Great leadership demands gender-neutral skills.

Do women make better managers than men? Are we beyond the stage when we should even be posing this question? Touching on gender stereotypes that persist in the workplace, this is the kind of debate that makes employers squirm.

Indeed, many women entering the ranks of management still face criticism on opposing fronts: Either they are presumed to be “too feminine” for effective leadership, or they are denigrated for more “masculine” behavior. (Just think of some of the criticism heaped on former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher.) And while recent studies give high marks to women as managers, some see these studies as creating stereotypes of their own.

Of course, in the workaday world, many employees say it’s really a manager’s competency, and not gender, that’s significant.

Studies Back Women Managers

A number of studies in recent years have proclaimed women as the better managers. The most comprehensive—by Michigan-based Lawrence A. Pfaff and Associates in 1999—showed 2,400 managers rating women above men in 17 out of 20 skill areas. Another, by the California-based Hagberg Consulting Group, had more than 400 executives rank women above men in more than 80 percent of skills. In these and other studies, women scored well in areas such as mentoring, productivity, and decisiveness. They were also noted for a gentler touch in dealing with work issues, in contrast to the allegedly more autocratic style of men.

Yet subordinates say their main concern is not the gender of their boss, but their style. “My current boss is fantastic,” says Kelly Thomas, who works in the publications division of a scientific society in Philadelphia, “but the qualities that make her great aren’t necessarily related to her sex: knowledge of both the type of work and people management, flexibility, and sense of humor.”

Ironically, Thomas’ only concern about working in a female-dominated business like publishing is that she has seen something of an “old girl” network. “If you aren’t part of that loop,” she says, “you could lose out professionally.”

Ability Unrelated to Gender

Ida Byrd, a senior specialist at a major New York City insurance brokerage, agrees that gender does not matter as much as individual management skills. “I’m not sure that what makes a good manager is as much learned as it is a natural ability to lead people, while being compassionate and self-assured all at the same time.”

Her current boss is a woman who “asks questions about what we do, and then actually listens to our responses, even taking notes when necessary.” But clearly not every person is suited for management. At a law firm in Boston, where Byrd was formerly a legal secretary, her office manager had a confidence problem and “frequently looked as though she might burst into tears at any time,” Byrd recalls. “If she was an effective manager, it was only because those of us who were under her felt sorry for her.”

Dropping the Neo-Stereotypes

Sheila Reines is a senior human resources officer at the Washington, D.C.-headquartered World Bank, which has implemented successful internal programs to push women into higher management positions. She confirms that looking through gender-tinted spectacles is no longer considered helpful.

Reines says that in the mid-1990s studies identified the “unique” characteristics that women bring to work in general and to management in particular. Many of the qualities attributed to women—for example, a more holistic approach to problems, better listening, and teamwork skills—were those identified as key to the World Bank’s becoming a more effective development institution.

“However, we moved away from attributing these characteristics to women,” she continues. “Doing so created a new form of stereotyping, implying that all women possessed these characteristics. By extension, it created expectations that women would be responsible for these behaviors. And it subtly suggested the creation of a new ‘sell’ for women—that is, it’s not enough that they are excellent economists, they also need to be good listeners.”

Most of all, though, she says the bank wanted to show that it didn’t matter whether women or men demonstrated these behaviors. “The key,” she concludes, “was to value and nurture them in all staff, as business assets.”

For example, a supervisor knows one of his staff will be laid off. He also knows that the worker plans to make some expensive purchases. The supervisor’s boss, however, asks him not to warn the employee to avoid disruption. McNamara points out that this situation, like most ethical problems in the workplace, requires a choice among conflicting values with equally justifiable alternatives and significant consequences for all parties.

Ethical decisions in the workplace involve relationships among people with different degrees of authority, trust, empathy, risk, and benefit, as Daniel Brass points out in a January 1998 Academy of Management Review article. When you hand your keys to a stranger at valet parking, Brass says, you rely more on an established system than your trust in the valet. When you share confidential information with a co-worker, the level of trust may be a greater factor than the organization’s rules.

