Laura Crawshaw, Ph.D., BCC 

Founder 

The Boss Whispering Institute 

Portland, Oregon 

www.bosswhispering.com-----Presented by Lynn Fraser, Director of ADR, FEC 

 
 Founded in 2009 

 Mission: To reduce suffering in the workplace 

caused by abrasive leaders 

 Dedicated to research & training in the field of 

coaching abrasive leaders 

 Method: Designed to increase empathy & resulting 

psychological insight 

 Based upon Dr. Crawshaw’s research coaching over 

400 abrasive leaders (including professionals such 

as physicians, academics, and attorneys). 
Any individual charged with managerial authority 

whose interpersonal behavior causes 

emotional distress in coworkers sufficient 

to disrupt organizational functioning. 

They rub their coworkers the wrong way 
1. Overreact 

2. Over-control 

3. Threats 

4. Public humiliation 

5. Condescension 
 Center for Creative Leadership survey: 74% of 

successful executives had at least one intolerable 

boss

 Gallup survey: Main reason people quit

 Absenteeism

 Lowered morale/productivity

 Increased legal actions

 Retaliation: sabotage, homicide
 Fully aware of nature and impact of abrasive 

behaviors 

 Intent: malevolent (to harm) 

 Means: dominate (exert control) through 

aggression/intimidation 

 Behavior is intractable: they cannot change 
 Little or no awareness of nature and impact of 

abrasive behaviors – they’re clueless

 Intent: to “do what it takes to get the job done” 

 (They are defending against the threat of being perceived 

to be incompetent) - they’re afraid 

 Means: dominate (exert control) through 

aggression/intimidation 

 Behavior is coachable: the majority can change 
 See a problem 

 Explore cause of problem 

 Employee is unable 

 Employee is unwilling 

 Address problem 

 Provide resources, training 

 Set limits & consequences 
 See a problem 

 Diagnose incompetence 

 “stupid”, “lazy”

 Attack incompetence 

 Dominate through intimidating 

“threat displays” (bullying) 
 Bears & abrasive leaders just want to go about their business 

 Their business is survival 

 Dominance pays (superior “fitness” = survival)

 They defend against threats to their survival, whether in 

the wild or the workplace, with aggression. 

You’ll pay if you get in their way
THREAT => ANXIETY => DEFENSE 

(TAD© Dr. Laura Crawshaw) 
 FIGHT 

THREAT => ANXIETY => DEFENSE

 

 FLIGHT 
THREAT => ANXIETY => DEFENSE 

(TAD© Dr. Laura Crawshaw) 
THREAT => 

ANXIETY =>

 

 

WORKING THROUGH 

THREATENING ISSUE 

RATIONALLY INSTEAD OF 

RESORTING TO DEFENSIVE 

BEHAVIOR 
 FIGHT

THREAT => ANXIETY => DEFENSE

 FLIGHT

 WORKING 

 THROUGH 
PERCEIVE A 

THREAT 

TO THEIR 

COMPETENCE 

 

 

 

 

 

=>

 DEFEND 

AGAINST 

 PERCEIVED 

 THREATS 

 WITH 

 AGGRESSION
 Lack social sonar (empathic capacity) 

 Don’t “read” emotions

 Discount importance of emotions 
Whence fleeth 

management? 
HR!!! 
 Rationalization: 

▪ “It’s just a personality conflict.”

▪ “Nobody’s perfect – including myself.”

 Projection: 

▪ “He’s just got some difficult employees.”

 Minimizing: 

▪ “He doesn’t blow up that often.” 

▪ “You’re making too much of this.” 

 Procrastination: 

▪ “It won’t be long before she retires.”

They’re 

evil 

They 

condone it 
 Fear of being harmed or doing harm 

 Failure of past intervention efforts 

▪ Ineffective management training 

▪ Blocked by abrasive leader’s denial of behaviors 

 Focus on evidence vs. negative perceptions 

 Belief that people can’t change

 Belief that sole option to end workplace bullying is 

termination 

Hope => Empowerment => Intervention 
INTERVENE 

 Make them see the impact of their behavior 

 Make them care enough to want to change 

 Offer help 
 Employees should be evaluated on their 

technical performance and 

interpersonal conduct 

 Detect & document chronic pattern of 

negative perceptions 

 Present pattern of negative perceptions 

to abrasive leader as evidence of 

unacceptable conduct 

 “ We’ve had a steady stream of complaints from coworkers about 

their experiences interacting with you – we don’t see this with other 

faculty (or administrators). This is not acceptable and cannot 

continue. We need to have you turn this around.” 
 Don’t get pulled into 

defensive “fact battles” of 

“what really happened” or 

“who’s really at fault”. 

