levine
It was the luncheon portion of the academic conference when I witnessed the anomaly. A gorgeous, well-dressed man had claimed the chair to my right at the table. There are plenty of good-looking academics, but few of them show up to a scholarly conference impeccably dressed in a three-piece pin-stripped suit, matching tie tack and cuff links, and shoes as shiny as mirrors. My reaction upon observing this unusual creature outside his native habitat? This is going to be a mighty fine lunch.
I would like to say that this story has a happy ending and that we united to form scholarly offspring who speak five languages and tell physics jokes without appearing nerdy. But alas, this was not to be in this timeline. As Dr. Suit sat down for lunch, he reached across the table to grab a roll from the bread basket. He buried his entire hairy hand in the vessel until he found the specimen he craved. It was a perfectly round roll. He then proceeded to spread mountains of butter on its entire spherical surface, until the roll ceased to be no longer. It had been transformed…to a Ball o’ Butter. Dr. Suit’s fingers were smeared with butter and when he appeared satisfied that his masterpiece, the Ball o’ Butter, was complete, he then commenced gorging on it, one huge buttery bite at a time. He shifted said Ball o’ Butter between hands, licking his once perfectly manicured fingers as he went. I quickly lost my appetite (for the food and the man).
I often think of this moment -- not because I hunger for memories of the grotesque -- but because I wonder: Is this how Dr. Suit behaves on a job interview? Or at dinner with his dean? I would hope not, but something tells me he had no idea that he was demonstrating improper and disrespectful manners, in the process making a lasting negative impression on me.
Professionals in any field often neglect a basic understanding of proper etiquette in interacting with other human beings. We are inclined to argue that our skills, talents and reputation alone will secure us advancement opportunities. Academics especially opine that any impression they impart from behavior is inconsequential to what super star scholars they are, and it matters not how they hold their fork or eat their bread at a business dinner.
But the truth is that academe is a profession in which one must behave professionally at all times. Being professional means demonstrating you are serious about your craft, and having good manners and proper business etiquette for all occasions promotes and amplifies your level of professionalism. When you practice flawless etiquette, your talents are bolstered, allowing attention to be paid to you, and not your slimy buttery fingers (which you keep wiping on your pants). Furthermore, in acting as a professional with professional behavioral traits, you are demonstrating a high level of respect for both you and your colleagues.
In Dr. Suit’s case, he made some terrible and basic mistakes when he sat down at the lunch. He ruined his chances of communicating his wisdom because all I could concentrate on was his bad manners. Here are some pointers for professional etiquette at meals and in interactions so that you don’t become a Dr. Suit:
Smile, and remember other actions to take during the first interaction. When you meet someone for the first time, there are five things you should do: introduce yourself, shake the person’s hand, look them in the eyes, smile, and say their name back to them (so they know you are listening and you know that you pronounced their moniker correctly).
Keep your handshake quick, firm and dry. Shaking hands leaves more of an impression than one realizes. Your handshake should be firm, dry, and quick. The shake should employ two pumps up and down, and then get the heck out of there. Don’t linger and don’t keep holding their hand like you’re mates. Don’t use your other hand for the “reach around," in which you grab your colleagues shoulder and shake their entire body. Utilize the whole hand -- don’t engage a shake with three fingers. Keep yourself dry by not clasping anything in advance (like a drink or a briefcase), and always use your right hand.
Place that napkin on your lap. When you arrive at a luncheon, whether the table is for 2 people or 10, sit down and immediately put the napkin on your lap. The napkin will stay on your lap the entire time you are sitting there, even after the meal is complete. It should never touch the table until you rise to leave.
Harness the silverware. If you are at an event in which the table is set with multiple utensils, here is a simple trick to remember which to use and when. Start from the outside in, and for each course, use the utensil that is farthest from your plate. If you drop your fork on the floor, ask your server for another -- don’t reach for it.