How do you solve ethical problems at work? The quiz below may reveal when you rationalize (for example: “I’ll work better if I take home this proprietary software”), and when you choose the wisest “good.” You’ll also find actual situations combined with a dash of “social network analysis,” as described above by Brass.

Read the following situations; after each scenario, determine what you would do. (Need we tell you? No peeking!) After you’ve determined your responses, compare them to the responses of people who were really in these situations. Are your answers more or less ethical than the actual responses, or equally ethical? (If you’re reading this on company time, get back to work and finish the article later!)

Situations

1. The principal’s secretary at a public school noticed that petty cash kept disappearing. She suspected her new assistant but didn’t have proof. She wanted to maintain harmony within the small school while preventing theft.

2. A computer systems designer was promised a $5,000 bonus when she joined a particular company. Her attempts to collect the bonus failed, even after another co-worker received his bonus. She discovered that he got the bonus only after he agreed to return half of it to the manager who had authorized it.

3. A history professor perked up classroom discussions by sharing incidents from his life. The technique worked so well he considered passing off invented stories as actual experience.

4. Library assistants collected fines for overdue books at a large university. One assistant thought that students needed the money more than the library did, and in the spirit of Robin Hood, was tempted not to collect fines at all.

5. A national retail chain required lengthy procedures if a cash drawer did not tally with receipts. On nights her drawer was a bit low, one cashier considered putting in her own money to avoid the paperwork.

Responses

1. The secretary rearranged responsibilities so the assistant had no access to cash.

2. The systems designer stopped demanding her bonus. Her co-worker exposed the kickback scheme to top managers when he left a year later. Nothing changed.

3. Joseph Ellis, Pulitzer Prize-winning historian, regularly spiced classroom discussions of the Vietnam War with stories of his own military experiences there. He stopped in June, when the Boston Globe revealed he had never served in Vietnam. Thousands of former admirers are angry.

4. The library assistant waived the fines and was fired for “excessive generosity.”

5. The cashier put in her own money and went home on time with no regrets.

Keeping in mind that this quiz is unscientific, tally your response ratings. If all are “more ethical,” you’re either a saint or fooling yourself. If you rated your responses as more ethical than the historian’s only or less ethical than any of the other responses, get some ethics training now! If your responses fared better than the historian’s and the library assistant’s, and about the same as the other responses, your ability to do the right thing is probably adequate.

You may find that two wrongs don’t make a right—but three just might. See if your employer provides confidential help with ethics. Or ask a librarian or search the Web for professional associations that can provide education.

You can be fired for wearing a red shirt to work, for preferring the Yankees to the Mets, or for not attending a piano recital featuring your boss’s daughter. Sound ridiculous? Under the employment-at-will doctrine, workers may be terminated at any time “for good reason, bad reason, or no reason at all.” If you are an “at-will” worker, you should reassess this risk.

There are innumerable reasons for which an employer can legally fire someone, according to David Larson, Law Professor and Senior Fellow at Hamline University School of Law. “At-will means that I can arbitrarily choose” to fire someone, he says, “so long as I don’t violate any of the expressed prohibitions. Very few Americans understand how broad this rule is.”

Workers just don’t know much about this practice. “They say, ‘You’re kidding! I can be fired because I didn’t show up for my boss’s son’s soccer game?’ The reality is that, yes, you can,” adds Larson. People tend “to feel more secure than they are.”

One reason so few people understand this concept is that labor unions have not done a particularly good job of educating American workers, Larson believes. Since unions have a presence in the workforce at large, he thinks unions should educate the public on this issue.

Legal Protection in Place

Joseph Z. Fleming, resident partner at Ford and Harrison, LLP, and a national resource on labor and employment law, reports, “The concept of at-will employment, which favored employers, has been eroded over the years–first by collective bargaining laws, and second by unions which have pushed for workplace reforms so that people have protection.”

