You want to start a business. So you need a plan, right? No. Not really.

As part of the research for a book I’m co-authoring — Heart, Smarts, Guts, and Luck, due out in August from HBR Press — my colleagues and I interviewed and surveyed hundreds of successful entrepreneurs around the globe to better understand what it takes to be an entrepreneur and build a really great business. One of our most striking findings was that of the entrepreneurs we surveyed who had a successful exit (that is, an IPO or sale to another firm), about 70% did NOT start with a business plan.

Instead, their business journeys originated in a different place, a place we call the Heart. They were conceived not with a document but with a feeling and doing for an authentic vision. Clarity of purpose and passion ruled the day with less time spent writing about an idea and more time spent just doing it.

It’s not that all planning is bad. It’s that efforts to write the “perfect” business plan usually lead to being precisely incorrect rather than approximately correct. One problem is that the content that most people focus on in business plans has little to do with the reality that will actually emerge. Many start-up plans emphasize some gigantic potential market and how getting just the smallest sliver of it will make them and investors rich. A colleague of mine offers the hypothetical example of selling a bar of soap for a dollar every month to just 0.5% percent of the people in China. It’s nearly a $100M business! Good luck making it happen, though.

At a business’s inception, resources are limited, and the best content for a business plan is real-world data based on testing aspects of the concept. These experiments need not be complex. You want simple, iterative tests that are easily measurable and let you know whether you are winning or not.

It’s not just start-ups. The strategic architecture of any business should incorporate facts from real world testing to allow one to adjust course as necessary. This is what Henry Mintzberg, a seminal figure in competitive strategy theory, once described as “emergent” or “evolutionary” strategy. My business partner Mats Lederhausen (formerly global head of strategy for McDonald’s as well as former Executive Chairman of Chipotle) has his own saying for it: think big, start small, then scale or fail fast.

So don’t worry too much about a business plan. But to guide your thinking, improve a pitch to prospective investors, or better align your teams, consider these design points:

1. Identify and clearly articulate your Heart and purpose. Whether you want to call it vision, Heart, purpose or calling, be very clear on the why of a business — the bigger goal at hand.

2. The team is more important than any idea or plan. The top three priorities should be people, followed by people, and then people.

3. Think big, start small, then scale or fail fast. Per Lederhausen’s advice, set the right first “start small” milestone; it will usually involve seeing people’s willingness to buy or at least try your product.

4. Focus on a well-defined market sub-segment or niche. At least to start, think of where you can potentially be the best. This strategy is almost always more successful than being just another player in a massive market.

5. Understand your business model. How you will make money is more important than pages of Excel showing financials that are simply too hard to predict at this early stage anyway. Understand instead the basic way you will make money – is it through transactions, advertising, subscriptions, etc?

There appears to be a perennial market for how-to classes, books, and templates that promise almost “color by number” instructions for populating business plans. While aspects of those tools are helpful for a structured approach, they are more likely to mislead because of their emphasis on completing the plan of a business before uncovering its soul and demonstrating whether others connect with it. People feel a sense of accomplishment upon completing their plan, but what does that plan really get them? Filling worksheets can never replace zeroing in on the passion and purpose of your business. That Heart has to be there day one. The most researched business plan holds little value without a genuine Heart behind the idea and the Guts to just get it going.

Yahoo

Yahoo Inc. said in May 2012 that its new chief executive, Scott Thompson, didn’t earn a degree in computer science as stated in a recent securities filing, citing an “inadvertent error” without providing further explanation. The admission came after an activist shareholder, hedge fund Third Point LLC, pointed out the discrepancy. Yahoo’s website stated Mr. Thompson had received a bachelor’s degree in accounting and computer science from Stonehill College. Yahoo later said Mr. Thompson received a bachelor of science degree in business administration with a major in accounting from Stonehill. The fund, run by activist investor Daniel Loeb, called for Mr. Thompson’s immediate termination.
RadioShack

In 2006, RadioShack Corp. Chief Executive David Edmondson resigned by “mutual agreement” after he admitted inflating his educational background. Mr. Edmondson acknowledged misstating his educational credentials from Pacific Coast Baptist College in California, saying he believed he received a ThG diploma—typically a certificate with fewer requirements than a bachelor’s degree—and not a bachelor of science degree as he previously claimed. But the CEO also acknowledged he couldn’t document the ThG diploma. Mr. Edmondson said in a statement at the time: “The board and I have agreed that it is in the best interest of the company for new leadership to step forward.”

