05100014

necessarily – from an area that would yield insight, perspective, and experience obviously relevant to the concerns of the corporation. Such women tend to be highly “visible” and accessible; 120 of the 300 women currently serving on the top 1,300 boards are from government, education, and the nonprofit sector.

The chairmen's first three choices – women chief executives, women with CEO-related experience, and women of high achievement outside business – virtually exhausted the supply of visible women.

The corporate problem is that the pool of qualified women candidates as currently perceived, is inadequate. Thus, two things must happen: the visible pool of candidates must be enlarged, and expectations of them must be clarified.

Making a contract

The area of board responsibility has been vastly expanded. A greater range of experience and an infinitely broader perspective are needed today than in the

past. The sine qua non for directorship can no longer be chief executive experience or the equivalent. It must now be the highest level of intelligence and motivation. There is no shortage of either among women. However, the chairman's expectations of the new director must be realistic, clearly analyzed and defined, and well communicated to her. She, in turn, must agree to accept the responsibility to fulfill those expectations.

Perspective: point of view; the ability to look at things from different points of view.

Sine qua non: an essential element, condition that cannot be done without.

In effect, a contract, based on the board's need for a particular perspective or expertise and a woman's ability to perform, must be made between the chairman and the new director. Realistic ground rules would thereby be established so that the woman could make the needed contribution to the work of the board and derive both professional satisfaction and the respect of her peers from the contribution she makes.

There is a wide spectrum of significant yet different contributions that women directors have been able to make, from their specialized corporate experience as well as from their valuable experience in the public sector. Another valuable contribution that many women directors can make is to enhance the morale and the productivity of women in their companies, not only by their presence on the board as role models but by communicating actively with them and thus understanding and addressing the special needs and problems women face. Moreover, on the horizon is an enormous role that women can perform on boards by helping to analyze and seek solutions to the problems of the two-career family. The forward-looking chairman has this in mind in recruiting new directors for his board.

One positive aspect of women's presence in the boardroom is that their desire to learn and their position as representatives of a new phenomenon have allowed them to ask questions more freely than men, whose history of participation has led to the assumption that they are more knowledgeable about matters discussed and issues raised than they necessarily are.

Ground rules: guidelines established so that things will run smoothly to be understood by everyone concerned.

Spectrum: range, scope, variety.

Role models: examples to be imitated.

For both men and women, the move from a functional position to the position of director entails a shift from a primary concern with management to a primary concern with policy. Many outside male directors also face a necessary transition in perspective.

On the way up the corporate ladder, when the needed expertise and perspective are both in place, the signals are clear. No conflict about the nature of the function one is paid to perform occurs. But when the transition is made from staff to board, the woman needs guidance and encouragement from the chairman.

I would not argue that less should be expected from women or that they should seek special concessions as women.

I would urge, however, that if the contribution of some women is what has been traditionally viewed as a “female” contribution (e.g., in the areas of corporate social responsibility), the chairman should applaud her for it – and encourage her to applaud herself for that contribution.

If, however, the contribution of some women is what has been traditionally viewed as a male contribution, they should be equally applauded. In short, the challenge of the chairman is to ignore gender and encourage all the strengths women have to emerge and express themselves in the boardroom.

The challenge for women

The wall surrounding the corporate community, if it can be claimed to exist at

Transition: gradual or formal change.

Concessions: something admitted, granted, or allowed especially after discussion or a difference of opinion.

Applaud: express approval of.

all, is today a highly permeable one. Just as a degree of regulation by government and the voices demanding greater accountability are growing, so the corporation recognizes that it must be increasingly concerned with the environment in which it functions and with the human as well as the consumer needs of the people.

It is true that conditions are changing in many ways, but it should be remembered that most directors, of both sexes, are over 50 years old. They grew up in a highly polarized society. Women learned that the traditional role of women was to maintain the home and to work, often as volunteers, in efforts to improve the community. The majority of men were socialized quite differently so that they would perform the function of ensuring the financial wellbeing of their families.

