dealing with the physical and emotional toll of an abusive boss is every bit as important as developing an exit strategy. The targets of abusive supervision experience a range of negative effects, including elevated blood pressure, depressed immune systems, anxiety and depression.
Unfortunately, many employees respond to abusive supervision by suffering in silence or by retaliation, and neither of these is a very effective response. Suffer in silence and it is likely that the physical and psychological effects of stress will accumulate. Retaliate by blowing up at your boss and you will probably be out on the street in short order.
From RTÉ Radio 1's The Business, is being bold a good thing for the workplace?
There are productive ways of dealing with an absuive boss than hitting them over the head with something heavy. You should document the situation and events, manage the way you perform your job to minimise contact with and conflicts with the abusive supervisor and diagnose the likely causes of abusive supervision.
McKee suggests that you start with self-awareness and situational awareness. Are there things that you do or situations in the organization that contribute to your boss's behavior? Even if you cannot make large changes in the organization, having a better understanding of why your boss acts the way he or she does can help in managing the stress of dealing with an abusive boss.
Reacting to a bad boss is always difficult (even if it is sometimes hard to tell who is the bad boss as in the Trump-Musk feud), but there is one thing we know with confidence from the research on abusive supervision. The thing that might be most satisfying at the moment – blowing up at your boss – is a very bad idea.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Times
an hour ago
- Irish Times
US-Iran: Unclear what comes next after Donald Trump's riskiest foreign policy action as president
The news broke on Saturday evening as a sweltering heat belt settled across the central and eastern sections of the United States . A bombing strike had been launched on Iranian nuclear bunkers. US president Donald Trump would address the nation at ten o'clock that evening. Only a few days earlier, on Wednesday, Trump had been puckish about his intentions towards Iran. 'I may do. I may not do knows what I am going to do.' Now, the world knew. When he spoke, flanked by vice-president JD Vance, secretary of state Marco Rubio and defence secretary Pete Hegseth, it was in the knowledge that militarily, the immaculately planned bombing raid on the three key Iranian nuclear targets in Natanz, Isfahan and the most critical target in Fordow had been a glittering success. Trump, with his customary gusto, announced Iran's nuclear capabilities had been 'obliterated'. The action ended the will-he-won't-he question mark over a president who had campaigned vociferously last year on a platform which would end the Russia-Ukraine conflict and restore peace in the Middle East. READ MORE Instead, after opening his second term by issuing vague threats to claim Greenland and seeking to re-order global trade patterns with on-again-off-again tariff sections, Trump move decisively against Iran with a series of strikes. His administration insists those actions can usher in a new set of parameters through which White House negotiators can broker peace. But even as Secretary Hegseth emphasised the military accomplishment of the Midnight Hammer operation, which was the largest B2 spirit bomber and the second longest B2 mission ever flown, the mission raised a blizzard of new questions. The most obvious revolves around the uncertainty over how Iran, and the 86-year old Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, will respond to the US act of aggression , which complements the recent series of Israeli attacks that killed key Iranian generals and nuclear scientists. The US has warned Iran against retaliatory attacks on its bases in the region, with general Dan Caine, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, warning that a counter-attack, or proxy attacks, would represent 'an incredibly poor choice' of response on the part of Iran. Convincing Trump to withdraw from a deal was a diplomatic victory for Israel's prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu Within hours, the domestic response to the attacks was sharply divided along political lines. Republican lawmakers, with the conspicuous exception of Kentucky's Thomas Massie, uniformly praised the decisiveness and success of the operation. Democratic representatives emphasised that the depth of damage caused by the strikes had yet to be fully determined and warned that the decision greatly escalates the risk. Connecticut representative Jim Himes, the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee, stated on Sunday that Trump 'has just taken an enormous, enormous gamble. And if history matters – Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq, gambles in the Middle East very rarely go the way you expect or even hope they might go.' Perhaps the clearest indication of Trump's intentions were contained within his public rebuke days ago of Tulsi Gabbard, his director of national intelligence, when he flatly declared 'she's wrong' in relation to her March testimony that Iran was not in the process of building a nuclear weapon. [ US-Iran: Nobody, including Trump, knows what will happen next Opens in new window ] On Friday, Gabbard contradicted her position in response to Trump's criticism, stating on social media: 'America has intelligence that Iran is at the point that it can produce a nuclear weapon within weeks to months.' The strikes draw renewed attention to Trump's decision, in 2018, to withdraw from the nuclear agreement the US had entered into with Iran during president Barack Obama's administration in 2015. Convincing Trump to withdraw from a deal was a diplomatic victory for Israel's prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu, who has spent decades issuing warnings to the effect that Iran is on the cusp of nuclear capability. The Israeli leader was arguably the one person more exultant about the US intervention on Saturday night. Sceptics noted that for a full year afterwards, Iran remained in compliance with the terms of that shredded agreement. In 2020, Trump approved what was the boldest military action of his first term in office: the targeted assassination of Qasem Soleimani, the prominent military leader. That provocation drew a limited Iranian response, with missile launches at Iraqi bases where US forces were stationed. It remains to be seen how it will respond to what stands as Trump's boldest and riskiest foreign policy action as president.