Bausch & Lomb

Eye-care company Bausch & Lomb in 2002 rescinded a bonus for CEO Ronald Zarrella after learning his biography incorrectly claimed he had an M.B.A. from New York University. “I am fully responsible for the misrepresentation in my official biography, an error that has been repeated elsewhere,” Mr. Zarrella wrote in a letter to the board, adding: “There is simply no adequate excuse for a misrepresentation of this kind, and thus I offer none.” He offered to resign; the board didn’t accept his resignation. He retired in March 2008.
Mylan

When Heather Bresch was promoted to chief operating officer in 2007, the company said she had an M.B.A. from West Virginia University. Ms. Bresch had studied at the school but hadn’t completed her degree, an independent panel later concluded. After receiving questions from the media, the university retroactively awarded Ms. Bresch an M.B.A.—which, after further contention, it moved to revoke. In an emailed statement in 2008, she said, “I continue to believe that I did what I needed to do to earn my degree. The administration allowed me to take an unconventional approach as part of what was then a program in its infancy.” Ms. Bresch is now the generic-drug maker’s chief executive.
HerbaLife

Gregory Probert, the president and chief operating officer of Herbalife Ltd., resigned in 2008 after he was caught embellishing his academic credentials by fraud investigator. Herbalife, a Los Angeles marketer of weight-loss products, had said Mr. Probert received an M.B.A. from California State University, Los Angeles. It mentioned the degree in at least 19 regulatory filings. But Mr. Probert never finished Cal State’s M.B.A. program, where he took classes in the early 1980s, the university said. Mr. Probert said he nearly completed an M.B.A. at Cal State, but “the truth is that my vanity prevailed and I did not take action” to correct Herbalife’s biography.
MGM Mirage

J. Terrence Lanni, the chairman and CEO of MGM Mirage Inc., retired from the gambling company in 2008 shortly after questions surfaced about his academic background. Mr. Lanni claimed to have an M.B.A. from the University of Southern California, but the school later said that, while he had earned a bachelor of science degree, there was no M.B.A. on record. When questioned about the discrepancy, Mr. Lanni said he had received an honorary M.B.A. from the university in 1992. USC denied the claim. Mr. Lanni said at the time that his decision to retire had nothing to do with the allegations.
CSX

In 2009, railroad operator CSX Corp. levied a “substantial financial penalty” on its chief commercial officer, Clarence Gooden, after discovering that he had misrepresented his academic background in a corporate biography. Mr. Gooden claimed he had earned a bachelor’s degree from the University of Georgia in the 1970s. As he later admitted, he attended the school for several years but never completed the degree. The executive released a statement at the time apologizing to employees: “I want you to know that I take full responsibility and hope that you will accept my sincere apology.”
Veritas Software

In 2002, the chief financial officer of Veritas Software Corp., Kenneth E. Lonchar, resigned after directors learned he had lied about having an M.B.A. from Stanford University. A Veritas biography said Mr. Lonchar received a bachelor of arts degree in accounting from Arizona State University. A university spokeswoman had said it could find no record that he was a student there. In a written statement at the time, Mr. Lonchar said he regretted misstating his educational background. “Under the circumstances, I believe my resignation is in the best interests of both the company and myself,” he said.
Microsemi

James Peterson, the president and CEO of Microsemi Corp., an Irvine, Calif.-based semiconductor maker, kept his job but paid a $100,000 fine in 2009 and gave up his bonus that year after the company learned that he had attended classes at Brigham Young University, but was never awarded the bachelor’s and M.B.A. degrees that he had previously listed as credentials. After conducting a review, Microsemi said its board “concluded that the interests of Microsemi’s shareholders are best served by retaining Mr. Peterson while imposing appropriate financial penalties and remedial actions.” The board also adopted an ethics policy that, among other things, mandated background checks for directors and high-ranking executives. “I have respected the board’s process from the start, and I accept the results of that process,” Mr. Peterson said in a company statement at the time.

