Stop Bullying at Work: Thoughts from a Psychologist

Goodmorning!

Yesterday a colleague sent me a copy of a publication called Bullying at Work written by UK Psychologist Noreen Tehrani.

Noreen writes,

“we are at an interesting stage in how bullying at work is being tackled. Over the past 20 years, organizations have moved from ‘it doesn’t happen here’, to acceptance, and to putting policies in place to try and stop it.”

Noreen goes on to ask the questions, “Do these policies work, and if not, why not?”

Too many organizations are waiting for BAD BEHAVIOR to happen. The policies give advice on how to deal with the bullying behavior…focusing on the victim and isolating the bully.

But policies alone cannot solve the problem!  

Dealing with bullying behavior in the workplace calls for a more comprehensive approach which includes:

• policies
• training
• leadership development
• team building
• communication skills training
• coaching and counselling
• appreciative inquiry (recognizing and promoting positive relationships and behaviors)

Noreen also writes about INSTITUTIONALIZED BULLYING which is condoned by an organization by allowing the following:

• autocratic management styles
• work overload
• role confusion
• a blame culture
• unresolved conflict
• tolerating (or even promoting) aggressive behavior because it is believed to get results

For most of my career I have worked in health care organizations. I can still remember one psychiatrist who bullied staff, residents, patients and families. At least he was consistent.

There were numerous complaints about his behavior and nurses often refused to work on days when he made his rounds in their departments.

This was such a clear case of institutional bullying and yet nothing was done about it.

Senior management was aware of this man’s behavior but they chose to look the other way because this bully brought in large sums of research money and he was seen to get results.

Bullying at Work is published by the Chartered Institute for Personnel and Development in the UK.

The emphasis is on promoting positive working relationsips.

AND creating workplaces where appropriate ways of behaving are clearly communicated and supported.

Bullying at Work is well researched and well written. Try and get a copy.

Cheers,
Lesley

Reduce Stress and Conflict in the Workplace

Hello!

A few years ago I had the priviledge of being part of an innovative program to reduce stress and conflict in health care organizations. What made this program innovative was that it was created by the Hospital Employees Union (HEU) in B.C.

The program was based on international research that focused on the causes and ways to reduce organizational stress.

At that time the HEU’s vision was to collaborate or partner with health care organizations in order to implement the program.

Unfortunately for everyone involved management in the health care sector was not ready to “embrace” a program that was initiated by a labor union.

This was extremely short sighted considering the millions of dollars spent annually to cover the cost of stress related injuries and illnesses.

Perhaps the real reason that this program didn’t “fly” was because management refused to accept that the root cause of the problem was not the individual worker but the organization in which she worked.

Why is it that stress is  uncritically accepted as a “fact of life” in our society? And why is it that stress  is seen as an “individual” problem?

The prevailing worldview in North America is that stress is an individual problem and one that is within the power of the individual to address.

It is for this reason that most stress management programs focus on assisting the individual worker AND it is for this reason that most stress management programs fail.

Employee assistance programs and stress management training focus on assisting individual workers to recognize and deal with stress symptoms.

Employee assistance programs provided individual and family counselling while stress managment programs offer a range of techniques including meditation, progressive relaxation, time management, communication skills, and bio feedback.  

Workers are also encouraged to eat healthy diets and exercise on a regular basis.

There is nothing wrong with any of these things and they can contribute to a healthy lifestyle.

What is WRONG is failing to recognize and accept and address conditions in the organization that contribute to stress.

Labor unions and management hold different views on the causes of work stress. A 1980’s study conducted by the National Institute of Occupational Health and Safety  (NIOHS) confirmed these differences.

From the unions’ perspective the causes of work stress are environmental and include such things as organizational redesign, workload, lack of training, noise levels, overcrowding and little or no control over work.

Management, on the other hand, emphasize individual characteristics such as personality type, lifestyle and family problems as the major factors behind work stress.

Of course they are both right! But, focusing solely on individual factors without addressing organizational stressors is pointless.

“…effective programs thrive in organizations with policies and programs that promote respect throughout the organization and encourage active worker participation, input and involvement…a human centered culture is built on trust, not fear…” NIOSH Worklife Institute

Whether the focus is on the health of a workplace or on healing a workplace it all boils down to the same values: trust, respect, and honesty. Without these organizations will fail to thrive and this can’t be good for any of us.