You can be fired for almost anything today. But if you maintain that you are in a protective category, the burden then shifts for the employer to prove that they didn’t terminate you because you were in such a category, Fleming adds. As an employee, you have protection because of your:

• Race
• Sex
• Minority status
• Religion
• National origin
• Age (under the federal law, if you are over 40)
• Disability (mental or physical)—or the perception that you have a disability or communicable disease
• Injury (If you have worker’s compensation and are fired, you can sue for retaliation)

The at-will concept is riddled with statutory exceptions, and these exceptions really challenge this rule. “At-will termination sounds like it would be protective of the employer but it’s a little bit elusory–people who think that they can just fire people and don’t have to worry about it should take another look at the workplace laws and be careful,” Fleming says.

Fleming sees the “glass ceiling” for women as a limit that was created by some of the workplace laws. “We have a lot of minorities and women entering the workplace but the positions at the top are standing still. As people get older, they can work longer–you have a gridlock,” he explains. “When you begin to lay off by reverse seniority, the younger people go first so you may be eroding the groups that would be lasting in the workplace and that would be full of a different sex and minority than 20 to 30 years ago.”

Termination Policies

An employer terminating someone should always make sure that they have acted correctly, that they have documented why they are terminating the person, and that they give the person an opportunity to complain if he or she feels the firing is unfair (that could be a defense for the employer).

If you are thinking of starting a new job, pay some attention to what the termination procedure is like at the company. Is it literal, absolute employment-at-will or are there some termination or discipline procedures? For example, there may be progressive discipline where if something goes wrong or you make a mistake, you are entitled to a warning and the next step is suspension.

When you have a job offer, Larson suggests that you say to the potential employer, “I’m really excited about working here. I’m wondering whether you have any workplace management rules?” The answer will help determine how flexible the environment really is

Craig Intorcia recalls his last sales job where he and 25 other reps were subjected to a boiler room method of cold calling. “The VP of Sales tied our hands to the phones to cold call,” Intorcia told me. “We were also subject to occasional slaps on the wrists if this boss was agitated.” Intorcia sold stocks for this New York City firm, which went bankrupt last year.

So are incidents like this, and more serious violence on the rise in the workplace? “Yes, as are harassment, intimidation, angry outbursts, rudeness, and other inappropriate behaviors,” reports Dr. Lynne McClure, a leading expert in managing anger and high-risk employee behaviors and President of McClure Associates, Inc.

Timothy Dimoff, President of SACS Consulting & Investigative Services, Inc., has witnessed a ten-fold increase in these types of altercations over the last dozen years. “There is a lot more cattiness, competition, back-stabbing, and a lot of low-level altercations which escalate into more prominent types of violence,” he says. Much like the song lyric, “why can’t we be friends?”

Bad Behavior Too Common

McClure sees several factors contributing to this increase–role models and social norms, self-centeredness, a lack of consequences and high stress. “Violence, as well as other inappropriate behaviors, is exhibited regularly on TV shows, in movies, in sports games, etc., so it has started to look like ‘the’ way–or, at least, a common way–to resolve problems,” McClure told me. “This is particularly true for the youngest generation of workers, who were surrounded by these examples all their lives.

“Along with the role models and norms, our society has nurtured extreme individualism and self-centeredness–to the point where it’s ‘okay’ for adults to act like two-year-olds in terms of thinking only of themselves.”

McClure attests there are few repercussions for bad behavior. Sports figures still play, even if they’ve beaten their wives. At work, management often fails (for many reasons) to discipline managers or employees for any of these behaviors. “Management focus has not been on that level; it’s been on the higher-end level and we’re just now realizing that it’s getting out of hand,” Dimoff attests.

Stress on the Rise

Stress itself does not automatically lead to violence, but it can push a high-risk individual to the point of hostility. “With layoffs, mergers, stock market issues, as well as long work hours and family problems, people who are prone to violence are more likely than ever to carry it out at work,” McClure says.

Dimoff points toward a “pressure-cooker environment” at both work and home as the instigator. “There’s more pressure to succeed, to possess more and to provide a better environment for ourselves and our kids,” he admits. “We’ve got parents who are living longer; we have to take care of the parents and try to raise kids and pay bills. We want bigger homes, more cars.” At work, more people are wearing more hats. Customers expect jobs done faster. We’re more technologically sophisticated but somehow more exhausted than ever.