Utilize the b-d rule for triumph over the bread plate. When you sit down at a round table, you are immediately faced with lots of glasses, coffee cups, and bread plates. Which is yours? You can’t go wrong with the b-d rule. In your lap, take both your hands and form the OK sign with your thumb and pointer finger touching to shape an “o”. Keep your other fingers extended straight and together. With both hands in this position, you will see the shape of a “b” on the left hand and a “d” on the right. The “b” stands for bread, which means your bread plate will always be on your left. The “d” means drink, which translates to your drinking glasses and cup placed on your right. Now, invariably at large luncheon tables, there will be someone who will make an error, incorrectly claim the bread plate on their right, causing a domino effect around the table, leaving you without. No need to fret (or call attention to the mistake). Simply ask the server for another one.
Don’t reach or grab, just pass. If you want something on the table, such as the salt shaker or bread basket, and it is not within arm’s length (while you are still sitting), ask your colleague to pass it to you. For bread baskets, there is no need to touch every roll, just take the one at the top. When you have made your selection, put the basket directly in front of you (you don’t have to pass it back to the person unless they request it). If someone asks you to pass the salt, always offer both the salt and pepper, and never grasp the shakers from the top.
Consume your bread in no less than an eon. Don’t eat your roll like an apple. The courteous way to dine on bread is to tear off a bite-size piece, butter only that morsel, and pop it in your mouth. Chew, swallow, and repeat. It may take a million years to eat your bread, but at least you will look like a gentleman or lady while doing it.
Other rules include not eating until everyone is served, and refraining from wiping your nose, picking your teeth, or applying ChapStick while seated at the table.
I was having dinner with one of my graduate students and a CEO a few years ago when I noticed my student was holding his fork like he was in the Big House and was fearful someone would try to swipe it. He treated it like a scoop, and shoveled food into his mouth like it was his last meal. I was embarrassed for him, embarrassed for me, and embarrassed for the business leader, especially since the student was speaking with him about potential job opportunities. I would have hated for this talented, intelligent, and driven student of excellent academic pedigree to miss out on a professional opportunity simply because he did not take the time to employ the most courteous way to interact with someone over a business meal.
The reality is that scholarly strength can get you in the door, but proper etiquette and manners will seal the deal, and ultimately, elevate your academic credentials. So the next time you have an important function, wear a great suit, shine your shoes, and make sure you hone your business etiquette skills before you go. You will make an impression that can land you the opportunity you crave. And for goodness sake, under no circumstances, no matter how much you desire it, don’t lick your fingers and don’t build a Ball o’ Butter.
- Humanities
- Science / Engineering / Mathematics
- Graduate education
Comments on An Etiquette Lesson
Great article! I teach Etiquette to children, it is so important for them to learn at a early age to be prepared for their adult life. The finest business suit will not save your from disaster if you do not know the difference from a fish fork or desert spoon.
This was absolutely marvelous, and equally important is the issue of academics and how they dress, wear their hair, etc.
Nice to know someone else believes basic manners still essential to success. But, my friends and colleagues of the left hand persuasion often prefer that handshake with my left hand, thus, the "right hand only" rule deserves modification.
I wonder if we would find this story as amuzing if the author were male and telling us about this well dressed woman he spotted at a lunch table. Would it be as funny if a male was saying that it was going to be a mighty fine lunch. Would it bother us if he said that breeding did not occur.
This article makes an excellent point about basic social manners...yet contains what remains a stubborn piece of sexist tolerant language. When women objectify men, its a cool, chic, and enpowered act. When men do it, its sexist. While Sex in the City is a most popular show among students, few see that the lead characters are simply repeating the sexist behavior we have seen in male television characters.
A firm handshake is not an excuse to be sadistic. The person you are shaking hands with may have tendonitis, arthritis, or carpal tunnel. Don't squeeze!
Excellent article, presently writing a book; "Etiquette in the Hood" where I am keeping it REAL for all ages. These lessons must be rendered in a format and language that this generation and others (bad manners knows no bounderies) hears and adheres to, regardless of gender, geography, or financial status.
