Toxic workplaces delay economic recovery

 

[caption id="attachment_8868" align="alignleft" width="300" caption="working man"][/caption]

Carol Forsloff - Lack of accountability and a toxic workplace can take its toll not only on a given company but can create an environment where system wide there are problems, as toxic workplaces can become contagious, infect other companies and impede economic recovery.

What people in mediation and arbitration say is that people in organizations are rarely oblivious to the undercurrents present in

their workplace. In other words, they know what’s going on and in the same way
that children sense what is happening in families even when parents believe
that they have managed to hide the tensions, employees are very adept at
reading the energy and atmosphere in their workplaces. And they recognize
toxicity, dysfunction and lack of credibility within organizations and their
leadership.


Human beings have a very well developed sense of what is right and wrong, and
while there may be times when they choose to ignore this, a situation where
blame is deflected and unhealthy behaviors of gossip and intimidation are
rampant can cause problems not just for the particular company involved but the
organizational culture as a whole, experts in mediation tell us.

There is much talk these days about the need to create
‘healthy workplaces’. And certainly research supports the fact that employees
are more productive when they are happy and feel safe.


Ruth Sirman of CanMediate.com tells us, that in spite of the talk about healthy
workplaces, “ as human beings we seem to have an amazing capacity to create
negative and dysfunctional working environments; and often leaders seem
oblivious to the ripple effect and impact their choices have throughout their
organizations.”


What is that ripple effect?

Sirman says, “In any organization whenever someone is ‘let
go’ in a questionable way or where employees sense a level of cover-up or lack
of fairness, it can trigger a chain reaction of feelings such as “if it could
happen once (to them), then it could happen again - to me!” and “if this is
going on what else is going on?” ultimately leaving employees with a sense that
this is not a ‘safe’ place to work – and the guard goes up.


If I as an employee perceive that this is not a safe place to be and in
particular not a safe place to make mistakes (or fail), then I will take steps
to protect myself. Consequently a culture of wariness and risk aversion
typically sets in and pervades the atmosphere of the workplace leading to
people literally or at least figuratively looking over their shoulder and
making choices that are perceived to be safer and less likely to bring me to
the notice of the decision makers.


What does that mean for the organization?


“When the organizational culture becomes wary, risk averse and self-protective,
the impact on the organizations ability to thrive is huge,” explains
Sirman.  “ The most successful
organizations out there who can thrive in continually changing economic and
political climates are those which are flexible, robust and dynamic. They have
organizational cultures that are built on creativity, accountability (NOT
blame) and solid relationships that support the ability to adapt through solid,
dynamic, creative responses to the challenges confronting them.


When the culture if perceived to be based on blame-storming (ie finger-pointing
and scape-goating) the first things that get lost are openness and creativity.
If I feel the need to protect myself, I will choose carefully what ideas I put
out to the group, what decisions I make and what level of responsibility I am
willing to assume. Protection becomes more important than contribution, and the
organization suffers.”


The biggest problems have to do with blame and accountability and not knowing
the impact of these issues on the interaction of the workers and the workers to
service and products. Sirman tells us, “Blame is me telling you that you made a
mistake. Accountability is when I step up and take responsibility for my
actions and acknowledge that I made a mistake. There is a huge difference
between the two. Both typically have consequences: in blame they are generally
punitive in nature. In accountability they are more typically fair and
reasonable.


However accountability will not happen without a perceived level of safety and
fairness – and that must include any consequences that happen as a result of
someone being accountable. As young children we learned that if we are ‘to
blame’ for something the punishment that follows is likely going to hurt in
some way. So typically we stopped owning up to what we did… and learned to lie,
deflect, deny, and avoid whenever possible.


Denial, deflection and finger-pointing continue when a toxic and dysfunctional
organizational culture is allowed to flourish according to Sirman.

“ Can it be changed? Absolutely - but as Albert Einstein
said "You can't solve a problem with the same mindset that created
it". There would need to be a willingness on the part of leadership in to
find a better way, “Sirman reminds us, as she outlines how difficult it is for
people at the top to want to find that better way.

It is the willingness to take that first step that can make
a difference in ending toxicity in government and industry, which is
detrimental to economic recovery on every level.  An unhealthy workplace can be contagious and
create problems system wide so that blame is not only within an organization
but outside it as well.  As Sirman
explains, one company making a change at the top, with the recognition that it
is not only the company but the system itself that can be helped with

accountability.