Assault Stats

Workplace violence, as defined by McClure, is any physical contact that hurts or injures another person: homicide, assault, aggravated assault (weapon involved), and rape.

Attacks and violent threats against American workers number nearly two million a year, according to the Department of Justice’s National Crime Victimization Survey. Altercations can affect anyone nowadays in several ways, according to McClure:

• An employee might be the target of a disgruntled worker, happen to be in the area when violence occurs, or become a ‘symbol’ to someone seeking revenge.
• Individuals considered high-risk (more prone to violence than most people) can become violent when their stress levels are high enough.
• A person might be neither a physical victim nor a perpetrator, but he or she can be traumatized after witnessing assaults at work.

Preventing Aggression

The U.S. Department of Labor estimates about 500,000 employees will lose close to 1.2 million workdays due to violence, and lost wages cost employers more than $55 million each year.

If we don’t get control of it from the beginning, we see a certain percentage of people escalating or increasing their [violent] activity, Dimoff believes, and it almost becomes an unofficial norm in the workplace.

Companies should be implementing workplace prevention policies to protect themselves against liability. If managers are trained on how to handle low-level altercations, they can deter possible crises from happening.

What is a family? Is it a small group of loved ones, bound by time and common experience, or is it a legal and biological construct, meant to draw the line between our “official” and “unofficial” relationships? Most of us prefer the former definition, despite living by the rules of the latter. In some ways, however, those rules are changing.

Certain benefits have always been extended to the spouses and children of employees: medical insurance, relocation expenses, and so on. Those in committed homosexual relationships–lacking the legal sanction of marriage–are left out. Instead of rewarding valuable employees with baseline benefits, the policy tended to further marginalize gays and lesbians.

Now, companies seem to be embracing diversity initiatives, such as domestic partner benefits. “The trend is definitely real,” says Daryl Herrschaft, “and it mirrors broader changes in society.” Herrschaft manages the Worknet project for the Human Rights Campaign (HRC), the largest national gay and lesbian political organization. “Just take a look at the new Census data, for example. The number of unmarried partners has dramatically increased.” Thus, it stands to reason, companies eventually have to reach out to this talent base.

Has this change in corporate attitude been driven by competition or compassion? “Probably a little of both,” Herrschaft says. “Competitive benefit packages help companies recruit and retain the best people.” If a benefit package is fair, inclusive, and truly beneficial in real life situations, then people will be interested.

Both Parties Benefit

The Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, a national advocacy group devoted to the civil rights of gays, lesbians, and people with HIV/AIDS, goes further than that. It offers a number of convincing arguments for the inclusion of partner benefits in any employment package:

• The relatively low cost of implementing such a benefit.
• Fears about HIV-related costs and adverse selection (“less healthy spousal equivalents enrolling at a higher rate than healthy spousal equivalents”) have been proven unwarranted.
• A fair and equal benefits package promotes morale and company loyalty.
• Employees are more productive if their families are secure and if they have the full backing and respect of their employer.
• Companies with such benefits project a positive public image.
• Employer benefits like this lessen the public burden of health care costs for those who are uninsured.

But there are still a few problems to overcome. Employees who are legally married, for example, must only provide a marriage certificate to qualify their spouse. Domestic partners are routinely required to furnish extensive documentation of their relationship. And, despite avoiding the marriage penalty on federal income tax, domestic partners are swamped in other expenses. According to Lambda: “With domestic partner benefits, employees pay for coverage with post-tax dollars, and then must pay taxes on the employers’ share of payment for the benefits as added income. Married employees pay no taxes on benefits they receive.”

Ahead of the Curve

Which companies have been real pioneers in this area? “IBM is a good example,” Herrschaft says. “They have been moving toward a standard of full spousal equivalency across the board.” Meaning, all rights once reserved for legal spouses (medical, insurance, retirement) are being extended to domestic partners. A move like that–by such a major American player–only helps to prove its real value to employers.