Thought I knew how to properly use a fork until I moved down here. Those in the know here point the open prongs of a fork downwards towards the plate with one hand, and use a knife in the other to push food up onto the back of the fork, and thence to mouth. I never got the hang of it, and now signal my American orgins every time I eat....but they are a kind and generous lot, so its OK.
Karl:
I would say that rather than stereotyping, the author is merely relating a story. I would say that the two most egregious examples of poor eating behavior I have witnessed in academe were both committed by men. In one instance, a fellow used his fork to spear and scoop leftovers from his wife's plate onto his own at a banquet, and the other time a fellow crushed a bag of chips (it was a casual box lunch) into tinier chips, and then poured the entire bag into his mouth -- throwing his head back.
The "holding the fork" maneuver is also interesting. Some of us do adopt the European style vs. American style. But all of us should know that holding a fork with elbows flaring like a typical 2-year-old is just wrong.
Thanks very much for this great observation.
I generally agree that manners are important, but I'm a little disconcerted by the author's attitude toward those whose manners don't meet her standards. Perhaps Mr. Suit and the grad student didn't grow up in bourgeois households where such etiquette is learned. Knowing which fork to use is surely a marker of class as much as anything else.
I'd encourage everyone also to keep in mind that there is a difference between eccentricity and bad manners (in all senses).
One more note - remember, we live in a globalized world, your rules of manners aren't the center of the universe, others exist, are valid and need to be equally respected (including balls of butter).
PS If a ball-o-butter keeps one from talking to someone potentially as interesting as was described, I'd personally question both their motivation and desire to interact and grow ... Be careful not to slip on your own pet peeves and miss out on great opportunities!
TOLERANCE AND UNDERSTANDING MAKE THE WORLD GO ROUND!
It's a proper observation that many people lack the upbringing in which one would learn good etiquette -- and teaching these things to children is becoming increasingly rare. But it might, conceivably, be part of a university education to become modestly cultured, especially since this is frequently a quite important aspect of one's professional or academic career.
Cornell recently made a quite modest gesture in that direction by bringing in a well-known consultant on business relations to provide a one-shot "class" in etiquette for engineering students. They might have found it amusing at the time, but I'll wager they'll be grateful for some of these things when doing on-site interviews or meeting with underwriters of their projects.
Thank you all for taking the time to read my article and post comments. I am always happy to learn new things from my audience.
This is a great piece, and I'm sure that even readers familiar with these social norms found themselves checking for something they might have missed. I, for one, am guilty of preemptively placing my napkin on the table when I'm getting bored and want to leave.
I question the author's advice, however, when it comes to clothing. I find that in most settings, academics who wear three piece suits look terribly out of place. Academe is purposefully different in its attire and is the happy home of many people who prefer not to look like an investment banker or corporate VP. I would say that, with the exception of interview situations, polite attire for conferences, university-wide events, etc, is usually no more than a blazer or sport coat for men (I will not pretend to know the appropriate match for women) and some nice slacks. Ties are optional, and tweed (patches are over the top) is nice in the right seasons.
If I were to walk through professional conferences in a three piece suit, I would expect many confused looks and stares. Perhaps I would try to draw attention away from the suit by buttering the entire surface of my roll.
I can't imagine why anyone cares about any of this. The author of this article is attempting to impose their arbitrary preferences on other people. The comments on the differences between European, American and South African table manners demonstrates just how superficial and pointless such recriminations are. The author can feel justified in no longer wanting to have babies with the intelligent, well-dressed man of the story but shows her absolute unsuitability to be making any sort of business decision based on merit. Although dismissed as utopian, the idea that in academia people can eat their bread just how they damn want and still be judged solely on their ability to do their job is not one that should be dismissed out of hand.
Our country is an intractable war in Iraq that has destabilized the entire Middle East. We lost a major city to a hurricane last year and it's still gone. The U.S. refuses to acknowledge what it's own insurance industry takes as a given: Global warming is playing havoc with weather and expectations of risk. America refuses even to consider stem-cell research, guaranteeing that other parts of the world will lead in this vital area for the next half century. And, horrors, our academics don't know which side to butter their bread on.
