langt_ch07.qxd 8/22/06 11:55 AM Page 250

250 OB ON THE EDGE The Toxic

It’s not unusual to find the following employee behaviours in today’s work- place:

Answering the phone with a “yeah,” neglecting to say thank you or please, using voice mail to screen calls, leaving a half cup of coffee behind to avoid having to brew the next pot, standing uninvited but impatiently over the desk of someone engaged in a telephone conversa- tion, dropping trash on the floor and leaving it for the maintenance crew to clean up, and talking loudly on the phone about personal matters.1

Some employers or managers fit the following descriptions:

In the months since [the new owner of the pharmacy] has been in charge [he] has made it clear that he is at liberty to fire employees at will . . . change their positions, decrease their bonus percentages, and refuse time-off and vacation choices. Furthermore, he has established an authoritarian work structure characterized by distrust, cut-backs on many items deemed essential to work comfort, disrespect, rigidity and poor-to- no-communication.2

He walked all over people. He made fun of them; he intimidated them. He criticized work for no reason, and he changed his plans daily.3 langt_ch07.qxd 8/22/06 11:55 AM Page 251

251

8 What’s Happening gone to McDonald’s.” Such a come- workplace, including aggression and in Our ? back is acceptable to the diners at the violence.17 Elbow Room Cafe, because Pierre Lebrun chose a deadly way Workplaces today are receiving is its trademark. to exhibit the anger he had stored up highly critical reviews, being called Most work environments are not from his workplace.18 He took a everything from “uncivil” to “toxic.” expected to be characterized by such hunting rifle to Ottawa-Carleton– Lynne Anderson and Christine rudeness. However, this has been based OC Transpo and killed four Pearson, two management professors changing in recent years. Robert public transit co-workers on April 6, from St. Joseph’s University and the Warren, a University of Manitoba 1999, before turning the gun on University of North Carolina, respec- marketing professor, notes that “sim- himself. Lebrun felt that he had been tively, note that “Historians may view ple courtesy has gone by the board.”9 the target of by his co- the dawn of the twenty-first century There is documented evidence of workers for years because of his stut- as a time of thoughtless acts and the rise of violence and threats of vio- tering. If this sounds like an unusual rudeness: We tailgate, even in the lence at work.10 However, several response for an irate employee, con- slow lane; we dial wrong numbers studies have found that there is per- sider the circumstances at OC and then slam the receiver on the sistent negative behaviour in the Transpo. “Quite apart from what’s innocent respondent; we break workplace that is not of a violent alleged or otherwise with Mr. 4 appointments with nonchalance.” nature.11 For instance, a survey of 603 Lebrun’s situation, we know [OC The workplace has often been seen Toronto nurses found that 33 percent Transpo’s] had a very unhappy work as one of the places where civility still had experienced during environment for a long time,” Al ruled, with co-workers treating each the five previous days of work.12 Loney, former chair of Ottawa- other with a mixture of formality and Another study found that 78 per- Carleton’s transit commission, noted. friendliness, distance and politeness. cent of employees interviewed think A consultant’s report produced the However, with downsizing, re- that workplace has year before the shooting found a engineering, budget cuts, pressures increased in the past 10 years.13 The workplace with “rock-bottom morale for increased , autocratic researchers found that men are and poor management.” It was not work environments, and the use of mostly to blame for this change: uncommon for fights to break out part-time employees, there has been “Although men and women are tar- in the unit where the four men were an increase in “uncivil and aggressive gets of disrespect and rudeness in killed. 5 workplace behaviours.” equal numbers . . . men instigate the , according to What does civility in the workplace rudeness 70 percent of the time.”14 the International Labour Organi- mean? A simple definition of work- Rude behaviour is not confined zation (ILO), includes place civility is behaviour “involving to men, however. Professor André politeness and regard for others in the any incident in which a person is Roberge at Laval University suggests workplace, within workplace norms abused, threatened or assaulted in that some of the rudeness is genera- for respect.”6 then circumstances relating to [his or tional. He finds that “young clerks her] work. These behaviours would “involves acting with disregard for often lack both knowledge and civil- originate from customers or co- others in the workplace, in violation ity. Employers are having to train workers at any level of the organi- of workplace norms for respect.”7 Of young people in simple manners zation. This definition would course, different workplaces will have because that is not being done at include all forms of harassment, different norms for what determines home.”15 Professor Warren backs this , , physical mutual respect. For instance, in most up: “One of the biggest complaints threats, assaults, robbery and other restaurants, if the staff were rude to I hear from businesses when I go to intrusive behaviour.19 you when you were there for dinner, talk about graduates is the lack of you would be annoyed, and perhaps No Canadian statistics on anger interpersonal skills.”16 even complain to the manager. at work are available.20 However, However, at the Elbow Room Cafe in studies show that anger pervades the downtown Vancouver, if customers Workplace Violence US workplace. While 25 percent of complain they are in a hurry, man- Recently, researchers have suggested Americans reported being “generally ager Patrick Savoie might well say, “If that incivility may be the beginning at least somewhat angry at work,” you’re in a hurry, you should have of more negative behaviours in the 49 percent say that they felt “at least langt_ch07.qxd 8/22/06 11:55 AM Page 252