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

In 2007, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology dismissed its longtime dean of admissions, Marilee Jones, after the university received an anonymous tip that she had embellished her own credentials. She attended college for one year, as a part-time student at the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in 1974, but never received the bachelor’s or master’s degrees that she claimed from RPI. Nor did she receive a degree she claimed from Albany Medical College, the university found. In a statement released by the university, Ms. Jones said she first fudged her résumé in 1979 when she was hired in a junior position in the MIT admissions office. When she was promoted to the deanship in 1997, she “didn’t have the courage to correct my résumé,” she wrote.
R.H. Donnelley

In 2006, telephone-directory publisher R.H. Donnelley Corp. said that its chairman and chief executive never graduated from the Minnesota university he attended. David Swanson attended St. Cloud State University in Minnesota from 1973 to 1976 but didn’t earn a degree. R.H. Donnelley had twice issued news releases stating that he had. The company said the detail had never appeared in any document filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission or the New York Stock Exchange. It said Mr. Swanson didn’t claim to be a graduate of St. Cloud State when he was hired. “This is a regrettable situation for which I accept full responsibility,” said Mr. Swanson at the time.
Smith & Wesson

James Minder resigned shortly after being named chairman of gun maker Smith & Wesson Holding Corp. in 2004 when it was learned that he had spent time in prison in the 1950s and ’60s for an armed-robbery spree and an attempted prison escape. Mr. Minder confessed his past to directors after getting a call from a reporter.
U.S. Olympic Committee

Sandra Baldwin resigned in 2002 as president of the U.S. Olympic Committee after admitting she hadn’t received an undergraduate degree from the University of Colorado in 1962 and a doctorate from Arizona State in 1967. She did attend Colorado in 1958-1959 without graduating and earned a bachelor’s degree from Arizona State in 1962. She said she completed the course work for a doctorate but didn’t finish her dissertation.

University of Notre Dame

In 2001, George O’Leary resigned as Notre Dame football coach five days after being hired, admitting inaccuracies in his academic and athletic background. Mr. O’Leary claimed to have a master’s degree in education and to have played college football for three years, but checks into his background showed it wasn’t true.

Sunbeam

“Chainsaw” Al Dunlap, ousted by Sunbeam in 1998 amid allegations of accounting irregularities, was later discovered to have been terminated by Max Phillips & Son after seven weeks in 1973 and by Nitec Paper Corp. in 1976 after two years as president, according to his lawyer. The two major search firms checking his employment history never uncovered those dismissals.

Did you know that your FMBA peers have found jobs and internships with companies such as Johnson & Johnson and Endo Pharmaceuticals?  Check out just a few of the FMBA students who reported a job/internship offer!

Have you found a job or internship in 2012 and want to be included in the FMBA job/internship update?

Let the CSPD office know online! Or come in to the CSPD office to fill out the form, get your picture taken and collect a small token of our best wishes.

Interested in learning more about what the CSPD office has to offer and how to land yourself a job/internship?

Click here for our website or come into our office at 134 Alter Hall.

If you have any questions please contact the CSPD office at 215-204-2371 or foxcspd@temple.edu.

Don’t forget to follow us on Twitter, Like us on Facebook, and Join the CSPD LinkedIn Group!

To thine own self be true, the oft-quoted William Shakespeare line, is advice that MBAs should take to heart as they undertake the job hunt. That’s the conclusion of a study by two business school professors who find that candor is the best approach job seekers can take when interviewing, even though the temptation can often be strong to misrepresent oneself to appear a stronger candidate.

The professors, Daniel Cable of London Business Schooland Virginia Kay of the University’s of North Carolina, Chapel Hill’s Kenan Flagler Business School, followed a group of 146 MBA students over the span of their two-year B-school careers and shortly thereafter, trying to determine what role “self-verification”–people’s desire to have others view them as played in landing a job and their job satisfaction. The researchers collected interview feedback from admissions staff who’d interviewed the MBA students before they matriculated at the school, as well as their final grade point average. Students also were asked to fill out a survey both during their summer internship and four months following graduation that asked them to answer questions about how they perceived themselves. For example, students were asked to rate themselves on such questions as, “I like to be myself rather than trying to act like someone I’m not,” or “It’s important for an employer to see me as I see myself, even if it means bringing people to recognize my limitations.”

Those who were forthcoming about their self-image had a high level of job satisfaction, a strong commitment to their jobs, and high ratings from their supervisors, according to the study, published in the latest issue ofThe Academy of Management Journal. In addition, the authors found that business school admissions officers can do a better job predicting future academic performance of applicants who are more forthright about how they view their strengths and weaknesses.

The findings may be counterintuitive to MBA students, who often erroneously believe they need to engage in “extensive image creation” when trying to land a job, the study’s authors said. That can backfire, because if individuals cannot deliver on the skills and abilities they promise, they may find themselves in a role where they will not be able to succeed. In addition, they may alienate themselves from their co-workers, Cable and Kay suggested in the paper, titled “Striving for Self Verification during Organizational Entry.”

