‘Bill’, a marketer, is a good team player for his organization. He seeks training when it’s available and always extends a helping hand when needed. He’s sought out for his leadership, guidance, and mentoring by many of the younger, more inexperienced members of the team.
The company that employs Bill is doing well, so the management team charges into expansion mode, hiring for a number of new positions on the marketing team. When this news reaches Bill, he changes.
He begins to feel and act paranoid.
Two thoughts echo through his head:
- Why do we need new people? We have enough people that aren’t pulling their weight.
- Great. The last thing I need is a new boss.
Bill starts hoarding information and his normal ‘encouraging’ attitude starts to dissipate. ‘Sue and ‘Ralph’ are interviewed for two new positions on the marketing team, but Bill declines to participate, citing that he has too much work to do. His boss wonders what’s wrong; Bill would never do such a thing.
Sue and Ralph interview very well with the marketing team and are hired without reservation. Many on the team love the fact that Sue and Ralph are now teammates. They are lauded for their fresh, innovative ideas; most of the team believes the team becomes stronger with these new hires, except for Bill. Bill is bitter, sour, and confused about what these changes mean for him.
Bill sees Sue and Ralph as a threat to his knowledge, experience, and value to the team. He sees Sue and Ralph as near adversaries, not trusted allies in the company’s growth. Bill begins to purposely exclude Sue and Ralph from key meetings, and he publicly criticizes the two new team members on a daily basis.
So what’s wrong with this picture? How could this story turn for the better for Bill? How would you react in this situation?
Join us next time for the dramatic conclusion to this tale.
Until next time,