This difference is reflected in the career development of most of even the outstandingly successful women of the generation now in their fifties. It is reflected in the careers of women now on corporate boards: 25 % are in education and 22 % are in government, law, and the nonprofit sector. Women are thus uniquely positioned to perform this function, not because they are women, but rather because they are joining boards now at a particular time. “They are,” as Fletcher Byrom, chairman of Koppers, says, “a group whose time has come.”

By serving as a bridge between the corporation and the community and having an understanding of the one within the context

Permeable: that can be passed through.

Polarized: concentrated around two opposite or contrasting positions (here, contrasting ideas about the roles of men and women).

Socialized: adapted to the needs or requirements of society, especially as one grows up.

A company's ability to be responsive to social change is no longer solely a matter of corporate conscience. The effectiveness of a corporation in coping with external factors and society's needs affects how it is perceived by its key constituencies (i.e., by its customers, employees, and investors) and how well it can implement its corporate strategies over time. Social change is no longer a matter merely for charitable attention but has become a factor that can influence a company's growth and even survival. The Women Directors' Program, in acting as a channel of communication between corporate leaders and leaders in other fields, serves corporate society both by helping it to anticipate emerging social issues and by enhancing the special contribution that women directors individually and as a group can make to the boards on which they serve.

Selecting women candidates

Identifying and choosing women for corporate directorships is difficult. Although there are approximately 3,500 women whose achievement and/or level of employment might qualify them for consideration as directors, the vast majority are unknown to most corporate leaders. In addition, the network through which they might be reached – the “new women's” equivalent to the “old boy” network – has not yet been widely established.

Constituencies: groups having a special interest and power (direct or indirect) over someone.

Network: here, an informal organization of like-minded persons (for example, women) who help each other advance in status or position; “old boy network” refers to the informal organization of men who have long been in the same kind of business, think alike, and do favors for each other, especially getting better pay and position for each other.

The Catalyst Corporate Board Resource (CBR), which is chaired by Coy G. Eklund, president and chief executive officer of Equitable Life Assurance, whose own board includes four women, represents an attempt to organize just such a network along rational, objective lines. Catalyst has researched and identified a comprehensive national collection of accomplished women who are potential candidates for corporate boards. CBR currently contains the dossiers of 837 of the most outstanding women in the country, dossiers crossindexed by geography and field.

In a sense, CBR was launched before its time, insofar as the supply of well-known, accomplished women was sufficient to meet the early, limited demand. However, in the years ahead, it is likely that the movement to recruit women directors will accelerate.

Currently 365 corporations, including every one of the top ten, have added women directors. Of the corporations,

2 have four, 5 have three, and 50 (including

1 of the top 10) have two.

It has become difficult to think of a board without women. Two factors will further expedite the process of assimilation:

1.The disappearance of the novelty of having a woman on the board.

2.The recognition of the contribution women can make, with the clarification and realization of the incentive to recruit women that I mentioned earlier.

Dossiers: collections of various papers for a specific purpose, especially for showing and describing the qualifications of a candidate for a job.

Cross-indexed: referred from one part of a file to another. In this case, you could look up female candidates by geographic location or field of work.

Accomplished: skilled, well trained.

Expedite: speed up the progress of; help along; assist; facilitate.

Assimilation: absorption, integration, becoming a part of another group.

In the former connection, one of the most delightful comments I have heard is from Alice F. Emerson, who said:

“I didn't realize how strange I looked to the other directors until a second woman was added and sat across from me at the table.”

T E X T 4

Why I am Not A Manager

Here's what you get: pressure from above and resentment from below. Who needs it?

By Robert J. Samuelson

IN 1997, REPORTS THE LABOR DEPARTMENT, THERE Were 18 million executives, managers and administrators in the United States. I am not one of them. I have never “managed” anyone or anything. No one works for me or is supervised by me. This is the way it's always been and almost certainly, will always be. At various employers, no one has ever hinted that I deserved greater power and responsibility. Perish the thought.

All this may explain why I have a certain grudging respect for managers. I am obviously unfit to do whatever it is they do. They seem to relish responsibility, while I dread it. They have, or feign, confidence, while I shudder at putting a subject and verb in every sentence. What also baffles me is why people want to be managers. Granted, some rewards aie tempting: power, money, status and (possibly) the respect of co-workers. But the drawbacks seem as plain: resentment from below, pressure from above: loud criticism of failures; silence over successes. No thanks.