I suggest an immediate and massive federal appropriation to revitalize Home Ec departments in colleges across the nation, and I'm NOT talking these trendy, possibly leftist, Human Ecology fabrications. We're not mannered enough. The veneer of civilization is slipping. Woe!
As professionals in higher education, it is our job to role model those things which we like our students to learn. I am very disappointed that JO would simply push aside the intent of the article truly disappoints me. I am also disappointed to see the numerous spelling errors in these postings... amuzing from Karl? I constantly hear complaints from staff, faculty, and administration about the inappropriateness of today's students. How can we expect our students to learn to be more business-world ready when we don't role model for them or when we put down someone else for trying to use humor to teach a lesson? Let's face it, unless it has a computer screen today's students don't have a lot of interest in it so humor is a great way to find a teachable moment.
J.O. I trust you don’t travel much. Or you don’t work. I am picturing your digging into the roast lamb in Kuwait with your left hand or sticking your chopsticks vertically into your rice bowl in Taiwan. I suggest your school not revitalize their Home Ec departments but rather their Sociology Departments and that you audit a course or town. You may be interested in finding out how manners and dining/eating habits are part of cultures around the world. You may even feel inclined to pass on some of your our cultural heritage and teach your children manners.
Mr. Dockery, you are perfectly right to point out that horrible things happen in this world. However, while I can’t control the weather or the war in Iraq, I certainly can control my personal manners. What sir, is so terrible about being civil, polite and kind? Or of discussing things within our control?
I don't buy any of this. I think Alaina simply struck out and is making all this up to get back at Mr. Big,... I mean Mr. Suit.
Unfortunately STM has clearly missed the point of my comment. Were I, or anyone else, to commit faux pas like using the 'wrong' hand to eat my lamb in Kuwait, this would have absolutely no impact on a rational assessment of my ability to do my job as an academic. I would also argue that this applies to most other jobs. Anyone making employment decisions where eating dinner using a fork as a scoop does not disqualify you from doing that job competently (and I cannot think of a single job where that would so disqualify you), must be making that decision on factors irrelevant to the person's ability to do the job. This, it seems to me is the basis of discrimination. Imagine the situation where a student/academic/potential employee from Ghana, say, started to eat with her hands. Would this generate snide blog entries and result in lists of 'proper' or 'normal' behaviour being presented to this person? If this is the case, then these entries/lists will not be being written by me.
Alaina says that she could not access Mr Suit's wisdom because she was focused on his table manners. This I would class as an error on her part. Mr Suit does not lose out because someone with particular sensibilities refuses to listen to his wisdom. Alaina misses out. A crucial element of multiculturalism, and of tolerance in general, is being able to see past such superficial (and completely irrelevant to job performance) behaviour.
I am not denying that in life there are many more situations where cosying up to the boss, laughing at his/her jokes, etc. and impressing them with your ability to fit the profile that they like (habits, beliefs, behavioural traits) are crucial to your job performance than situations were rationality and tolerance shine through. What I am asking is that we, enlightened via extensive education, strive to avoid making such important decisions and judgments based on what is essentially personal preference.
Sorry JO, I don't think I missed your point. I believe that your abilty to operate within the culture of the nation/society you chose to be employed in does impact on your abilty to do your job.
To think that you could effectively work in a business climate where your
stomp all over the sensibilties of your customers is silly. Would you hire a lawyer who comes into court wearing cutoffs and calling the judge 'dude'? Is interacting with the judge part of being a good lawyer? I would think so.
Unless you are some super-techie working equations from a cubicle you have to work with people. And guess what? How you deal with people involves interacting with culture and meeting soe type of cultural norm.
If your job as an academic was only to write papers for publication, maybe, you would have an case for your point. However, you most likely have students in your class. And probably would even have a couple of humans actually read your papers in fact.