“The number of companies offering these kinds of benefits has more than doubled,” according to the HRC. And companies are doing more than just legitimizing domestic partnerships–they’re fostering corporate diversity in unique ways:

• Supporting diverse volunteer groups and organizations
• Donating funds to more inclusive charitable giving programs
• Supporting federal anti-discrimination law
• Sponsoring employee resource groups, awareness days, guest speakers, and counseling sessions
• Training managers and supervisors in diversity issues

There are 3,600 private companies now offering domestic partnership benefits, including more than 120 of the Fortune 500. Besides IBM, the list includes many of the biggest names in corporate America: Coca-Cola, Disney Corporation, Ford Motor Company, Microsoft, RJR Nabisco, and Xerox, to name just a few. You can also find diversity benefits at major labor unions, insurance companies, universities, and state, county, and municipal government offices.

Sometimes, good business also makes good sense. Employers may argue the legitimacy of your family, but fewer and fewer of them are withholding benefits because of it.

While tax cuts and environmental issues have dominated coverage of the early Bush administration, today’s desktop-dependent professional may want to look closer. Governmental regulation of–and remedy for–repetitive stress injuries is on the wane.

According to Workers Warmups, a repetitive stress-reduction company, they are the fastest-growing ailments in the workplace today. Individual cases cost an average of 25 days of lost work time, or more than any other employee injury.

High Cost of Compliance
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), working with the White House, proposed major policy changes affecting ergonomics at the end of Bill Clinton’s second term. The rules would have required that injured professionals be compensated with 90 percent of their wages. Also, injured workers reassigned to other tasks would be paid 100 percent of earnings, regardless of the value of the work they perform.

OSHA estimated more than 650,000 Americans suffer from these disorders because of poor working environments, accounting for more than 34 percent of all work-related injuries and costing an estimated $15 to $20 billion annually.

Congress and the Bush administration, however, have reversed these proposed rule changes. The potential cost of implementation was a major concern. OSHA estimated the new ergonomics laws would cost businesses $5 billion annually. But other organizations said it would cost much more. The Small Business Administration, for example, projected $18 million. The Employment Policy Foundation pegged it at $126 billion.

Also damaging for proponents of the new rules: A January report from the National Academy of Sciences indicating that musculoskeletal disorders are caused by more than work-related injuries. Age, gender, obesity, lack of exercise, vitamin deficiency, stress, and lifestyle are all contributing factors. There is no ‘magic bullet’ available to cure these disorders, the report concluded.

Major Implications
Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill argues that all OSHA standards, including ergonomics, should be replaced by one voluntary standard. He’d like to see no more than two workdays lost due to injury for every 100 employees, every year. Currently, the nation’s workplaces average 3.5 workdays lost annually for every 100 employees.

Workplace experts remain divided on the impact of rule changes for desktop-driven professionals. John Domenech is chief operating officer of NetCompliance, an online workplace training and compliance firm that monitors OSHA policy. He sees the new administration as being fairer to both employee and employer.

“The Clinton administration created incentive for a claim,” says Domenech. “A person with an injury could claim 90 percent of their salary, tax-free. In essence, they end up with more money with an injury than if they keep working. And how do you define how that injury came about? If the person works in a cube, but then surfs the Web for five hours a night at home, did the job cause the problem or was it the Web surfing at night?”

Josh Kerst is vice president and ergonomics engineer at Humantech, a Michigan-based human performance firm specializing in occupational ergonomics. He believes that workers shouldn’t fear any policy shifts.

“There are sunrise companies and there are sunset companies,” Kerst says. “Sunrise companies see the benefit of health and safety efforts for all the right reasons–low turnover, communications within the organization, etc. Sunset companies are too busy going out of business with systems in disrepair and financial problems. They do the minimum to get by. Professionals shouldn’t fear health and safety regulations going away. They should fear sunset companies.”

Linda Walker, founder of OSHAstuff.com, a San Diego-based workplace safety compliance resource, thinks the scuttled OSHA rules won’t really affect impact today’s professional. “In most cases,” she says, workers “can easily control the layout of their workstation in ways that will make the most difference to their comfort. They can put their monitor directly in front of their keyboard. They can learn to adjust chairs and monitors. They can get in good physical condition, eat right, take breaks, and walk as often as possible.”

