Incivility in the Workforce: A Cultural Phenomenon?
I was recently preparing a lecture for a Pre-Collegiate program that I volunteer for, and researching marketing ads that told a story, connecting emotion and need to a product, I ran into a very powerful video about bullying. The video was filmed by the fast-food restaurant Burger King and presented a parody about how people may react to a “bullied” Whopper Junior or a child being bullied in front of them (https://youtu.be/mnKPEsbTo9s). In short, following a-not-very scientific research methodology, the short video showed that only 12% of adults would interfere when they see a kid being bullied. That video, filmed in the USA, sparked my curiosity — would bullying behavior and reaction vary by culture? What about within a work environment? Would the reaction be the same as in the restaurant?
In a Harvard Business Review blog, Dr. Davey wrote about the abusive behaviors that one might encounter in the workplace[1]. Davey argued that there are three possible roles that one might play in a workforce related abusive situation. Based on a 2014 article written by Portuguese professor Pedro Neves[2], Davey argued that abuse affected managers, victims and witnesses in different ways and suggested alternatives actions to face and eliminate abusive situations. One of the comments brought up by the authors was that abusive managers usually picked on the weaker employees, described by Neves as “vulnerable and submissive” (Neves, 2014, p. 507). University of Michigan professor Cortina also noted that most uncivil or abusive behaviors happened from the top-down, that is, from a manager or supervisor towards an employee, as well as from a male employee to a female employee, and from a male white employee to a minority employee[3]. One could only wonder if this type of bullying might be related with the individualistic and competitive cultures of many organizations.
In 1999, researchers Andersson and Pearson[4] described how uncivil behaviors or incivility in the workplace have a higher cost for US organizations that the expenses related with other deviant acts such as violent acts. The researchers, defined incivility as “a low-intensity deviant behavior with ambiguous intent to harm the target, in violation of workplace norms for mutual respect” (Andersson & Pearson, 1999, p. 457). They argued that uncivil behaviors were part of the antisocial behaviors, which also included violent and aggressive behaviors, and would escalate to more serious and less ambiguous behaviors unless addressed by the organization’s executives. The researchers promoted the idea that organizational culture needed to make uncivil behaviors undesirable. Interestingly, the study made another reference to culture, but this time as a potential antidote against abusive behaviors.
Just as many parents would push their children to do their best using different methods, in an individualistic culture, managers might challenge their employees to reach their peak performance using different motivational techniques. A manager might decide that ridiculing an employee during a group meeting, an act that could be defined as an uncivil behavior, should motivate the employee to “learn the lesson” and improve his or her performance. I went to a French school for 14 years… when a teacher ridiculed me for a grade in French Poetry Composition (yes, it’s a thing), I improved my academic performance enough to make sure that he or she would pick on someone different the following time, but did I improve as much as I could have improved or just enough to get by?
While I will not deny that ridiculing may provide some type of motivation for some employees, for others, it would probably have a negative impact in their performance, possibly pushing them to disengage from the process and the system. In addition, some of the witnesses of such an abusive behavior may be impacted in a negative manner as well. Overall, most abusive behaviors would result in higher level of psychological stress, lower productivity, lower job satisfaction, higher absenteeism and turnover and overall, in higher levels of active or passive employee disengagement. A report by Gallup Consulting[5] concluded that employee disengagement would result in lower productivity and performance on the employee, and it would negatively impact the whole organization. If the employee engages in active employee disengagement, it would also impact negatively on the performance and productivity of those employees that interact with him or her.
On the other hand, team leadership expert Schwarz[6] argued that if the team could benefit from learning from the mistake made by a team member, the leader should publicly acknowledge the failure. The other team members would learn from the failure and it would have a positive impact of the overall team in the future. The constructive criticism would positively affect future team performance.
So how does one balance the pros and the cons of employee mistakes? Should the leader first meet privately with the employee to point out the mistake and facilitate a corrective action? Should the leader introduce the mistake anonymously during a meeting and work with the team members to find a possible solution or alternative behavior? The short answer — it will depend. It would depend on the leadership style, the development level of the employee, the organizational culture, how long the team has been working together, the type of mistake and the overall culture of the individual team members. Defining that thin red line that separates constructive criticisms and abusive behaviors, represents the difference between a boost to performance, engagement and productivity or a negative impact on the morale of the employees. As an inclusive leader, you need to provide the team psychological safe environment for all team members to feel comfortable to admit and discuss mistakes developing the learning environment that would positively affect the team’s future performance.
[1] L. Davey. (2014, July 18). End abusive behavior on your team. [Web log]. Retrieved from http://blogs.hbr.org/2014/07/end-abusive-behavior-on-your-team/
[2] Neves, P. (2014). Taking it out on survivors: Submissive employees, downsizing, and abusive supervision. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 87(3), 507–534. doi:10.1111/joop.12061
[3] Cortina, L. M., Magley, V. J., Williams, J., & Langhout, R. (2001). Incivility in the workplace: Incidence and impact. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 6(1), 64–80. doi:10.1037/1076–8998.6.1.64
[4] Andersson, L. M., & Pearson, C. M. (1999). Tit for tat? The spiraling effect of incivility in the workplace. Academy Of Management Review, 24(3), 452–471. doi:10.5465/AMR.1999.2202131
[5] Gallup Consulting (2011). State of the global workplace 2011. Retrieved from http://www.gallup.com/strategicconsulting/145535/State-Global-Workplace-2011.aspx.
[6] Schwarz, R. (2013). Smart Leaders, Smarter Teams: How You & Your Team Get Unstuck to Get Results, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