252 OB ON THE EDGE

‘a little angry’ at work.”21 A 2000 understand the seriousness of this In addition, “employers’ excessive Gallup poll conducted in the United situation, consider that one quarter demands and top-down style of man- States found that 25 percent of the of Nova Scotia teachers surveyed agement are contributing to the rise working adults surveyed felt like reported that they faced physical vio- of ‘work rage,’” claims Gerry Smith screaming or shouting because of lence at work during the 2001–2002 of Toronto-based WarrenShepell stress, 14 percent had considered hit- school year.28 Consultants.30 He is the author of the ting a co-worker, and 10 percent recently released Work Rage.31 He cites worry about colleagues becoming demands coming from a variety of violent. This worry is not unfounded. What Causes sources: “overtime, downsizing, rapid Twenty employees are murdered Incivility (and Worse) technological changes, company each week in the United States.22 in the Workplace? restructuring and difficulty balancing Canadian workplaces are not the demands of job and home.”32 murder-free, however. In 2001, If employers and employees are act- Smith worries about the conse- 60 murders occurred at work, 10 per- ing with less civility toward each quences of these demands: “If you cent of all murders for the year.23 Most other, what is causing this to happen? push people too hard, set unrealistic of these workplace incidents were Managers and employees often expectations and cut back their ben- carried out by male spouses and part- have different views of the efits, they’re going to strike back.”33 ners of female employees. Surprisingly, employee’s role in the . Smith’s work supports the find- Canada scores higher than the United Jeffrey Pfeffer, a professor of organi- ings of a study that reported the most States on workplace violence. In a zational behaviour at the Graduate common cause of anger is the actions recent ILO study involving 130 000 School of Business at Stanford of supervisors or managers.34 Other workers in 32 countries, Argentina University, notes that many compa- common causes of anger identified was ranked the most violent. nies don’t really value their employ- by the researchers include lack of pro- Romania was second, France third, ees: “Most managers, if they’re being ductivity by co-workers and others; and Canada fourth. The United honest with themselves, will admit tight deadlines; heavy ; States placed ninth.24 it: When they look at their people, interaction with the public; and bad Sixty-four percent of union repre- they see costs, they see salaries, they treatment. sentatives who were surveyed see benefits, they see overhead. Very recently reported an increase in few companies look at their people The Psychological and see assets.”29 , based on their Contract review of incident reports, grievance Most employees, however, like to Some researchers have looked at this files, and other solid evidence.25 The think that they are assets to their frustration in terms of a breakdown ILO, in a separate 1998 study, found . The realization that of the psychological contract formed that, per capita, the rate of assault at they are simply costs and not valued between employees and employers. work for Canadian women is four members of an organization can Employers and employees begin to times that of American women.26 To cause frustration for employees. develop psychological contracts as they are first introduced to each other 35 27 in the hiring process. These con- FactBox tinue over time as the employer and the employee come to understand • In 2000, only 49% of working Canadians said they were committed to each other’s expectations about the their employers. In 1991, the level of commitment was 62%. amounts and quality of work to be • More Americans report commitment to their employers than Canadians: performed and the types of rewards 55% of Americans vs. 49% of Canadians. to be given. For instance, when an employee is continually asked to • Of those who experience rudeness, 12% quit their in response, 22% work late and/or be available at all decrease their work effort, and 52% lose work time worrying about it. hours through pagers and email, the • Employees over the age of 55 express the highest degree of commitment employee may assume that doing so to their employers. will result in greater rewards or faster promotion down the line. The langt_ch07.qxd 8/22/06 11:55 AM Page 253