Now you may wish to argue that the norms of a university are different from the norms of the outside society and that at the University of Bangkok you can point your feet at statues of Buddah and perhaps I would agree. However, all that would mean is that your standards and norms are different. And by the way, having taught one semester in Thailand, I challange you to open a class with an insult to their King or to Buddah and see how effective you are as an academic.
Your ego may say that you can be the cool, hip guy who can act as he wants and should only be judged on his knowledge, but I believe an academic's first and formost job is being able to input that knowledge to others. And to do that you have to operate within some type of cultural norm.
To think otherwise is, well, foolish and shows a lack of cultural awareness, global experience and understanding of people. To say nothing of a pretty big ego.
One other note JO. I believe that you are mistaken in stating that these activities are personal preferences. As I suggested earlier, take a "soc" class or two. Eating behavior and such are cultural norms and have evolved over centuries. You may not want to be bothered doing them, you may not agree with them, you may even think you are above them. But I believe you are wrong in saying that they are personal preferences much like the choosing the color of your car.
Choosing to follow them or not is, of course your choice, but following customs like respect of elders, silence at funerals, eating in a certain way, not having loud side conversations in class are more than just personal (you seem to imply arbitrary) preferences. These are norms - and by the way, cultural norms are actually a bit more than just sucking up to your boss. I am respectful to elders I meet but I honestly don't do that because I think the Dean is watching me.
Your choice is to show respect to a culture or not to. And how one fits into a culture truely is part of most job descriptions I know of. I really can't see your argument that it isn't. I am willing to listen though.
More in reply to STM:
Your point that the ability to operate within a culture is relevant to how you do your job is correct. However, it is too coarse-grained for the current discussion. Calling the judge 'dude' or insulting the Thai king to students who react badly to that arguably does have an impact on your effectiveness in being a lawyer or teacher. However, the 'tips' being propounded in this article are not behaviours of this type. Unless you messily butter and eat a bread roll at the beginning of each class before getting stuck into the non-gastronomic content, and I do not do this, the way you choose to butter your bread does not impact on your job performance as a teacher/academic.
Also, I am not challenging the empirical observation that in life following certain customs is in one's self-interest. In practice, not only making your boss like you but making friends and interacting with colleagues, etc., requires you to follow certain cultural norms. This is not the issue. I am saying that we _should_ not care (a normative point) about stuff that is irrelevant to job performance. I am also saying that we should not care about trivial things like table manners, that do not harm us in any way whatsoever, even when making social decisions about who we are friends with, let alone academic or professional decisions. A crucial point here (one that some of my friends with whom I have been talking about this blog article also have had trouble grasping) is that while the boss/academic colleague may in fact care about table manners, they _should_ not, on the grounds of the irrationality of judging someone's job performance on factors irrelevant to that. Clearly, someone who disregards shared cultural norms is likely to be discriminated against. This should not be the case. (BTW I have no delusions about the effectiveness of this comment in bringing about a world in which people are rationally evaluated)
In refutation of your second point, regarding whether cultural norms in general and those described in this article in particular are personal preferences, I would like to quote a distinguished authority:
"Choosing to follow them or not is, of course your choice" (STM 2006)
To argue otherwise is to hold a form of cultural determinism, i.e. that a person born into a particular culture cannot manifest behaviours different from those characteristic of that culture. This is false. Also, and conversely, the choice of car colour is plausibly influenced by cultural factors beyond personal preference, such as the idea that red cars are faster, black cars are more distinguished etc. The choice is not between respecting a culture and not doing so. The choices for us are twofold:
between 1)acting socially in a way that furthers our interests (whatever they are), and 2)not doing so,
and between 3)Evaluating other people's capacity to do their job with reference to factors irrelevant to that capacity, and 4)not doing so.
I would advocate doing both 1) and 4), as I endeavour to do.
P.S. While I would rather not indulge in ad hominem irrelevancies, not only have I lived and taught in several countries but I also have a postgraduate degree in sociology.