The Irish Sun
an hour ago
- The Irish Sun
Incredible satellite pics show the aftermath of ‘devastating' strikes on Iranian nuclear bases after massive US blitz
ASTONISHING satellite pictures have emerged of the aftermath of the US's "devastating" strikes on Iranian nuclear bases. 11 A new series of satellite images has revealed the precision of the US attacks on Iran's primary nuclear facility Credit: maxar technologies 11 Two clusters of six craters show where the bombs were dropped Credit: maxar technologies 11 The Isfahan nuclear technology in Iran before U.S. strikes Credit: AP 11 Six B-2 stealth bombers descended over Iran Bunker buster bombs were Also hit were the nuclear plants at Natanz and Isfahan, which Israel had already targeted with its own missiles. US submarines also launched around 30 Tomahawk missiles in a coordinated air-and-sea operation. Trump declared that the Fordow plant is now "gone" and all the night's targets were "obliterated". Read more on World Satellite imagery of the Two clusters of at least six holes are seen at the Fordow nuclear site, where the massive 30,000-pound bunker buster bombs were dropped. Bombs of this kind are believed to be able to penetrate about 200 feet below the surface before exploding. Following the bombing, Sir Keir Starmer reinstated his commitment to making Iran nuke-free. Most read in The US Sun He, along with French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, released a joint statement following the US bombings on Iran. It read: "We have discussed the latest developments in the Middle East earlier today. We reiterate our commitment to peace and stability for all countries in the region. We affirm our support for the security of Israel. "We have consistently been clear that Iran can never have a nuclear weapon and can no longer pose a threat to regional security. "Earlier today, the United States conducted targeted military strikes against nuclear facilities in Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan. Our aim continues to be to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. "We call upon Iran to engage in negotiations leading to an agreement that addresses all concerns associated with its nuclear program. We stand ready to contribute to that goal in coordination with all parties. "We urge Iran not to take any further action that could destabilise the region. We will continue our joint diplomatic efforts to defuse tensions and ensure the conflict does not intensify and spread further." US Defence Secretary Pete Hegseth said He added Trump has been clear that "any Hegseth said: 'Iran would be smart to heed those words. He's said it before, and he means it.' The Defence Secretary went on to praise the US leader, calling it "bold and brilliant, showing the world that American deterrence is back". He urged: "When this President speaks, the world should listen." US warns it WILL strike again and world 'should listen to Trump' Iran's foreign minister Abbas Arghchi has said he is going to Russia today to meet mad leader Putin. He revealed: 'I'm going to Moscow this afternoon, and I have a meeting with President Putin tomorrow morning.' Arghchi called Moscow a 'friend of Iran,' adding 'we always consult with each other'. Fears loom that the conflict could spiral into a world war, with Putin puppet Dmitry Medvedev making a veiled threat to supply Iran with nuclear weapons. He said: "A number of countries are ready to directly supply Iran with their nuclear weapons." After declaring the He said in a nationally televised speech at the White House: " "There will be 11 A closer satellite view shows holes and craters on a ridge at Fordow underground Credit: Reuters 11 President Donald Trump speaks from the East Room of the White House in Washington after the strikes 11 Trump addressed the world after announcing the strikes 'Remember there are many targets left. Tonight's was the most difficult of them all, by far, and perhaps the most lethal. 'But if 'Most of them can be taken out in a matter of minutes. There's no military in the world that could have done what we did tonight." And shortly after speaking on-camera, he posted to Truth Social: "This cannot continue. There will be either peace or there will be tragedy for Iran far greater than we have witnessed over the last eight days. "Remember, "But if peace does not come quickly we will go after those other targets with precision, speed and skill." Meanwhile Iran's foreign minister Abbas Arghchi dubbed the strikes "outrageous and will have everlasting consequences". He also called the military action "a grave violation of the UN Charter, international law and the NPT by attacking Iran's peaceful nuclear installations". 11 Imagery shows where the bombs likely entered before pummelling Credit: maxar technologies 11 The Isfahan nuclear technology center in Iran after U.S. bombardment Credit: AP 11 Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant in Iran before the US blitz 11
The Journal
5 hours ago
- The Journal
US bombs caused 'extremely severe damage and destruction' to three Iranian nuclear sites
THE EXTENT OF the damage caused to the three Iranian nuclear sites by US bombs, which were dropped on the locations overnight, has yet to be fully determined , according to US military command. During a press conference at the Pentagon in the US today, the chairman of the US military chiefs Dan Caine said the army is confident that 'extremely severe damage and destruction' was caused. At the same event, US defence minister Pete Hegseth confirmed that the Trump Administration did not inform Congress, the houses of parliament, before it bombed the three nuclear enrichment facilities in Iran. Advertisement The shock-announcement by US President Donald Trump that the US had launched strikes on Iran came just two days after the Republican had given a two-week deadline for Iran to engage in nuclear peace negotiations. Hegseth and Caine detailed the operation, named Midnight Hammer. Caine said that the mission was contained and that the US Army bombers had not been spotted by the Iranian military throughout the mission. He added that the entirety of the mission maintained an element of surprise. 'I know that battle damage is of great interest. Final battle damage will take some time, but initial battle damage assessments indicate that all three sites sustained extremely severe damage and destruction,' Caine said. More than 125 US aircraft participated in the operation, he said, in which fourteen 30,000-pound bombs were dropped on the locations across Iran. Related Reads Ireland's reaction to the US bombing Iran: 'There is an urgent need for de-escalation' No signs of radioactive contamination after US attack on Iran, says nuclear watchdog Hegseth said: 'The President authorised a precision operation to neutralise the threats to our national interests, posed by the Iranian nuclear programme and the collective self-defence of our troops and our ally Israel.' Fielding questions from reporters, Hegseth was asked about the criticism of the Trump administration for not informing elected officials of its plan to carry out Midnight Hammer. He said: '[Congress] were notified after the planes were safely out when we complied with the notification requirements of the War Powers Act, they were notified. They were [informed] immediately thereafter.' The US War Powers Act requires the president to notify elected officials within 48 hours of assigning armed forces to military action. The administration ascertains its position that it notified Congress within the time frame of the law. Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone... A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article. Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation. Learn More Support The Journal