Now, “manager” is a marvelously elastic tide. It covers a lot of ground, from exalted CEOs (chief executive officers) to plant managers to school principals – to produce managers at supermarkets. Almost half of all managers now (44 percent) are women, says the Labor Department. In 1997, it counted 711,000 marketing and advertising managers, 535,000 building and real-estate managers, 108,000 personnel manag-

ers. But along the spectrum of pay and power, many managers face two contradictory demands.

First, they're supposed to get results – to maximize profits, improve test scores or whatever. Everyone must “perform” these days and be “accountable” (which means being fired, demoted or chewed out if the desired results aren't forthcoming).

Second, they've got to motivate or manipulate their workers. Gone is the era when machines determined how most work was done. Jobs today are looser. They require initiative or allow leeway. If workers do poorly, the organization suffers. So managers have to command and coddle. They're supposed to be sensitive to workers' problems and “feelings.” They should be nice and not nasty. Petty tyrants are disapproved.

The manager mediates between the hard demands of the stock market and the soft demands of workers. On paper, there is no tension, Workers will be committed and creative if they are respected and consulted. Good ideas will bubble up from below. Managers will be rewarded for their openness and understanding. But in real life, conflicts abound. Galvanizing consensus is often time-consuming. Sometimes it's undesirable because some ideas are better than others. And getting people to obey without alienating them is hard if they: (a) disagree with you; (b) hate you; (c) are incompetent, or (d) spend the day surfing the Net.

Little wonder, then, that no group in America is more advised and analyzed than managers. I know this, because I receive a steady flow of review copies of management books. Just who reads these books has always puzzled me: if you manage something important, when would you have time? But someone must read them (or at least buy them), because the publishers keep pouring them out. Of course, the publishing industry has a well-deserved reputation for being dimwitted. But it can't be that dimwitted.

Here, for example, are two recent arrivals – “Profit Patterns: 30 Ways to Anticipate and Profit From Strategic Forces Reshaping Your Business” and “The Dance of Change: The Challenges to Sustaining Momentum in Learning Organizations.” As management books go. these seem to be more informative than most. But exactly how will they make it easier for managers to manage?

“Profit Patterns” reminds us that some companies have clobbered others in head-to-head competition. In 1989, both Apple Computerand Microsoft had stock-market capitalizations (the value of all their shares) of about $4 billion. By 1998. Apple was still worth about $4 billion, while Microsoft had zoomed to $220 billion. But Microsoft benefited as much from the blunders of rivals as from its own efforts. IBM let Microsoft keep the licensing rights for the original PC operating software. Big mistake. And Apple didn't license coproduction of its computers; this stymied sales and software development.

Companies should spot how’the strstegic landscape is changing’, says the book. This is a bit abstract. Microsoft's real lesson is simpler: pray for dumb competitors. If IBM and Apple had been smarter, Bill Gates might be a nobody.

In “The Dance of Change,” we discover that companies often fail at organized efforts of self-improvement. By one study, 70 percent of “re-engineering” campaigns founder. Another study estimated that two thirds of “total quality management” programs do likewise. These failures implicate the capacity of middle managers. Are they guiding change or simply being swept along? “Our core premise,” write the authors, “is that the source of these problems cannot be remedied by more expert advice, better consultants or more committed managers.” What then follows is – 573 pages of musings from experts, consultants and managers.

The enduring popularity of self-help books like these. I suspect, reflects a widespread insecurity among many managers as a class. (But I also suspect that the best managers disdain these books. They trust their own instincts and knowledge.) The common craving is control; the common fear is chaos. But the latter is rising while the former is falling. Someone must have an answer. In one way or another, all these management books hold out the chimera of control. The fact that they don't deliver may not diminish their appeal: if you're confused, it's reassuring to know that everyone else is, too.

