RULES OF ENGAGEMENT
KERSTEN
THE THREAT OF
THREATENED EGOTISM
Millennials bring many positive qualities—but at what cost?
ecent years have seen
a great deal written
ahout the new genera-
tion of workers who
are entering the lahor
force, frequently re-
ferred to as millennials.
.\nalysts tend to agree that this generation
is going lo have a profound impact on the
world of work, partly because of its size -
which some estimate to he ahout the same
as that of hahy hoomers — and partly due
to the expe<itations and assumptions that
millenniab hring to the workplace. Their
defining characteristic is an unapologetic
sense of entitlement Miltenniats were the
centers of attention in their homes, and
a great deal of their family lives revolved
around helping them pursue their various
interests. Ilieir parents worked hard to
huild their self-esteem hy encouraging
them, mentoring them, and making them
helieve that they were special.
Millennials were also taught to challenge
E. L KERSTEN i& co-bunder and COO of Despair
Inc. and author of The Art of Demotivatiort: A Vision-
ary Guide tor Transforming Your Company's Least
Valuable Asset- Your Employees.
7 0 THE CONFERENCE BOARD REVIEW • January/February 2009
BYE. L.
status and autliorJty — hut to forgo the gra-
tuitous reheUion of their hoomer parents.
.^s a result, miilennials hring to the work-
place a great deal of optimism and amhi-
tion, comhined with a casual disregard for
hierarchy and tradition. They're willing
to work hard if they ean have a significant
identifiable impact on something they
find valuable - though lliey're not inter-
ested in spending years paying their dues
hy laboring in ohscurity just because that's
what others who came hefore them had
to do.
It should come as no surprise that peo-
ple respond to millennials in dramatically
different ways. Plenty of executives and re-
cruiters are appalled hy this new genera-
tion's presumptuousness. Others are more
optimistic, seeing millennials a.s a \'ibrant
confident force that is going to shake things
up and change the way we think ahout life
and work. Nevertheless, even the most san-
guine concede Uiat millennials are often
ill-prepared for business challenges, Tlieir
parents have taken care of them their en-
tire lives. They've lived in a world that has
been largely accommodating and affirming.
As a result they have not developed the
social and psychological skills necessary to
thrive in a less supportive environment —
specifically, one that threatens their sense
of entitlement. This has the potential to
he a serious prohlem, not just for millenni-
als hut for their co-workers and thrir man-
agers as well.
Looking to explain a great many social
and psychological maladies - ranging from
interpersonal violence to stihstance abtise
to suicide — many experts point to low self-
esteem. But some of llie beat research on
seLf-esteem over the last two decade.« re-
futes that asstmiption, instead hiaming a
state of "threatened egotism" for many psy-
chological and interpersonal pathologies.
Threatened egotism occurs when people
or events undermine an individual's high
hut unstahle self-esteem. It doesn't affect
those with a stähle self-esteem, since exter-
nal threats are unlikely to faze such people.
.And those with a low self-esteem are un-
susceptible to threatened egotism because
external threats siuiply reinforce tdready
low self-perceptions.
Millennials, then, are especially vulnera-
ble to threatened egotism, hecauee their
inliated self-perceptions are generally
grounded in an affirming and supportive
social environment rather ihan Íii real-
world achievement As a result, millennials
are likely to possess a host of interpersonal
pathologies and behavioral maladaptations
tbat have been linked to threatened ego-
tism, four of wbic^h am especially salient
to the workplace:
Violence and ineivility. Research has
consistently shown a linear relationsliip
hetween threatened egotism and interper-
sonal violence. The higher the level of un-
stahle self-esteem, the greater the likeli-
hood the individual will choose aggression

1
in Üic íkir.c ut dii ego ÜireaU Millenriials
entering the workforce, therefore, may be
one explanation for why most people he-
lieve that incivility is on the rise and get-
ting worse. Moreover, such hehaviar is
costly, u s e ' s Christine Porath and Thun-
derhird School of Glohal Management's
Christine Pearson found that an executive
spends as iniRh as 13 pertenl uf his lime
resolving conflicts among employees. Mean-
while. Vie P>lo A.sshole Rule: Building a
Civilized Workplace and Surviving One
Tliat Isn't by Stanford University's Robert
Sutton provides a stunning array of exam-
ples, both crude and subtle, of how people
are aggressive witli each other at work.