But Jim Walsh, editor of OSHA in the Real World, believes the policy shift is a major setback. “The recently-departed ergonomic standard was designed to give federal regulators a tool for cracking down on carpal tunnel syndrome. It would have given OSHA a reason to inspect offices as well as factories. The reality is that, unless there is a serious or fatal injury in the office, there isn’t much of a chance of OSHA getting involved in office issues. Some economists will argue that this is one more step toward a modern workplace. But new economies and modern workplaces don’t matter much when your wrist is throbbing. When that starts,” he adds, “you’ll have to look to state workers’ comp systems for help.”

Employers may want to regulate your romance.

Besides raising a few eyebrows, office romances can jeopardize your job security and put employers and co-workers on edge. If you find yourself drawn to an attractive co-worker, be aware of company policy and relatively new trends in office romance management.

Lester Jones, attorney and law partner with the law firm of Littler Mendelson in Los Angeles, says employers have been approaching labor and employment law firms for years about work romance issues. Many companies now ask “involved” employees to sign Consensual Relationship Agreements, more commonly known as “Love Contracts.”

Love and the Law

“These types of contracts have been around for about six or seven years,” Jones says. Before you consider another date with your new office partner, give some thought to what you might want to do if asked to sign one of these agreements. “Basically, it’s an agreement to not pursue litigation against the employer if the relationship goes bad,” Jones adds. Once two employees stop dating, one person may believe that the former partner no longer treats them fairly or ignores them when a promotion should be considered.

It’s at this point that the less senior employee could claim that a “hostile work environment” has evolved–and pursue litigation against the employer. According to Jones, “Most employers realize that it’s unwise to try and ban all office romances. However, they are very interested in preventing these relationships from having a negative impact on the workplace.” By having both parties sign a Consensual Relationship Agreement, the two parties will be put on active notice of their separate rights and responsibilities, both during the course of the relationship and after its possible demise.

Though some employees may be fearful of waiving future legal rights, Jones says, “Many people actually feel a bit relieved when asked to sign these contracts. They realize that others will be watching and try to help them protect their legal rights.” Fortunately, most employers have not found it necessary to intervene once these types of contracts have been signed.

Whose Business Is It?

Other questions still remain. For example, when can you expect an employer to approach you–after a few lunch dates with your new friend, or when office gossip circulates about the relationship? “Once a relationship has become open and notorious,” Jones says, “employers are likely to approach two employees with one of these contracts.”

The term ‘open and notorious’ is ambiguous; it doesn’t necessarily imply any improper workplace shows of affection or overt signs of favoritism. Instead, it’s simply a legal term indicating that the employer believes that the relationship has become common knowledge in the office. Employers may choose to restate their expectations for respectful and responsible behavior on the job.

The Bottom Line

When approached about signing a Consensual Relationship Agreement, many employees wonder if they can refuse to sign it. These are voluntarycontracts; employers should tell both parties that they will not be penalized if they decide not to sign. However, it may be in your best interest to accept the terms.

Signing one of these agreements does not cause either party to waive all of their rights regarding sexual harassment or other wrongful behavior that may evolve at a later date, Jones says. However, these contracts normally include an arbitration provision. If any adversarial action is later contemplated, the matter must be resolved through arbitration proceedings–not the public court system.

In light of this, it’s always important to ask yourself if the relationship is really worth it. If you think it is, just be prepared to have a personnel officer or managing partner of your company approach you with one of these agreements. Hopefully, your romance will either have a happy ending or at least end amicably, regardless of whether you choose to sign on the dotted line.

To gain a clearer understanding of why so many of us exhibit packrat tendencies, let’s begin by examining four reasons for what I like to refer to assaver behavior.

Weight Gain
Over the years you, like your closet, have packed away a few extra pounds. You tell yourself that it’s just a matter of time before you’re back to your fighting weight. This is enough reason for you to leave your favorite shirts, pants, dresses, and skirts right where they are.

