Bonum Certa Men Certa

Management by Intimidation Has Caused Deaths at the European Patent Office (EPO)

Management by Intimidation



Summary: An accurate diagnosis of the conditions created at the European Patent Office (EPO) by Benoît Battistelli and his cronies, who have essentially hijacked the Organisation -- not just the Office -- then attacked every 'enemy', either real or perceived

THE previous article about Professor Alain Pompidou (former EPO President who, as far as we know, EPO staff at the time did not hate). Nobody is perfect, but Professor Pompidou was at least regarded not as a bully. People in circles close to the EPO generally told us positive things about him. Pompidou did complain about productivity or laziness (IP Kat covered it at one point). When Alison Brimelow stepped down IP Kat said that "Brimelow is reported to be unhappy at the quantity of politics that has invaded her senior administrative job description [and] calls for the clarification, extension and abolition of the computer program "as such" exception to patentability."



We covered all this (at the time) and at no point did we hear about suicides, for instance. Staff did occasionally protest (we covered that and posted photos), but back then there was no aggressive crackdown on staff and their representatives. When Battistelli took over he introduced a de-motivational career path, which was explained also in this presentation [PDF]. But what pushed people to depression and sometimes even suicide (not to mention brain drain due to departures and inability to attract/recruit talent) was explained in the following document from 3 years ago:

Zentraler Vorstand . Central Executive Committee . Bureau Central

03.11.2014 sc14260cp – 0.2.1/4.1

Management by FEAR



Dear colleagues,

Some of you may still remember a power-point presentation from a management meeting years ago that suggested “fear, isolation and punishment” as a method for dealing with “under-performers. The staff representation requested the (then) President to distance herself from such statements. She never did and neither did Mr Battistelli, when asked.

There are various names for such management methods. “Management by intimidation” (“MBI”) is one of them. As an annex, we have copied list of warning signs for MBI. We invite you to do the test and see which apply to our organization.

The article from which the list was copied1 states that MBI practices lead to a demotivated work-force and are costly for an organization. In the EPO the consequences of MBI might be less quickly visible because the quality of the work done (the most obvious part to suffer) is not properly measured, and our income derives in part from the work done in the past (renewal fees). Still: the long-term impact will be negative on the organisation and the costs in terms of human suffering and reputation will be huge.

We therefore call on the individual responsibility of each staff member and each manager to resist the current development. For managers this means in particular not exposing staff under their responsibility to the isolation2 and punishment3 that is part of the Office’s new way of dealing with “challenging people4”.

SUEPO Central

_______________ 1 Impact of Management by Intimidation on Human Capital: Is It Destroying Your Organization? http://www.acua.org/ACUA_Resources/Auditor/Summer2006.pdf, pages 5-10 2 e.g. suspension 3 usually dismissal. 4 “DG1 Teaming Up: Challenging People”, A. Bailas, Yann Chabod http://babylon/projects/babylon/acedg1.nsf/0/268766D76E00FFB8C1257C8200471D56/$FILE/Presentation_MM14_Challenging%20People.ppt




Warning Signs of MBI (Management by Intimidation)



After years of consulting and management reviews, the authors discovered patterns of behavior. Do you see these in your organization?

1. Use of Threats: MBI practitioners threaten or intimidate people to perform, not inspire people to do their best. Letters of warning, informal threats of dismissal and informal requests to resign are some of the popular tactics used by MBI practitioners in organizations. Show of unchecked power is the basis for their operating philosophy.

2. Ineffective Oversight Body: Members of the oversight body (e.g., board of directors) are carefully screened and hand-picked. The intent is to ensure that members, who do not habitually question the activities of management, are selected and retained. Such an ineffective oversight body gives MBI practitioners a carte blanche to act administratively with unchecked powers. The body views auditors as necessary evils, rather than partners who assist its members in discharging their oversight responsibilities. The need to avoid micro-management is used as an excuse for this kind of hand-off oversight philosophy.