Certainly, a little old-fashioned humility
would be a weleome relief.
Revenge at a cost to self. In many sitii-
dtiuns, people are willing to forgo arts of
revenge when they feel sueh aedons aren't
worth the potential costs to themselves.
'ITiose susceptible to threatened egotism.
however, arc willing to exact revenge any-
way. For example, a baeeball pitcher may
consistently pitch the hall on the inside to
force the hatter to step out of the batter's
hox. "Die batter and his teammates will
generally endure the intimidation as part of
tlie game, knowing that, if they respond an-
grily, they would incur fines and penalties.
Occasionally, though, the pitcher will throw
MANY PEOPLE
PURPOSEFULLY
BEHAVE IN WAYS
THAT OBJEaiVELY
INCREASE THEIR
LIKELIHOOO OF
FAILURE.
a pitch that is interpreted as being espe-
cially provocative and disrespectful — i.e,,
a threat to the egos of the batter and his
teammates. In that case, it's not uncommon
to see the entire team pour onto the field,
where a brawl ensues. Thus, in the face of
threatpned egotism, the team is willing to
suffer loss to exact revenge.
Self-handieapping, It may seem counter-
intuitive, but many people purposefully be-
have in ways that objectively increase their
likelihood of failure. I'or example, employ-
ees may forgo working on an important
project by wasting time on less important
tasks. From a threatened-egotism perspec-
tive, they do this because they are simulta-
neously defending their egos against the
impIirationH of a possible failure and laying
the groundwitrk tor an ego boost in the
event of a highly improbable succeea. By
www.-lcbreview.com • THE CONFERENCE BOARD REVIEW 7 1
not investing the appropriate time on the
project hecause they were "too busy" with
otlier tasks, tbey provide for themselves
a ready-made excuse. In such a case, it
renders an assessment of tbeir competence
ambiguous. After all, it's possible they
would have done really well if thtry only
had more time to work on the project. In
contrast, if tbey had spent all of the requi-
site lime working on the project an<l slill
pertornieH poorly, tbat would [)rovide a
stronger case that tlieir failure was due to
incompetence rather than an external, un-
controllahle variable. By the same token,
if they perform well, even after they were
presumably too busy to work on tbe proj-
et t. tliaf suggests that ibey are highly
ronipelenl.
Destructive persistence. Obviously, per-
sistence in the face of diflîeulties and set-
backs is an important contributor to even-
tual success, hut it's also important to know
when to throw in the towel. When egos in-
fluence a decision, people are more likely
to persist in the face of challenges, 'Diis
dynamic is amplified when they make the
decision in the face of overwhf Iming dis-
sent, controversy, or criticism from others -
which may lead to a case of destructive
persistence. To follow the advice of others
would be admitting failure. A good example
of this oecurred when French securities
trader Jerome Kerviel - himself an early-
stage millennia] - lost €4.9 billion at
Société Générale in early 2008. ;\fter be
lost on bis first big trade, be covered his
tracks and placed even bigger trades hf-
cause be thought he could earn hack the
money be had lost. His trading spun out
of control until he was eventually catight.
His response was another good example
of threatened egotism: Rather than accept
responsibility for losing billions of dollars,
be blamed bis employer for having insuffi-
cient oversight.
Despite ihese and other problems that
millennials may bring, there is still good
reagon to be excited by tbeir drive and dy-
namism — but we sbould be clear that their
positive attributes carry a cost •