Perhaps managers couJd once succeed-or at least survive – on status and technical competence. There was a chain of command. Authority was respected or feared. Machines regulated production jobs. This era has ended. The almost-universal task of managers today, in our culture, is to serve twin masters, each of whom has grown more de-

manding. There's the Organization with Its imperatives; and there's the Individual – each with “needs.” This is a tough job, and somebody's got to do it. But not me.

VOCABULARY REVIEW “WHY I AM NOT A MANAGER”

24 words from the article are used below in management-related questions. For further practice, try writing and answering questions which involve other contexts (social, political, etc.)

1.Describe a superior/manager that you dislike (or disliked in the past).Why did you resent this person(what actions, qualities)?

2.How would you hint to one of your superiors that he/she is not an effective manager? What are the consequences of criticizing your boss(either directly or indirectly)?

3.How many workers in this region perish in job-related accidents each year? Describe the safety measures your firm takes to avoid accidental deaths on the job.

4.Explain which five aspects of your job you relish.

5.Explain which three aspects of your job you are dread.

6.When you need to feign self-confidence, what techniques do

you use?

How can you tell if someone is feigning competence?

7.Why people want to be managers baffles the author of this article, Robert Samuelson. Explain a career choice that baffles you.

8.Give an example of why someone at your company was demoted. In general, what are the reasons someone at your company might be demoted?

9.When was the last time you chewed out one of your subordinates? What was the reason?

10.Do you monitor your employees’ break time, Internet use, etc. Or do you give them leeway?

11.How do you coddle your subordinates? Why? Do you plan to continue this practice?

12.How do you deal with a very competent and efficient employee who is nasty to his\her colleagues?

13.What management principles abound in the average Russian company? What management principles abound in your company?

14.What are some alienating managerial qualities that you have seen or heard about? (How did this manager alienate his\her subordinates and colleagues?)

15.What was the most dimwitted thing someone at your company did or said last year?

16.How do you plan to clobber your competition?

17.What kinds of blunders have your superiors or subordinates

made?

18.How is your company promoting change and innovation? Or is it just being swept along?

19.What is the core premise of your company/department/unit?

20.How could the issue of low salaries in Russia be remedied? Should it be remedied or are the low salaries a competitive advantage for Russian companies?

21.Which enduring legacy of the Soviet Union is the most difficult for Russian managers to deal with? Why? There is a saying: what cannot be cured, must be endured. What are some of the negative features of Russian business life that cannot be changed easily and must be endured for now?

22.Which management roles do you distain? Why?

23.What professional opportunities are you craving?

24.How would you reassure an interviewer that you are the person he/she should choose for a PMTI internship?

T E X T 5

PREVIEW

The “bad boss” is a familiar character of TV sitcoms and cartoons. But when you’re dealing with a real-life bad boss, the situation is hardly amusing. According to this essay, difficult bosses fall into several categories. Learning to recognize these types can give you some guidance on how to work successfully in a challenging situation.

WORDS TO WATCH

modus operandi (6): method of operation; cower (8): shrink back in fear; browbeating (8): bullying;

litmus test (10): a test using a single factor to indicate something;

subservient (12): obedient; vulnerable (14): open to ridicule;

outplacement (17): helping former employees find new jobs; rapport (19): understanding;

recurring (21): happening again;

paraphrase (26): put what someone has said into other words; prioritize (27): put things in order of importance;

brusque (29): rudely brief: rough in manner and speech.

How to deal with a difficult boss

Donna Brown Hogarty

Harvey Gittler knew his new boss was high-strung – the two had worked together on the factory floor. But Gittler was not prepared for his co-worker’s personality change when the man was promoted to plant manager.

Just two days later, the boss angrily ordered a standing desk removed because he’d seen a worker leaning on it to look up an order. He routinely dressed down employees at the top of his lungs. At one time or another he threatened to fire almost everyone in the plant. And after employees went home, he searched through trash cans for evidence of treason.

For many workers, Gittler’s experience is frighteningly familiar. Millions of Americans have temperamental bosses. In a 1984 Center for Creative Leadership study of corporate executives, nearly 75 percent of the subjects reported having had at least one intolerable boss.