“Anyone who teaches in an MBA program has likely heard the litany of student complaints about the need to wear the mask, check your values, etc., when you enter the corporate jungle,” Cable said in a press release. “When we launched this research, I would have been prepared to argue that maybe it’s not so bad to be true to yourself even if it does diminish a bit your chances of landing a job. Finding that it doesn’t diminish those chances in the short term while it helps everyone in the long term is a great outcome.”

The report’s findings jibe with the advice that career services officers traditionally give MBA students. Julie Morton, associate dean of career services and corporate relations at the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, says the authors’ conclusions are “totally in line” with how they advise students beginning their job searches.

Even if students can “fake it” for the first round of interviews, they will find it harder to do so during the second and third round of interviews, when they spend a longer time interacting with people at the company where they are interviewing, Morton says.

“Our assumption is that you can be candid and professional at the same time,” Morton says. “Your professional self may not be exactly the way you interact with your family and friends, but your professional self should not be this made-up, manufactured being by any means.”

To be directed to the full article click here:http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-04-27/honesty-is-the-best-policy-for-mba-job-seekers

Obviously, serious misconduct such as discrimination and harassment can lead to a job loss. But small irritants can hurt productivity and build walls between co-workers.

Chip Wass

“Those little annoyances, like having a really sloppy work area or being a disgusting desk eater, can loom large,” says Charles Purdy, senior editor at jobs site Monster.com.

To avoid negative judgments from your co-workers, experts advise avoiding the following behaviors.

1. Sucking up to the boss

The boss’s pet who ingratiates himself at the expense of his co-workers incites negative judgments, says Meredith Haberfeld, a New York-based executive and career coach.

For example, Ms. Haberfeld consulted for a human-resources company where a junior employee pointed out his co-workers’ mistakes after errors had been made.

“He created ill will with his colleagues because he didn’t ever go to them to provide any insights while he saw the ship sinking,” Ms. Haberfeld says. “Nobody wanted to work with him.”

Trying to take work from your colleagues, or take too much credit, are also bad moves.

“These people are seen as overly self-interested and therefore untrustworthy and difficult to work with,” Ms. Haberfeld says. “At a certain point, to go further in your career you need to not just be liked by your boss, you need support from your peers and people more junior.”

2. Negativity

The occasional bit of gossip can relieve stress. Too much can make you look bad.

“Sometimes it’s fun to talk about the boss, but the person who is always complaining is widely disliked as well,” Mr. Purdy says. “Toxic negativity makes people feel like you are not a good co-worker. People associate negativity with you.”

According to a 2011 Monster.com survey, respondents reported that among their co-workers’ impolite behaviors, gossiping “ticked them off,” along with texting during meetings, being too loud and leaving a mess.

Employees also are judged when they interrupt colleagues, or ignore or discount others’ ideas, says Peter Post, author and great-grandson of etiquette expert Emily Post.

“Those are the kinds of things that people remember for a long time. You are really attacking the person and belittling them,” Mr. Post says. “They see you as a bully, and don’t want to interact with you.”

Complaining about “inappropriate” behavior that is, at worst, slightly off is also a problem. “It feels really condescending,” says Art Papas, founder of TheFit.com, a website where workers complete anonymous surveys about companies’ cultures. “Just because you’re offended that doesn’t mean you have to broadcast it.”

3. Messiness

Messiness, particularly in communal areas and shared workspaces, can breed negative judgments.

“Food that’s left to become some sort of other thing in the refrigerator is really frustrating,” says Mr. Post.

According to a recent survey from staffing and consulting firm Adecco, a majority of respondents said people are most productive when their workspace is clean, though some view messiness as a sign of being busy, and others see it as an indication of laziness.

4. Poor cubicle etiquette

In offices with few doors and lots of cubicles, etiquette with regard to odors and noise is important.

Microwaving last night’s fish dinner for lunch in your cubicle today is a no-no. And your co-workers can sense if you didn’t clean up after bicycling to the office.

But a loud talker may be the top offender. “If you need to concentrate and somebody is yapping, it can affect your work,” says Margaret Fiester, operations manager for the human-resources knowledge center at the Society for Human Resource Management.

5. Not fitting in

It’s important to fit into an office culture. That can include how you dress, and what you say.

“I was in a meeting the other day and somebody dropped the S-bomb. The third time they did it, it became unprofessional,” Mr. Papas says.

There’s also a code of conduct for email. “Maybe someone is overly brusque, or is always putting urgent or cc’ing everything,” Mr. Purdy says. “Bcc is almost always a dangerous idea.