 Instead: 

 “The fact is that we don’t know and cannot know exactly what 

happened — we weren’t there when the incidents occurred. But we 

do know one thing for a fact: your coworkers feel they are being 

treated disrespectfully and this cannot continue.” 
 Set limits 

 “The way you interact with 

others has to change.” 

 Set consequences 

 “Failure to do so will result 

in...
 Individualized program: 

 Internal mentoring 

 External specialized coaching 

(such as Boss Whispering©) 
1. Detect & document chronic patterns of negative perceptions 

2. Explore reports of abrasive conduct (aka workplace bullying) 

3. Intervene with management 

• Make Management see that they can & should hold leaders 

accountable for acceptable conduct 

• Make Management care enough to set limits & consequences 

(predict future consequences of failing to intervene) 

• Offer hope and help

EARLY INTERVENTION PREVENTS FUTURE DAMAGE 

1. What are the negative perceptions? 

2. What is causing them? 

3. What strategies can we develop to 

eliminate these negative perceptions 

permanently? 
“I don’t get it. When I ask my team for input, no one speaks 

up.”

“Why do you think that is?” 

▪ Theory 1: “They’re lazy”

▪ Theory 2: “They’re stupid”

Poor empathizers 
“I’d like you to engage me as your co-researcher so that we can discover 

the exact nature of these damaging negative perceptions, and 

determine what generates them.”

• “Once we do that, we can then work to develop strategies to 

eliminate these negative perceptions.” 

• “This is a confidential process: I do not share our findings or work 

with anyone.” 
 Coworkers are individually interviewed by Coach

▪ Data is purged of identifying information & aggregated into 

themes (“Over-controls”, “Doesn’t listen” “Publicly 

humiliates”, etc.)

 Confidential feedback data is reviewed 

▪ Client learns exactly what he/she does or says that 

generates interpersonal distress (the negative perceptions)

▪ Coach & Client determine which theme to address first 
 “ He will dress people down with other employees present.”

 “In a meeting he told one person they were worthless.”

 “If someone makes a mistake, he’ll bring it up in meetings –

he’ll say ‘How did you ever come up with a stupid idea like 

that?’

 “If somebody says something that he perceives as 

contradictory, he enjoys humiliating you, like a cat toying with 

a mouse.”

 “People are terrified to say anything – they just clam up”
 © FIGHT

THREAT => ANXIETY => DEFENSE

 

 FLIGHT 
“I don’t get it. When I ask my team for input, no one speaks 

up.”

“Why do you think that is?” 

▪ Theory 1: “They’re lazy”

▪ Theory 2: “They’re stupid”

▪ Theory 3: “They’re afraid! Now I get it: they’re afraid I’ll 

criticize them.” 
What strategies could reduce the perception of threat?

 “If I have a problem with someone, I could address it behind 

closed doors.”

 “I can’t call people names.”

 “If I think someone has a stupid idea, I need to bring them around 

without making them feel stupid.” 

Client shifts from Attacking to Educating 
Analyze 

behavior w/ TAD 

Dynamic©

Develop 

theory on 

nature of 

anxiety 

Develop 

strategy 

to reduce 

anxiety 

Test 

strategy

Observe 

behavior 
 Requires employer commitment 

 Averages 8-10 sessions 

 Demonstrable change by 3rd session 

 82% achieve acceptable level of conduct 

 Engaged in longitudinal research with the 

Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology 

(RMIT) 
 Employee suffering ends 

 Employees are heartened that formerly abrasive leader cared 

enough to work to change 

 Employees regard employer positively for intervening 

 Formerly abrasive leader is grateful for employer’s

willingness to invest in him/her and offer “second chance” 

through coaching 

 Employer reduces potential for litigation, attrition, antimanagement sentiment 

 Employer retains leader’s technical expertise 
 Employee suffering ends 

 Employees regard employer positively for intervening 

 Employer reduces potential for litigation because they can 

demonstrate they intervened. 

 Employer has peace of mind of knowing that they did 

everything in their power to remedy the situation. 
1. Establish a code of (respectful) conduct 

 Provide physical and psychological safety in the 

workplace 

2. Live the code

3. Enforce the code 
 

We can all be abrasive....

America’s First Chief (Abrasive) Executive

“Every action done in company ought to 

be done with some sign of respect to 

those who are present” – George 

Washington
To download free article: 

Coaching Abrasive Leaders: Using Action 

Research to Increase Productivity & Reduce 

Suffering in the Workplace 

www.bosswhispering.com 

(on Research & Publications page)