Unless you’re talking about losing 15 or 20 pounds, go ahead and donate the clothes. By the time you lose the weight you’ll feel so proud of reaching your goal that you’ll probably want to celebrate by purchasing a few stylish outfits. Besides, the healthy way to lose unwanted pounds–and keep them off–is slowly, about two pounds per week. If you have 20 pounds to drop, for example, it will take you nearly three months to lose the weight. And by that time a whole new season of designs and colors are sure to be in full swing.

Bargain Shopping
Bargain shoppers have a difficult time buying responsibly. They are motivated to purchase clothing because it’s on sale. They wear it once and cram it into the closet–or never wear it at all. A year later, it dangles there, collecting dust, often with the price tag still securely attached. No matter how great the deal, if you don’t feel and look fabulous in the clothes, you won’t wear them. So, try to buy one quality piece for $60 instead of three so-so items for $20 apiece. You’ll stretch your fashion dollar by investing in quality clothes that last.

Sentimental Saving
Some poor souls can’t throw anything out because there’s always a memory or feeling attached. If you ask them why they won’t part with a particular outfit or accessory, they’ll most likely tell you that someone special (or not-so-special) gave it to them. How could they possibly discard such a gift? Or perhaps they spent a small fortune on some shirt, suit, blouse, tie, etc. Whatever the case may be, the sentimental saver peers into the closet and feels weighed down by gifts and outdated items that just take up space. Holding onto clothes that don’t make you look great or that no longer serve a purpose keep you stuck in the past. Liberate yourself of the emotional baggage associated with these items by giving them to those in need! You’ll feel better about yourself and make room for change.

Back-in-Style Saving
The back-in-style saver never worries about an outdated wardrobe because, if they hold onto things long enough, they will miraculously be back in vogue. Believe me, they never come back. The styles of the 60s, 70s, and 80s mirror the decade in which they were created. Designers are sure to be influenced by decades past, but they always create their fashions with the latest fabrics and cutting edge techniques. Textiles and technology leave the indelible print of a moment in time.

If you are in anyway related to one or all of these aforementioned types, it’s time to clean out your closet and follow a few rules:

1. If you haven’t worn it in a year, toss it. Select a month to conduct this yearly ritual (Springtime is the obvious choice).
2. Set aside a day in your chosen month to sort, toss, and donate.
3. Ask a friend or loved one to lend an impartial eye.
4. Rearrange the cleaned closet by separating work, weekend, evening and formal.
5. Stained, tattered, or torn clothes should be cut up and used for polishing the car or dusting around the house.

Observing the one-year rule is a fantastic way to help keep your wardrobe clutter-free and your mind open to new possibilities. It will also make it easier to assess the clothing you keep. By purging your world of clutter at least once a year, you’ll make room for new ideas and a fresh perspective. Adding new clothes can help lift your spirit and boost your self-esteem.

Once you the take time to rid yourself of the things you never use, you’ll begin to feel a sense of freedom. Attacking your closets will empower you to embrace change, not fear it.

If you’re hired at a big, financially stable, highly respected company, you’re going to be thrown into a large population mix of recent college grads. In many consulting and investment banking firms, for example, entire recruitment classes are filled with people from top-tier schools. If you’re just starting out, especially if you’re working 50-plus-hour weeks, companies are likely to encourage social interaction in the workplace.

Those Tight Groups
Smaller companies might present a more difficult challenge because of the tight employee bonds already in place prior to you coming onboard–that’s the nature of small staffs. Instead of trying to fit in on the first day, you might want to get used to your surroundings during the first week or two. Get used to the office and its workers; try to figure out who the moles are and whom you can trust. You will eventually be grouped or paired off with people. Don’t try to rush friendships–they will happen naturally.

Training programs and company outings help facilitate the bonds of co-workers. The success of making a transition within a company, where the culture is somewhat collegiate, will be determined by your resistance to the wild fraternity days of old. Have fun, but remember your professional etiquette. You want to stay away from telling questionable stories to co-workers in the office cafeteria. Use your best discretion.

So, now that you know what not to do, what’s the quickest way to gain a pal or two in the office?