“Virtually all bosses are problem bosses, in one way or another,” says psychologist Mardy Grothe, co-author with Peter Wylie of Problem Bosses: who they are and how to deal with them. The reason, he said, lies in lack of training. Most bosses were promoted to management because they exceiled at earlier jobs – not because they have experience motivating others.

Uncertain economic times worsen the bad-boss syndrome. “There is an acceptance of getting results at any price,” says Stanley Bing, a business executive and author of Crazy Bosses. “As a result, the people corporations select to be bosses are the most rigid and demanding, and the least able to roll with the punches.”

Bad bosses often have a recognizable modus operandi. Harry Levinson, a management psychologist in Waltham. Massachusetts, has catalogued problem bosses, from the bully to the jellyfish to the disapproving perfectionist. If you’re suffering from a bad boss, chances are he or she combines several of these traits and can be dealt with effectively if you use the right strategy.

The Bully

During his first week on the job, a new account manager at a small Pennsylvania advertising agency agreed to return some materials to a client. When he mentioned this at a staff meeting, the boss turned beet red, his lips began to quiver and he shouted that the new employee should call his client and confess he didn’t know anything about the advertising business, and would not be returning the materials.

Over the next few months, as the account manager watched coworkers cower under the boss’s browbeating, he realized that the tyrant fed on fear. Employees who tried hardest to avoid his ire were most likely to catch it. “He was like a schoolyard bully,” the manager recalls, “and I’ve known since childhood that, when confronted, most bullies back down.”

Armed with new-found confidence and growing knowledge of the ad business, he matched his boss’s behavior. “If he raised his voice. I’d raise mine,” the manager recalls. True the type, the boss started to treat him with grudging respect. Eventually, the young man moved up the ranks and was rarely subjected to his boss’s outbursts.

Although standing up to the bully often works, it could make matters worse. Mardy Grothe recommends a different strategy: reasoning with him after he’s calmed down. “Some bosses have had a problem with temper control all their lives, and are not pleased with this aspect of their personality,” he explains. Want a litmus test? If the boss attempts to compensate for his outburst by overreacting and trying to “make nice” the next day, says Grothe, he or she feels guilty about yesterday’s bad behavior.

Grothe suggests explaining to your boss how his temper affects you. For instance, you might say. “I know you’re trying to improve my performance, but yelling makes me less productive because it upsets me.”

Whatever strategy you choose, deal with the bully as soon as possible, because “once a dominant/ subservient relationship is established, it becomes difficult to loosen,” warns industrial psychologist James Fisher. Fisher also suggests confronting your boss behind closed doors whenever possible, to avoid being disrespectful. If your boss continues to be overbearing, try these strategies from psychologist Leonard Felder, author of Does someone at work treat you badly?

To keep your composure while the boss is screaming, repeat a calming phrase to yourself, such as “Ignore the anger. It isn’t yours.”

Focus on a humorous aspect of your boss’s appearance. If she’s got a double chin, watch her flesh shake while she’s yammering. “By realizing that even the most intimidating people are vulnerable, you can more easily relax,” explains Felder.

Wait for your boss to take a breath, then try this comeback line: “I want to hear what you’re saying. You’ve got to slow down.”

Finally, never relax with an abusive boss, no matter how charming he or she can be, says Stanley Bing. “The bully will worm hir or her way into your heart as a way of positioning your face under his foot.”

The Workaholic

“Some bosses don’t know the difference between work and play,” says Nancy Ahlrichs, vice president of client services at the Indianapolis office of Right Associates, an international outplacement firm. “If you want to reach them at night or on a Saturday, just call the office.” Worse, such a boss invades your every waking hour, making it all but impossible to separate your own home life from the office.

Ahlrichs advises setting limits on your availability. Make sure the boss knows you can be reached in a crisis, but as a matter of practice go home at a set time. If he responds angrily, reassure him that you will tackle any project first thing in the morning. Get him to set the priorities, so you can decide which tasks can wait.

If you have good rapport with the boss, says Mardy Grothe, consider discussing the problem openly. Your goal is to convince him that just as he needs to meet deadlines, you have personal responsibilities that are equally important.

