I can live with lots of folks stuff showing up late but not WaR!

I have to say, one hypothetical comment made me check the date on something not really written by someone posing as me. Whew!

Now back to slagging Coyle and Hillman on my own time.

Oh, and I agree with everyone. This is a highly complex topic with a line that completely disappears as one approaches it.

Thanks for the great discussion!!

I will say that: “My name is my own and I don’t believe it should reflect upon my employer at all” is, as I said in the original post, not really completely possible–and I don’t think it ever has been. If a schoolteacher in a small town was catting around with the head pharmacist at the town drug store, on their own time, and wasn’t pretty discreet about it, you could bet that the school and the drugstore would both get involved to some degree. Maybe the internet has made “small-town connectedness” much more widespread and peculiar, but the principles are the same.

Maybe this shouldn’t be true. Maybe work and personal life should be entirely separate. But I don’t think they ever really have been, and I don’t think that’s likely to change. In most cases, all you need is a modicum of common sense. (A working “internal censor” might be nice, but I’ve never been very strong on that account, so…)

Jennifer–Just for fun, I reviewed the past month or so of Life as I Know It. There are things there I might disagree with (as you’d expect). I’ve seen nothing that I could imagine would have the potential for causing you trouble in a work situation (OK, I have a lousy imagination, but)… You don’t beat up on people; you do discuss ideas, honestly and articulately. You don’t write in a way that would appear that you’re indirectly speaking on your employer’s behalf–and you don’t tell secrets about your employer or coworkers.

We should be able to discuss ideas forcefully, honestly, openly, with no fear of reprisal. Some of us may avoid certain topics because there’s no good way to prevent the assumption that we are, somehow, speaking on our employer’s behalf, but that’s pretty rare for most people in libraryland.

The odd thing is that this is all about fringe cases; based on my liblog, list, and traditional-media reading, I’d say between 95% and 99% of discussions don’t cross any lines you might care to draw.

This conversation is fascinating and gets to the heart of many of my own worries about engaging in public debates. My name is my own and I don’t believe it should reflect upon my employer at all. It is very scary to think that it could, but that is the reality of life in the age of the internet.

As a consumer, I don’t often see the connection between the jerk and the employer, unless it’s something really heinous (eg. fraud) and/or I wasn’t really happy with the firm in the first place. Taking the “how could a company actually hire this jerk” line seems unnecessarily judgmental in my view, especially if I like the product/service the employer is selling me.

Going to an employer for merely jerky behavior ought to get a quick “thank you and we will look into this matter” (meaning “get a life”). This, of course, would depend on a few things though — is this person a public representative? Did the jerkiness include some level of abuse or harassment? Fraud? Indecency?

And then you have cases like Donald Trump and Simon Cowell whose jerkiness is a part of their employment.

There are alot of really competent jerks out there. Studies show that people are apt to prefer the incompetent “nice folks” over the competent jerks and that this preference is usually a mistake on the employer’s part from a GTD point of view. It’s hard to say, but quick, efficient and effective service with a scowl is better in my view than slow, inaccurate and otherwise crappy service with a smile.

Then I found blogging. It was a place to say meaningful things in writing. And, not surprisingly, what I found most meaningful was never far from my vocation of choice.

What we say has consquences: does that mean be quiet? I’m a bit of a moral coward where my (future) income is concerned. I’m often (always?) uneasy when I put words in public print. Public. I think, more than “in the workplace”/’outside theworkplace” its that publc character that is at the heart of the issue.

Maybe?

I’m really saying “This is the way I believe I should behave, even if I don’t always live up to it.” I guess I’m also saying “This is one reasonable way to behave.”

I am not saying “This is the only reasonable way to behave” or “This is how everyone should behave.”

I’m observing, not setting myself up as a guru.