253

employer may have had no such What does it mean to be a toxic becomes toxic. This is not dissimilar intention, and may even be thinking organization? The late professor Peter to what the liver or kidneys do when that the employee should be grate- Frost of the Sauder School of toxins become too intense in a ful simply to have a job. Later, when Business at the University of British human body.40 the employee does not get expected Columbia notes that there will What makes organizations toxic? (though never promised) rewards, always be pain in organizations, but Like Pfeffer, professors Frost and he or she is disappointed. that sometimes it becomes so intense Robinson identify a number of fac- Sandra Robinson, an organiza- or prolonged that conditions within tors. Downsizing and organizational tional behaviour professor at the the organization begin to break change are two main factors, partic- Sauder School of Business at the down. In other words, the situation ularly in recent years. Sometimes University of British Columbia, and her colleagues have found that when a psychological contract is violated Do You Have a Toxic Manager? (perceptually or actually), the rela- tionship between the employee and Below are some of the toxic behaviours of managers and the workplace cultures the employer is damaged. This can that allow these behaviours to thrive. 36 result in the loss of trust. The Managerial Toxic Behaviour breakdown in trust can cause employees to be less ready to accept • Actor behaviour. These managers act out anger rather than discuss prob- lems. They slam doors, sulk, and make it clear they are angry, but refuse to decisions or obey rules.37 The ero- talk about it. sion of trust can also lead employ- ees to take revenge on the employers. • Fragmentor behaviour. These managers see no connection between what So they don’t carry out their end of a they do and the outcome, and take no responsibility for their behaviour. task. Or they refuse to pass on mes- • Me-first behaviour. These managers make decisions based on their own sages. They engage in any number of convenience. subtle and not-so-subtle behaviours that affect the way work gets done— • Mixed-messenger behaviour. These managers present themselves one way but their behaviour doesn’t match what they say. or prevents work from getting done. • Wooden-stick behaviour. These managers are extremely rigid and controlling. The Toxic • Escape-artist behaviour. These managers don’t deal with reality, often Organization lying, or at the extreme, escaping through drugs or alcohol.

Pfeffer suggests that companies have Workplace Culture That Fosters This Behaviour become “toxic places to work.”38 He notes that companies, particularly in • Macho culture. People don’t discuss problems. The emphasis is to “take it Silicon Valley, ask their employees to like a man.” sign contracts on the first day of work • Specialist culture. Employees who are technically gifted or great in their indicating the employee’s under- fields don’t have to consider how their behaviour or work affects anyone. standing that the company has the • Elitist culture. Promotions and rewards are not based on your work but on right to fire at will and for any rea- who your buddies are. son. Some employers also ask their employees to choose between hav- • -politics culture. Promotions and rewards are based on flattery and ing a life and having a career. Pfeffer positioning. relates a joke people used to tell • Change-resistant culture. Upper management struggles to maintain the about Microsoft: “We offer flexible status quo regardless of the outcome. time—you can work any 18 hours • Workaholic culture. Employees are forced to spend more time at the you want.”39 This kind of attitude office than necessary. can be toxic to employees, though this does not imply that Microsoft is Source: L. McClure, Risky Business (Binghamton, NY: Haworth Press, 1996). a toxic employer. langt_ch07.qxd 8/22/06 11:55 AM Page 254