“Transparency is important—it prevents you from seeming sneaky. If you are bcc’ing someone to get someone else in trouble, you are being the office jerk.”

Finally, you land a killer opportunity, pass the phone screen and show up to an interview with a hiring manager. Just as you think you’re about to close the deal, she spins her computer screen around and asks you to login to your Facebook account.

What do you do?

This is common enough that it now has a name: Shoulder Surfing. According to Lori Andrews, a law professor at IIT Chicago-Kent College of Law specializing in Internet privacy, this practice is “coercion if you need a job”. Not to mention the violation in Facebook’s privacy policy, albeit unenforceable.

Facebook’s official statement is that shoulder surfing “undermines the privacy expectations and the security of both the user and the user’s friends” and “potentially exposes the employer who seeks this access to unanticipated legal liability.”

The ruling, made by the FTC in May, 2011, was that companies can usesocial media information as part of a background check, but this information must be available from public databases. In other words, strictly speaking, it could be illegal for companies to use private social media information against you without your consent. (I say could be because I am not a lawyer, I just pay attention.)

However, there are some cases wherein this type of deep probing could be deemed appropriate; for example law enforcement or defense. In this case, it would be easy for the employer to defend their request to access private data as it pertains directly to the candidate’s qualification to perform the job.

But when Justin Bassett, a statistician based in New York, was asked for his Facebook password he refused. And so should you. Many states are already in the process of introducing legislation against this practice, and if you live in Illinois and or Maryland, such legislation already exists.

How to Protect Your Privacy in a Job Search

As our economy makes its baby steps towards recovery, chances are that fewer people will “need” to find a job that desperately. Assuming your situation is not dire (and it’s probably not, the unemployment rate for people with bachelor’s degrees or higher is only around 4.5%), here are some responses you can memorize and use in an interview just in case they ask.

1. I take my agreements very seriously. And it is against Facebook’s user policy to share my password with anyone else. I’m going to have to respectfully decline your request.
2. I’m sure your firm has a social media policy. Well, it is my own social media policy to use Facebook for personal reasons. I mean no offense, but I’m going to have to decline.
3. Privacy is a very serious matter for me. Should I be employed with your organization, I would honor private company information just as seriously as I honor my own. Even if this means losing a great opportunity for me, I must refuse your request. And know that if I were presented with a similar situation with your private information, I would respond in the same way.
4. I wouldn’t want to jeopardize your organization’s standing withOFCCP’s regulations about asking about kids or other protected private matters in the course of an employment decision. Therefore, if you don’t mind, I’d prefer to keep my Facebook profile private. However, should you and I become friendly after my employment, I would have no problem having you in my network. (Note: please see my post on how to deal with nosy bosses on Facebook)

I will leave you with one final thought. Never forget that Facebook owns your data no matter what — and it takes up to seven days for them to remove deleted information from their database.

When you use social media you are a publisher. Never forget that. When people complain that they now have to “watch their step” with every post, welcome to reality. That’s the way it always was. And I think these issues are arising precisely because we are all maturing in our use and our understanding of social media.

With the release of the 2013 Best Graduate Schools rankings, many programs see their academic stock change considerably. These 10 business schools made some of the biggest jumps in the rankings from last year to this year. Schools are listed in order of their overall increase in the rankings.

Here is a link to the slideshow featuring the top 8 graduate business schools on the rise: http://www.usnews.com/education/best-graduate-schools/top-business-schools/slideshows/business-schools-on-the-rise/4

Interested in learning about how social media can assist you in your job search and networking opportunities?

For more details and to register for the CSPD Webinar titled “Social Networking for Career Success” visit cspdwebinar1.eventbrite.com

Don’t forget there will be refreshments courtesy of Liberty Mutual.

Prizes will be given away including the Ultimate Professional Development gift basket containing a $50.00 gift card to Macy’s provided by Enterprise Holdings and a $100.00 gift certificate to Toppers Spa/Salon!

Greetings from the Center for Student Professional Development (CSPD)!

Did you know that your FMBA peers have found jobs and internships with Fortune 500 companies such as Bristol Myers Squibb?  Check out just a few of the FMBA students who reported a job/internship offer!

Have you found a job or internship in 2012 and want to be included in the FMBA job/internship update?

Let the CSPD office know online! Or come in to the CSPD office to fill out the form, get your picture taken and collect a small token of our best wishes.

Interested in learning more about what the CSPD office has to offer and how to land yourself a job/internship?

Click here for our website or come into our office at 134 Alter Hall.

If you have any questions please contact the CSPD office at 215-204-2371 or foxcspd@temple.edu.