One of the foundations of friendship is having a shared interest. Simply by virtue of your decision to enter the same industry, your co-workers and yourself have mutual interests. Once you get used to the idea of befriending someone outside your traditional peer group, you’ll likely find their perspective refreshing. You may have similar tastes in music, movies, and literature. These are great ways to break the ice–you may even want to bring up the possibility of getting a group together to go see a certain movie or concert.

What About Weekends?
Should you feel obligated to go barhopping on the weekends with your co-workers? Work friends don’t necessarily have to become social friends. If they make your workday enjoyable and offer humor, guidance, and interesting conversation, then you need not take it any further. Boundaries are a good thing. While no one is suggesting you cut traditional friendships short, it may be easier to keep borders between your work and non-work lives. That way, outside tensions won’t creep in and you’ll truly be able to leave work behind at the end of each long day.

There are other options. If you’re in the market for a new social scene and are disappointed by the lack of potential at work, there are other places to meet new people. Look into local sports clubs, volunteer opportunities, or outside classes. Ever want to learn flamenco dancing? Thai cooking? Karate? Give it a shot–and don’t worry about mixing business with pleasure

Cultivate a professional working environment by reducing idle chat.

Gossip. It can be so much fun. Who did what? Who did what to whom? What was she wearing? Can you believe what he wrote in that e-mail? My goodness. A few minutes too many around the old office water cooler and you’ve become Great Aunt Bessie at the beauty parlor.

Shakespeare couldn’t have said it better himself: “Beware, friends, of gossip. It is the big-mouthed monster that mocks the juicy news it feeds on.” Seriously, gossip is one dangerous vice. It will (and I mean will) come back to haunt you. The office is not the place for loose-lipped or mean-spirited chatter. The office is part of your professional life, not your personal life. If you want to elude the temptation to talk, here are some ways to keep it professional.

Just Like Your Mom Said…
“If you don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything at all.”

I hate to quote Mom on this one, but she definitely has a point. If you’ve ever been the subject of gossip, you know exactly what I’m talking about.

Unless it’s constructive criticism on something business-related, keep the catty comments to yourself. No one needs to know your opinion on the “ugly short-sleeved dress shirts” that your “sweaty pig” of a boss wears. Planting one little seed of negativity in your impressionable co-workers’ minds can sprout a beanstalk of colored perceptions and harmful vibes. You can alienate your peers–and supervisors–with just one word.

Just Like Your Jilted Ex Said…
“What goes around, comes around.”

Whether you’re into the whole Karma thing or you just believe in that Golden Rule stuff, this adage holds true. Start dishing out the goods and you may be one of the cool kids for a while–until they revert back to a high school mentality. And then you’re in trouble. Mess up a project, get a promotion, kiss up to the boss, get a haircut, whatever, and you could be the target of a cruel office culture that you helped cultivate.

Just Like Your Best Friend Said…
“They’re just jealous.”

Could any statement ring more true? When it comes down to it, people do things out of discomfort, low self-esteem, and self-doubt. And what could possibly make them feel better about themselves? Putting other people down, of course. They don’t really hate your Palm Pilot VII, they’re just jealous you have one and they don’t. It’s just like the Tonka trucks and designer Barbie duds of your childhood.

This kind of symbiotic envy can become overwhelming. Even the most meaningless minutiae can balloon into irrational issues. If you sense a co-worker searching for a little stability, stay as far away from that mess as you can. Offer your support, but do so objectively.

Just Like Johnny Law Said…
“Just say no.”

If you can refuse the temptation of whole creamer, you can resist coffee-break gossip. Instead of ensnaring yourself in the bitter banter, why not steer it toward something more positive? Perhaps you might indulge your gossipy urge by talking about celebrities: What was Jennifer Aniston thinking when she cut off her hair? Who does that Ricky Martin think he is, anyway?

If you can’t change your water cooler cohorts, just excuse yourself from the inner circle. Without saying anything, your actions will generally indicate that you’re not down with the dish. Colleagues may not invite you to chat as often, but you’ll know better.