254 OB ON THE EDGE

organizations experience unexpected loyalty, a decreased sense that The Toxin Handler events—such as the sudden death of respondent values and the organiza- Employees of toxic organizations suf- a key manager, an unwise move by tion’s values are similar, a decreased fer pain from their experiences in senior management, strong compe- sense that the employer treated the toxic environments. In some organ- tition from a start-up company—that respondent with dignity and respect, izations, mechanisms, often infor- lead to toxicity. Other organizations and a decreased sense that employers mal, are set up to deal with the are toxic throughout their systems had fulfilled promises made to results of toxicity. due to policies and practices that cre- 42 respondents.” So do these feelings Frost and Robinson identified a ate distress. Such factors as unrea- make a difference? Apparently so. special role that some employees sonable stretch goals or performance Researchers have found that those play in trying to relieve the toxicity targets, or unrelenting internal com- who felt angry with their employers within an organization: the toxin petition, can create toxicity. There are were less likely to put forth their best handler. This person tries to mitigate also toxic managers who lead efforts, more likely to be competitive the pain by softening the blow of through insensitivity, vindictiveness, toward other employees, and less downsizing, or change, or the behav- and failure to take responsibility, or likely to suggest “a quicker and better iour of the . Essentially they are control freaks or are uneth- way to do their job.”43 All of these the toxin handler helps others ical. The inset Do You Have a Toxic actions tend to decrease the produc- around him or her deal with the Manager? on page 253 lists some tivity possible in the workplace. strains of the organization, by coun- types of toxic managers and the It’s not just those who work for an selling, advising, shielding employees workplace culture that fosters their organization who are affected by inci- from the wrath of angry managers, behaviour. vility and toxicity. Poor service, from reinterpreting the managers’ mes- indifference to rudeness to outright sages to make them less harsh, etc. What Are the Effects of hostility, characterizes many transac- So who takes on this role? Incivility and Toxicity in tions in Canadian businesses. “Across Certainly no organization to date has the country, better business bureaus, the Workplace? a line on its organizational chart for provincial government consumer-help In general, researchers have found “the toxin handler.” Often the role that the effects of workplace anger agencies and media ombudsmen emerges as part of an individual’s posi- are sometimes subtle: a hostile work report a lengthening litany of com- tion in an organization, for instance, a environment and the tendency to do plaints about contractors, car dealers, manager in the human resource only enough work to get by.41 repair shops, moving companies, air- department. In many cases, however, Those who feel chronic anger in lines and department stores.”44 This handlers are pulled into the role “bit the workplace are more likely to suggests that customers and clients by bit—by their colleagues, who turn report “feelings of by the may well be feeling the impact of to them because they are trustworthy, organization, decreased feelings of internal workplace dynamics. calm, kind and nonjudgmental.”45 Frost and Robinson, in profiling these individuals, suggest that toxin How Toxin Handlers Alleviate handlers are predisposed to say yes, Organizational Pain have a high tolerance for pain, a sur- plus of empathy, and when they • They listen empathically. notice people in pain they have a need to make the situation right. But • They suggest solutions. these are not individuals who thrive • They work behind the scenes to prevent pain. simply on dealing with the emo- tional needs of others. Quoting one • They carry the confidences of others. of the managers in their study, Frost • They reframe difficult messages. and Robinson cite the full range of activities of most toxin handlers: Source: P. Frost and S. Robinson, “The Toxic Handler: Organizational Hero—and Casualty,” “These people are usually relentless Harvard Business Review, July–August 1999, p. 101 (Reprint 99406). in their drive to accomplish organi- zational targets and rarely lose focus langt_ch07.qxd 8/22/06 11:55 AM Page 255

255

FACEOFF Want to Know More?

Manners are an over-romanticized The Golden Rule, “Do unto others If you’d like to read more on this topic, concept. The big issue isn’t that as you would have others do unto see Peter Frost, Toxic Emotions at employees need to be concerned you,” should still have a role Work (Cambridge, MA: Harvard about their manners. Rather, employ- in today’s workplace. Being nice Business School Press, 2003); P. Frost ers should be paying better wages. pays off. and S. Robinson, “The Toxic Handler: Organizational Hero—and Casualty,” Harvard Business Review, July–August on business issues. Managing emo- 2. Identify three Canadian organiza- 1999, pp. 96–106 (Reprint 99406); tional pain is one of their means.”46 tions that are trying to foster bet- and A. M. Webber, “Danger: Toxic The inset How Toxin Handlers ter and/or less toxic environments Company,” Fast Company, November Alleviate Organizational Pain on for their employees. What kind of 1998, pp. 152–157. You can find the page 254 identifies the many tasks effect is this having on the organi- latter article at www.fastcompany.com/ that toxin handlers take on in an zations’ bottom lines? online/19/toxic.html. It contains an organization. Frost and Robinson interview with Professor Jeffrey Pfeffer, suggest that these tasks will proba- who discusses examples of toxic bly need to be handled forever, and Your Perspective organizations. they recommend that organizations 1. Is it reasonable to suggest, as take steps to actively support people some researchers have, that performing this role. young people today have not learned to be civil to others or Research Exercises do not place a high priority on doing so? Do you see this as one 1. Look for data on violence and of the causes of incivility in the anger in the workplace in other workplace? countries. How do these data 2. What should be done about man- compare with the Canadian and agers who create toxicity in the American data presented here? workplace while being rewarded What might you conclude about because they achieve bottom-line how violence and anger in the results? Should bottom-line workplace are expressed in differ- results justify their behaviour? ent cultures?