Don’t forget to follow us on Twitter, Like us on Facebook, and Join the CSPD LinkedIn Group!

You can lose your whole team’s respect, and no one will ever even tell you.

Years ago our team gathered at a posh steakhouse to celebrate blowing out our region’s sales goals. We cut loose, plucking lobsters and ordering by the bottle. This was our moment, our catharsis. For one night, money was no object. We laughed and boasted, toasted and gave thanks. We’d survived another year of restructuring, slashed budgets, and shareholder revolt. And it would be a long time before we’d gather together again. We were going to savor the moment, knowing another brutal sales year awaited us.

Eventually our vice president, Steven, as I’ll call him, joined us. The tenor soon changed. After a few glasses, Steven began boasting how one field rep had “job security” after catching a married superior in bed with her roommate. He mocked his boss’ “born again” status, listing his many sins before his Damascus moment. He revealed that another round of layoffs was imminent. And he whined about how his role and travel schedule didn’t jibe with what he’d been promised during recruitment. And that was just the start.

We sat there in shock as King Steven held court. We passed glances to confirm that we were hearing the same things. But we couldn’t blame alcohol (or bad mushrooms). This was real, and we didn’t know what to do. As salespeople, we had all sat through a client’s racist crack or suggestive story. We had just let that roll off, or excused ourselves if it gained traction. But this was Steven—our boss. More important, these were our peers being smeared. We felt guilty and gutless for staying silent, knowing that speaking up could jeopardize our bonus checks still months from being cut.

Afterward, we didn’t talk about what had been said. Steven probably believed he was bulletproof anyhow. But we filed it all away. And it affected us going forward. You see, an executive’s reputation isn’t just shattered with a public blunder or poor phrasing. More often it slowly spoils over quiet moments when employees reflect and piece together their gut feelings. And those moments produce slight hesitations, lingering questions, and doubts. Of course I never shared my disgust with Steven’s conduct. But the damage was done, in the following ways:

Vulnerability: Now we had ammo. Steven had dropped his guard, and we had a chip. It was something we could share with a chatty, networked peer the next time Steven threatened something we valued. We just had to wait for the right time to play it. As we waited, Steven reveled in speaking about courage, toughness, and focus. He would hammer home how we were a “right-to-work” company and all free to leave if we weren’t happy with our roles or superiors. But he had betrayed those sentiments with his own earlier words. He’d forgotten that leaders are held to a higher standard, that their conduct echoes far longer than they realize. He himself had become the issue—and his hypocrisy poisoned his message.

Trustworthiness: It made me sick to watch Steven chum with the executives he had slandered. These were his longtime friends, the people who hired him. I could only imagine what he said about me when I wasn’t around. But it was more than that. Now I had to ask myself: What would happen if I put Steven in front of my clients? Would he embarrass us and jeopardize the business? In short, could I trust his judgment and self-control? I had my doubts, and that made Steven a liability.

Permission: In my formative years I had learned to watch my coworkers’ backs and keep their secrets. It was the way to keep peace, to earn a free pass when you fell short. That was another reason Steven’s conduct struck a nerve with me. I desperately wanted to call him out: “This isn’t high school. You’re a vice president. Act like one!” You see, he had opened the corporate Pandora’s box. He had set the marker for what was acceptable. And it was anything goes, personal lives, confidences, and proprietary information be damned. Unfortunately, I knew where this attitude led—to disrespect, distrust, and dysfunction.  It was only a matter of time.

Cowardice: What a tough guy! I’d love to see him talk that smack when his bosses were there. Yes, that summed up our feelings about Steven. He had violated our innate sense of fairness by launching a hit-and-run without giving his victims a chance to defend themselves. Of course, none of us planned to come forward. We already understood one of our company’s unspoken tenets: The only thing worse than a coward is a snitch.

Collateral damage: Steven had scored a twofer. Sure, his antics had cost him credibility. But his kamikaze strike took his bosses down with him. Before that night I had invested little time in contemplating my superiors’ personal failings. But now that they were out in the open, I couldn’t look at them the same way. Prudish or not, I believed that those personal issues, and the tendencies they exposed, would ultimately spill over and affect us all. In that silent reflection, I started asking the same questions—and harboring the same doubts—about my superiors as about Steven.

Ultimately, we tuned Steven out. He had violated our trust. In a few reckless moments, he had ruined a reputation he’d taken years to build. But no one ever told him. Instead, he faced silence, ideas never shared, help never offered, and relationships never built.