The Jellyfish

“My boss hires people with the assumption that we all know our jobs,” says a woman who works for a small firm in New England. “Unfortunately, he hates conflict. If someone makes a mistake, we have to tiptoe around instead of moving to correct it, so we don't hurt anyone's feelings.”

Her boss is a jellyfish. He has refused to establish even a basic pecking order in his office. As a result, a secretary sat on important correspondence for over a month, risking a client's tax write-offs. Because no one supervises the firm's support staff, the secretary never received a reprimand, and nobody was able to prevent such mishaps from recurring. The jellyfish simply can't take charge because he's afraid of creating conflicts.

So “you must take charge,” suggests Lee Colby, a Minneapolisbased management consultant. “Tell the jellyfish: This is what I think I ought to be doing. What do you think?' You are taking the first step, without stepping on your boss's toes.”

Building an indecisive supervisor's confidence is another good strategy. For example, if you can supply hard facts and figures, you can then use them to justify any course you recommend – and gently ease the jellyfish into taking a firmer position.

The Perfectionist

When Nancy Ahlrichs was fresh out of college, she landed her first full-time job, supervising the advertising design and layout of a small-town newspaper. On deadline day, the paper's irritable general manager would suddenly appear over her shoulder, inspecting her work for errors. Then he'd ask a barrage of questions, ending with the one Ahlrichs dreaded most: “Are you sure you'll make deadline?”

“I never missed a single deadline,” Ahlrichs says, “yet every week he'd ask that same question. I felt belittled by his lack of confidence in me.”

Ironically, the general manager was lowering the staff's productivity. To paraphrase Voltaire, the perfect is the enemy of the good. According to psychiatrist Allan Mallinger, co-author with Jeannette DeWyze of Too Perfect: When Being in Control Gets Out of Control, “the perfectionist's overconcern for thoroughness slows down everyone's work. When everything has to be done perfectly, tasks loom lar-

ger.” The nit-picking boss who is behind schedule becomes even more difficult, making subordinates ever more miserable.

“Remember,” says Leonard Felder, “the perfectionist needs to find something to worry about.” To improve your lot with a perfectionist boss, get her to focus on the big picture. If she demands that you redo a task you've just completed, mention your other assignments, and ask her to prioritize. Often, a boss will let the work you've completed stand – especially when she realizes another project may be put on hold. If your boss is nervous about a particular project, offer regular reports. By keeping the perfectionist posted, you might circumvent constant supervision.

Finally, protect yourself emotionally. “You can't depend on the perfectionist for encouragement,” says Mallinger. “You owe it to yourself to get a second opinion of your work by asking others.”

The Aloof Boss

When Gene Bergoffen, now CEO of the National Private Truck Council, worked for another trade association and asked to be included in the decision-making process, his boss was brusque and inattentive. The boss, made decisions alone, and very quickly. “We used to call him 'Ready, Fire, Aim,” says Bergoffen. Many workers feel frozen out by their boss in subtle ways. Perhaps he doesn't invite them to key meetings or he might never be available to discuss projects. “At the core of every good boss is the ability to communicate expectations clearly,” says Gerard Roche, chairman of Heidrick & Struggles, an executive search firm. “Employees should never have to wonder what's on a boss's mind.”

If your boss fails to give you direction, Roche says, the worst thing you can do is nothing. Determine the best course of action, then say to your boss: “Unless I hear otherwise, here's what I'm going to do.” Other strategies: When your boss does not invite you to meetings or include you in decision making, speak up. “Tell her you have infor-

mation that might prove to be valuable,” suggests Lee Colby. If that approach doesn't work, find an intermediary who respects your work and can persuade the boss to listen to your views.

To understand your boss's inability to communicate, it's vital to examine his work style. “Some like hard data, logically arranged in

writing,” says Colby. “Others prefer face-to-face meetings. Find out what makes your boss tick – and speak in his or her language.”

Understanding your boss can make your job more bearable in a number of ways. For instance, try offering the boss two solutions to a problem – one that will make him happy, and one that will help you to reach your goals. Even the most difficult boss will usually allow you to solve problems in your own way – as long as he's convinced of your loyalty to him.