Take care and BE WELL!

Lesley

Social Capital…What can we learn from bowling alone?

WE need each other…we really do!

The happiness and health of our communities AND our workplaces depend on how connected we are to each other.

And perhaps more importantly the quality of our health and happiness also depend on the strength of our relationships!

In 2000 Robert Putnam wrote Bowling Alone and in doing so he coined the term “social capital”.

Social capital refers to social networks, norms of reciprocity, mutual assistance and trustworthiness.

Of course Putnam’s research focused on groups of people who were connected socially and geographically, but his findings should be applied to our workplace communities.

We are all part of social networks.

These are our connections to family, friends, neighbours, and colleagues. Our networks don’t stop there of course as we are also connected to the networks of all of the people we know.

People often think about their “networks” when they are looking for a job. Remember the old adage? “It’s now what you know but who you know?”

Some of these connections are strong and some are weak  but all have the potential to increase our social capital.

Reciprocity means give and take. Simply put, if I help you I expect you will help me. If I loan you “things” or money I expect the same kindness in return.

Some people are naturally inclined to share what they have…others are more reserved.

Workplaces in which the “norms” of reciprocity suggest that people help each other and share information and ideas are generally more successful than workplaces in which people hoard.

In his research Putnam identified two types of social networks:

1. Bonding Social Networks (think teams)
2. Bridging Social Networks (think cross functional teams and other ways for people to engage in dialogue and meaningful conversations)

So, to conclude…workplaces are only as strong and healthy as their “social capital”.

In Bowling Alone Putnam described in detail how disconnected and isolated North Americans have become. The consequences of this disconnection are increased crime, increased mental illness, and decreased health and happiness.

Workers in North America are also experiencing an increase in depression, accidents, and increased stress.  

What can we learn from Bowling Alone?

Who Can We Trust in the Workplace?

Trust, or lack of it, continues to be an issue for many of us. During the 1950’s, 1960’s and 1970’s there was a much higher degree of trust in the workplace. This was often referred to as the psychological contract of trust that existed between employers and employees.

Unfortunately, this trust was shattered in the decades that have passed since the 1970’s…

Trust has been shattered by individual and corporate greed, a focus on the short term (downsizing and moving business offshore), and the unethical behavior of people in positions of leadership.

As a result employees are less loyal overall. They are also less committed and less enthusiastic about their work which has a negative impact on productivity…which hurts us all.

It seems that not a month goes by without some scandle about Wall Street greed, unethical behavior and abuse. I think the latest insult to the public has been the acceptance of mega bonuses by senior employees in organizations that have received bailouts from the American government.

Not only do employees no longer trust their employers but much of the world has now lost trust in the American economic system. But this is not the topic of today’s blog post.

Today I want to share something that I just found on the www. I want to introduce you to the work of Jack R. Gibb who studied and wrote about trust during the latter half of the twentieth century.

In 1991 Mr. Gibb wrote, “Trust: A New Vision of Human Relationships for Business, Education, Family and Personal Living”. The entire book is available on-line and I found it to be a book of hope. The book is practical, inspirational and at the same time academic as it is based on years of research.

Jack was not only passionate about this topic but he was also a pioneer in that he was the first person in North America to research and write about a subject that touches so many people.

In 1991 trust-building was “unresearchable, unfundable and low on the priority list of most leaders”.

The book explores the many dimensions of trust: the psycholgical, the spiritual, the personal, and the interpersonal. The author provides theory, guidelines and tools for diagnosing the level of trust in teams.

Those of you wanting to increase trust in your organizations will want to read about High Quality Work Environments.

Gibb and his associates have developed a scale so that you can measure the level of trust in your workplace.

Why should we pay attention to this topic?

“When trust is high people and systems function well. When trust is low and fear is high these systems break down.”

This applies to the workplace but it also applies to every other “people system” that we can imagine.

I mentioned the word hope earlier and I’d like to leave you with these words,

“The world and the people in it ARE trustworthy…the future is in us and it is bright.”    Jack R. Gibb

Lesley