I had this friend years ago. When he went on a first date, which was not that often, he would commit some faux pas like slurping his root beer with a spoon just to see if she had a sense of humor. He did not want to waste time with a second date if she didn't! For the record, he is happily married now.
Perhaps I should have attended finishing school instead of graduate school.
E
Why do you seem to think that it has to be one or the other? Can't we have academics who aren't gross eaters?
My goodness, I didn't realize that not belching at a crowded table was such a burden.
Only in america would you need someone to publish this information.... Hilarious!
As most people here, I've spent a ton of time around academics. I've found there to be no correlation whatsoever between the wisdom of those academics, and their surface level manners about things like bread-buttering.
If you want to learn something from people, start looking past the surface!
I think Jo and STM should take it outside, but in a civilized manner of course; Pistols at Dawn.
My colleagues who teach academic writing tell their students not about "correct" and "incorrect" ways of writing, but of the different conventions that apply in different settings. If students want to write like a sociologist or an engineer, they need explicit instruction in these conventions. Similarly, *if* people want to impress others in certain settings, it seems only fair that they have access to explicit instruction in the conventions that apply to that setting. If they are aware of the conventions and reject them, I'd like to think that I personally would not judge their merit as human beings, academics, or whatever. (We all have our limits -- hold your fork however you like, but if you're rude to the waiter I may just walk out.) I think what is more uncomfortable is being around someone who *does* want to impress but is not aware of the conventions that apply in that particular social setting. In fact, when I began reading about Dr. Suit, I immediately felt sorry for him, assuming he was a working-class guy trying to make a good impression, but with no idea that academics don't dress like that at special occasions. Making "etiquette" lessons available to those who want them is a fundamentally egalitarian thing to do.
Deb,
I think you missed the hyperbolic tone of my comment. Look again. The comment was meant to provoke thought by invoking wry wit.
A very good article. I especially like the definition of professionalism. During employment interviews, unfortunately, I am sometimes on the receiving end of bad manners from "professionals". I have extended my hand for a hand shake only to have it left dangling in the air. I have been met by interviewers who greet me by name but fail to introduce themselves until after they have led me through the office and we are in the interview. And I have made eye contact with interviewers who slump in their chairs during the interview and act as if being there is a chore and looking at me while I am answering a question is boring. I certainly hope someone shows them this article! Well done!
Kim, Karl is right. Until social mores and etiquette are understood, promoted, and conducted by all, there will not be equality (gender, racial, or cultural) or proper manners.
Thank you, Alaina, for an excellent article about a topic that falls through the cracks.
I am not an academic--I am a lawyer. One might think that in a business where making an impression on other people facilitates transactions, and enables one to earn his livelihood, that business etiquette would be a no-brainer. But, alas, many lawyers eat with their mouths open, use their utensils like shovels, and act with no regard for the perceptive faculties of the other people at the same table. A confounding state of affairs!
I support tolerance, the recognition that difference does not automatically equate to better or worse. But, I also support preserving and extending our culture. Through the habits of culture, including how we act at the dinner table, we are able to live alongside each other in peace and harmony. And, through recognizing the basic cultural values that unite us, such as table etiquette, we can better tolerate, even celebrate, other cultural values that otherwise may divide us.
I think it would be terrific to address, as well, young people who "text message" at a dinner event, sneeze all over the person next to them, snap their fingers to get a waiter's attention when they are not the host, order their own bottle of wine and appetizers, get up from the table four times and complain because they missed dessert, take incoming calls, interrupt, and express their youthful superiority in all matters. How do you teach a young person the pitfalls of being flat out obnoxious?
I personally choose to follow many of the rules discussed in the article because I know some people will judge me on how well I conform to their expectations, but I think being so concerned with how someone butters their role betrays a close mindedness that I find unattractive.
One commenter mentioned scraping food from another person's plate. If that food would otherwise go to waste I think that's a perfectly good example of where one should NOT have good manners. Impressing colleagues is only worthwhile when you don't have to sacrifice other principles. What if you could endear yourself by agreeing with your boss's racist opinions? Too much politeness is a bad thing.