3. Censored Communications: MBI practitioners do not like employees to communicate openly and frankly about their views on organizational matters. They manipulate communication channels to ensure that only positive things are said and written about the organizations to external parties. Employees who express unfavorable opinions about the working conditions are routinely reprimanded by superiors who subscribe to the MBI philosophy. Commitment to truth is nonexistent. Board members, external auditors, internal auditors, and regulators receive communications censored or sanitized by MBI practitioners to conceal the real organizational climate and culture.

4. Self-Centeredness: MBI practitioners are self-centered leaders. They make decisions that are usually best for them, their favorite subordinates, their friends and their business partners. Personal agendas are disguised as organizational agendas.

5. Unchallenged Authority: MBI practitioners do not like their authority challenged or questioned by anyone. They have no compunction whatsoever in eliminating and neutralizing people who habitually challenge their authority.

6. Lack of Accountability: MBI practitioners are the least accountable people in organizations. They are quick to take credit for successful initiatives and equally quick to apportion blame on others for organizational failures. They are meticulous in building cases – real or imagined – against dispensable employees or scapegoats. MBI practitioners last long in organizations mainly because the culture of accountability is nonexistent.

7. Lack of Transparency: MBI practices are not transparent to people who are not directly and indirectly impacted by such practices. We either experience or learn about them from colleagues who were affected by the practices. MBI practitioners are too concerned about leaving audit trails that they have adopted the practice of not documenting their activities as much as possible and tacitly asking their subordinates to do the same.

8. Questionable Hiring Practices: MBI practitioners tend to ignore good personnel policies and resort to cronyism and nepotism in their hiring decisions. Covert tactics are used to ensure that friends and relatives are given preferential considerations. Ruse interviews are occasionally conducted just to satisfy legal requirements.




9. Lack of Diversity: MBI practitioners preach but do not practice diversity. They develop policies, procedures and plans that extol the virtues of diversity. They organize events intended to create the illusion that their organizations believe in diversity. A closer look will reveal that the people they surround themselves with in key leadership positions are not diverse. Lucrative positions, contracts and bonuses are typically awarded to people who look, think and act like them.

10. Double Standards: Activities that are acceptable to MBI practitioners are not necessarily acceptable to ordinary employees. Double standards are consistently applied in organizations. It is acceptable for MBI practitioners to circumvent rules if it suits their whims, but employees who commit the same type acts are involuntarily terminated.

11. Disdain for Independent Reviewers: MBI practitioners treat internal auditors, external auditors and other independent reviewers with open disdain. They do not want anyone to review and criticize their activities nor the activities of their "trusted" employees. They operate under the illusion that their actions are beyond reproach and not subject to audit. MBI practitioners prefer to have "other people" audited or investigated so that they can get the ammunition to eliminate certain people and show that certain conducts cannot be tolerated. The philosophy of "trust but verify" is foreign to MBI practitioners.

12. Management Myopia: MBI practitioners are inherently reactive managers. They like status quo. They dislike people who rock the boat or think outside the box. They rarely communicate their expectations to employees in a clear, unambiguous manner. They conduct periodic performance evaluations based on their moods at a particular time. Disliked employees are harshly criticized and "trusted" employees are richly rewarded. MBI practitioners manage to survive for as long as possible to aggrandize themselves – not to ensure the long-term health of their organizations.

13. Bliss in Feigned Ignorance: MBI practitioners find bliss in feigned ignorance. The less they know about bad things in their organization, the better for them. That is why they harbor visceral hatred for whistleblowers or employees they perceive as "bad news" messengers. They work hard to erect corporate buffers that will deter unfavorable news from reaching their attention. When confronted by the reality of things in their organizations, they are quick to use the standard excuse of "I didn't know" or "I was not aware" of the problems and their associated risks.


It's interesting just to what degree the above describes the EPO under Battistelli. Almost every single point is an accurate description of today's EPO. It's almost as though the entire article was composed regarding or based on the EPO.

