I find articles and interviews with executives, and just plain folks, about what drives them fascinating. They’re always so upbeat, civil—and sanitized. It’s as if our culture will only accept positive motivators for accomplishment, whereas motivators with a negative connotation are left unsaid, although they are easily discerned. I know from years of conversations with people at all levels that revenge drives many of them.

So it was great fun to read the Business Week article Sweet Revenge that really spelled this out. As Kenneth N. Siegel, a Los Angeles psychologist and coach to senior executives, says, “It’s one of the great undiscussable…”

Our society acts is if doing something to prove to someone that you can is considered OK, whereas doing it to get even for their saying that you couldn’t do it makes you not quite nice.

Bunk.

If constructive criticism is acceptable, then constructive revenge is also, but it must be constructive. Boards and bosses can’t stand idly by while knives fly and, metaphorically speaking, people die.

The difference between constructive revenge and destructive revenge is implicit in the two adjectives—the former builds and the latter tears down.

For six thumbnails, starting in 1853, of the positive results of revenge check out A Brief History Of Corporate Revenge and of course, the story of Mickey Drexler is absolutely classic.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, January 17th, 2007 at 3:04 pm and is filed under Business info, Culture, Leadership. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.