“John” was given to meetings. He liked to deliver bad news with witnesses.

I reported to John once upon a time. I was running a small account and had offered a position to the company receptionist, who had been planning to leave the company to find a better career opportunity.

The meeting consisted of John, two witlesses … uh, witnesses … and myself. I was on one side of the table, the other attendees on the other side, and the question to be addressed was how this violation of procedure had happened.

Since there were no other possible internal candidates and the receptionist had been planning to leave the company, there was no real issue that needed discussing. The point of the meeting, which I was deliberately too dense to understand, was that I should be afraid of John. Since I didn’t become afraid in that meeting, John held others periodically until I got the message.

Fear is a potent motivator, as mentioned before in this column. (See “The best and worst motivator,” Oct. 7, 1997.) When the situation calls for a sense of urgency, with dire consequences for inaction, scaring an employee can be exactly the right thing to do.

There’s a big difference, though, between scaring someone because of the situation they face (“Shark attack!”) and being a bully who rules through intimidation. The former helps people survive and get the job done. The latter helps nobody, including the bully.

Seem obvious? Maybe, but if it’s so obvious, why do so few bullies recognize themselves? For that matter, why are so many victims of bullying seemingly oblivious to their situation? And are you sure you’re neither bully nor victim yourself? Read on.

Bullies don’t lead employees, although they think they do. Fear of the bully leads the employees, and that’s different. When a person leads, that person sets direction. When fear leads, there is no direction. There is only scurrying around as everyone tries to avoid provoking the boss. Since the boss is a bully, though, the boss’s anger is a given, so attempts to avoid creating provocation are doomed before they start.

Bullies think they’re leaders, because their victims follow orders quickly and without argument, do things the “right way,” and always keep them in the loop so they always know what’s going on.

The bully/bosses are wrong, though. They aren’t leading. Their employees are victims who follow their sense of fear, not the leader. This has several unintended consequences:

• Victims don’t make decisions if they can help it. Any decision is a potential provocation. Better to wait and ask the boss.
• The decisions victims do make are usually bad ones, because decisions aren’t about helping the organization move forward. They’re about second-guessing whether the boss would want anyone else to make the decision and, if so, what the boss would do in this situation.
• Bully/bosses and their victims end up forming an unhealthy, addictive symbiosis, in which the bully/boss depends on the victims to provide an outlet for their continuing need to feel dominant while their victims rely on having the boss’s temper as an excuse for every failure.

Are you still sure you neither are a bully nor report to one? That’s great if it’s true. Being a bully isn’t binary, though, so your management style may include elements of bullyhood without your ever being aware of it.

If your employees ever make decisions by asking, “What would John do in this situation?” you have some warning signs. If they ever say, “We’d better not do that because it would tick John off,” you’ve gone beyond warning signs to the display of active symptoms.

Your manner of interacting with your boss may include an element of victimhood as well. It’s easy to tell. If, in your interactions, you’re more worried about potential criticism than hopeful for potential praise, you’re the victim of a bullying boss.

What should you do?

If the answer isn’t obvious to you, that’s another clear warning sign, because the answer is obvious.

Leave.