Recent Techrights' Posts

Representing and Speaking for Animals
If I ever choose to take this matter to tribunal with animals-centric NGOs on my side, it'll get some press coverage for sure
Slopwatch: Fake Articles About "Linux", Slop Images in VentureBeat, Linux Foundation Spam Made With LLM Slop and Slop Images
The only relief or upside - if any exists - is that the pace of slop was down a bit this week
Richard Stallman (RMS) Talk in Ethereum Cypherpunk Congress Will be Remote
This past week RMS received lots of accolades online
Links 28/08/2025: Chatbots Distorting/Fabricating History and Also Driving Suicide
Links for the day
 
Links 29/08/2025: Arti 1.5.0, War on Public Health (CDC), and Slop 'Bros' Made to Pay for Their Mass Plagiarism
Links for the day
No, 4Chan is Not Fighting for You by Lawyering Up Against Ofcom (UK)
Don't mistake proto-fascists for people who "fight for you". They don't.
Downlplaying the Impact of "UEFI 9/11" is a Losing Strategy
we won't publish much whilst on holiday
In Many Places in the World Vista 11 "Market Share" is Going Down, Not Up
In some countries Windows is already down to third place or lower
More Microsoft-Connected Layoffs, at Least Third Time This Month! (Also Another Death on Campus)
Microsoft as a "gaming" company is where studios, projects, games, and even developers come to die
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Thursday, August 28, 2025
IRC logs for Thursday, August 28, 2025
Gemini Links 29/08/2025: Poems, Games, and Java 25 Performance
Links for the day
Links 28/08/2025: Greenland 'Interferences' by US and Skinnerboxes to Get Banned in Korean Schools
Links for the day
The Register MS (Run by Microsoft Operatives): Free Software is Putin, Hence Evil and Dangerous
The current editor in chief is an American Microsofter, the previous one went to work for Google (US)
Gemini Links 28/08/2025: Back in Japan and Why "Hacker News" Sucks
Links for the day
A Much-Needed Wake-up Call to Users of Wordpress.com, Blogspot, Substack and All Those Other Outsourced (and Centralised) Platforms
There are several lessons in there
The UEFI 9/11 - Part II - Campaign of Censorship and Defamation Against Critics
In dictatorships, humour serves an important role. It's tragic.
Open Source Initiative (OSI) Resists Software Freedom, Even by Attacking Its Own
The OSI is compromised
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Wednesday, August 27, 2025
IRC logs for Wednesday, August 27, 2025
Slopwatch: linuxsecurity.com, Slopfarms in Google News, and More
Some readers of ours end up sending us links that are from slopfarms, not realising those are slopfarms
Gemini Links 27/08/2025: Katrina Memories and Google Versus Software Freedom
Links for the day
Links 27/08/2025: Police Against Media Freedom in the UK, Energy-Hungry Countries Targeted by China
Links for the day
Microsoft Windows Fell to All-Time Lows in Egypt This Summer, Vista 11 Adoption Decreases While GNU/Linux Increases
Vista 11 is going down rather than up
Links 27/08/2025: Microsoft Demoralises Staff With Slop Demands, Leaving Mastodon Explained
Links for the day
12 Hours Ago The Register MS Published a Fake (Paid-for) Article, But This One for a Change Did Not Promote a Ponzi Scheme
There are also Free software alternatives, but they don't pay The Register MS for "synthetic" so-called 'journalism'
More People Need to Call Out and Put a Stop to Serial Sloppers
Unless slopfarms are stopped, people will read and share Microsoft propaganda made by chatbots
Gemini Links 27/08/2025: Headphones and Tartarus
Links for the day
Morale at Microsoft is Terrible (Proprietary Plagiarism Machines Have No Future, LLM Slop is a Bubble)
The slop sceptics/critics are going to have lots of "told you so" moments
GNOME "governance issues, staff reduction, etc." amidst Albanian whistleblowing and women trafficking
Notice the connection to Software Freedom Conservancy (SFC) and GNOME
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Tuesday, August 26, 2025
IRC logs for Tuesday, August 26, 2025