No matter which type of bad boss you have, think twice before going over his head. Try forming a committee with your colleagues and approaching the boss all together. The difficult boss is usually unaware of the problem and often is eager to make amends.

Before embarking on any course of action, engage in some selfanalysis. Chances are, no matter how difficult your boss is, you are also contributing to the conflict. “Talk to people who know you both, and get some honest feedback,” suggests Mardy Grothe. “If you can fix the ways in which you're contributing to the problem, you'll be more likely to get your boss to change.”

Even if you can't, there's a silver lining: the worst bosses often have the most to teach you. Bullies, for example, are frequently masters at reaching difficult goals. Perfectionists can often prod you into exceeding your own expectations.

VOCABULARY

sitcoms = situation comedies – комедии ситуаций challenging situation – сложная неординарная ситуация high-strung – нервный

a standing desk – постоянно стоявший стол look up smth – искать что-либо

dress down smb at the top of one's lungs – громко распекать,

давать нагоняй

evidence of treason – доказательство измены

excell (at work) – отличаться (на работе) / преуспевать roll with the punches – справляться с неожиданностями modus operandi – определенный стиль работы

deal with – разобраться с, рассмотреть (напр., свои отноше-

ния с)

deal with effectively – зд. ладить bully – “тиран”

cower under the boss's browbeating – трепетать перед началь-

ственным гневом

try hardest to avoid one's ire – изо всех сил пытаться избежать чьего-либо гнева

confront – давать отпор back down – отступать

armed with new-found confidence – вооружившись новым от-

крытием

true to type – согласно своему типу grudging – невольный, против своей воли eventually – в конце концов

move up the ranks – продвинуться по служебной лестнице was subjected to his boss's outbursts – был объектом вспышек

“начальственного” гнева

standing up to smb – противоборство с кем-либо

reasoning with smb – объяснение, выяснение отношений с кем-то

want a litmust test? – хотите доказательство? / хотите прове-

рить?

overreact – проявлять повышенный интерес, быть чрезмерно внимательным

“make nice” – быть хорошим, быть паинькой subservient – раболепный

loosen – зд. исправить behind closed doors – наедине

be overbearing – быть невыносимым, зд. злоупотреблять вла-

стью

keep one's composure – не терять самообладание intimidating – устрашающий

vulnerable – уязвимый, ранимый comeback line – ответная реплика

abusive – зд. злоупотребляющий своим положением / властью worm one's way into one's heart – проберется в душу, зд. усы-

пит вашу бдительность

position one's face under one's foot – подминать под себя

make it all but impossible – сделать просто невозможным make / be sure smb knows – непременно, обязательно поставь-

те кого-либо в известность

do smth as a matter of practice – ввести что-либо в практику tackle smth first thing – сразу же / в первую очередь заняться

чем-то

have good rapport = have good understanding meet deadlines – уложиться в сроки jellyfish – зд. бесхарактерный

tiptoe around – ходить на цыпочках вокруг да около establish ... pecking order – установить ... порядок подчинения risk a client's write-offs – подвергать риску аннулирование на-

логов клиента

the firm's support staff – вспомогательный персонал фирмы step on smb's toes – задевать чьи-то чувства

build smb's confidence – укреплять чью-то уверенность supply hard facts – предоставлять неоспоримые факты

ease smb into taking a firmer position – подтолкнуть кого-либо к принятию более жесткой позиции

be fresh out of college – сразу же после окончания колледжа she landed her ... job – она получила ... работу

advertising design and layout – оформление и размещение рек-

ламы

feel belittled – чувствовать (себя) униженным loom larger – принимать угрожающие размеры nit-picking – скрупулезный до мелочей improve one's lot – облегчать свою участь

a boss will let the work ... stand – зд. начальник согласится принять ... работу

put smth on hold – задерживать, приостанавливать что-либо keep smb posted – держать кого-либо в курсе

get a second opinion of smth – заручиться еще одним мнением о чем-либо

brusque – грубый

many workers feel frozen out – зд. инициатива многих сводит-

ся к нулю

unless I hear otherwise – если не будет других указаний