Recent reports that Matthew Perry’s assistant, Kenneth Iwasama, was charged in connection with his fatal overdose sent shockwaves across the world. It was another layer to the tragedy of one of the most beloved actors of a generation, but the shockwaves from the story are still felt by the administration community, in particular Executive Assistants.
Iwasama’s LinkedIn profile states he is a Talent Manager/Executive Assistant.
He shares that he supported Perry for ~25 years in various capacities and responsibilities, from Executive Assistant to Personal Manager. He was also live-in, which no doubt added an added layer of complexity in his support role.
I’m a former EA with an almost 30 year career supporting CEOs, Chairs, thought leaders and a high profile person.
Today, I’m a trainer and advocate for EAs. Reading Iwasama’s profile, what struck a chord with me is that although his career was in show business, his strengths read like most other EA’s.
“I thrive in chaotic situations which call for order. I am discreet, loyal and honor absolute confidentiality. I am adept at migrating data to and from the cloud and back and forth from PC/Mac environments, excellent business writer and am at home making compelling visual presentations. I love deadlines, contracts, dotting i’s and solving puzzling situations and projects.”
Those qualities are the ones that make for a great EA. An interesting, misunderstood profession that requires full focus on the needs and priorities of others.
How does someone go from a fairly normal job to allegedly playing a role in their boss’s downfall?
To understand the pathway to this drastic experience I don’t believe is actually all that far removed from what’s occurring in many workplaces today.
Much of the EA career experience is shrouded in a cloak of secrecy, with the very nature of the role demanding complete discretion and confidentiality.
It also requires a unique connection to the person an EA supports. Innately knowing what they stand for, their career aspirations, their brand and mitigating the risk for any circumstances that might challenge any of it.
For that reason, the role can be seriously isolating. It can be difficult to confide in anyone let alone some kind of mentor or person with more experience than you, so the understanding of what is reasonable within the expectations of the role can become hazy.
These blurred lines of what is and is not reasonable for an EA occur as much in the corporate world, as they do in entertainment.
It can be particularly damaging for some EAs because the profession is conditioned to see individuals going above and beyond. A programming that suggests to enable the success of others, a deeply invested approach is needed, putting that person’s needs above an EA’s own which is where people pleasing and responsibility creep manifests.
It’s also where identifying too closely with an executive begins to happen. An EA’s identity becomes overshadowed by the executive they support.
This is what I believe could have occurred with Kenneth Iwasama. I have no doubt when he began his career that he could never have imagined this is the way it would end. The dark turn his being in service took would have happened slowly over time.
Loyalty becomes toxic, and it’s happening every day in corporates all over the world.
I know because I hear countless stories from clients and the EA community. I have experienced it in my career, too.
It comes from executives who abuse the power imbalance and disrespect personal boundaries. Those who push the envelope with their requests into the space of unethical or illegal, or those who simply treat the person directly enabling their success, as though they don’t matter.
This kind of treatment can have a very real impact on self-esteem, self-belief and confidence of EAs.
The reason it pervades is the stigma about the profession itself, with the worldwide believe that such assistants are “just an admin”.
There is the unspoken reality that to be regarded as talent, not a resource, an EA must strive to be perfect.
Read between the lines of any position description for an EA and you’ll see the expectations too.
Such position descriptions demand an ability to cope with pressure and ambiguity, to do it all in a self-led way with resilience and a permanent smile while taking on more and not being compensated for it.
In a largely unsupported role, it can feel hard for an EA to have a voice and agitate for the change that allows an EA to truly thrive.
Most EAs will work out how to thrive in their career, but for every EA that does, many others will suffer silently, experiencing burnout and in the most extreme cases, trauma and leaving the profession to heal.
Why should mainstream Australia care about the state of the administrative profession?
Organisations need to be more invested in understanding their administrative function’s challenges for a very simple reason: much of their career experiences are defined by Safe Work Australia as Psychosocial Hazards.
It’s bad for business to pretend it isn’t happening.
The last Australian Bureau of Statistics census indicates the field “Admin and Support Services” accounts for 9.1 per cent of the workforce, and is mostly made up of women.
Generally, there is a cap on salaries for EAs. And in most organisations, administrative cohorts aren’t supported and developed in a meaningful way to help them hit that ceiling as quickly as possible in their careers. This serves an organisation well, making it harder for an experienced EA to leave.
If you tune into the pulse of LinkedIn in EA-related posts, you’ll feel the fear that exists for those aged 40 and over. Finding work is becoming increasingly difficult as they face ageism, bias and the stereotypes of being generationally tech challenged, which is a fallacy.
The Australian Human Rights Commission’s report “Older Women’s Risk of Homelessness: Background Paper” (2019) reported the fastest-growing population of homeless is women aged 50+.
This paints a sobering picture.
In a profession that isn’t set up to thrive, this reality just isn’t good enough.
These are the people who protect the health of an organisation, yet their own wellbeing is often ignored or not considered because it’s been an acceptable status quo for too long.
With the cap on salaries, very real ageism and a tough economy,, it puts many EAs in a difficult situation of having to put up with toxic situations — not unlike Iwasama’s — that impact their quality of life. To leave, would be to put these EAs in a position of financial insecurity and the possibility of finding it difficult to find another role. It might be one of the final frontiers of othering and lack of inclusion in the corporate space.
Chances are you work with one or more admin professionals. Someone who keeps things moving and is responsible for enabling the success of your organisation, team, or maybe even your own personal success.
If this is you, my ask is simple.
Can you become curious about understanding the nature of their work better? Can you role model what it looks like to elevate an admin professional, giving their career of choice the dignity and respect it deserves and level the playing field?