Definition
“Incivility” in the workplace is defined as behavior that is perceived as rude, discourteous, disrespectful, and, overall, not conducive to harmony within the workforce. It is behavior that depresses the morale of a single individual or group. These behaviors can cause anxiety and fear, with resulting disruption to the workflow. Exposure to uncivil treatment is known to result in anger and resentment and can be instrumental in the development and expansion of workplace factions. Being the target of these behaviors can and does cause turnover, an expensive result that will oftentimes not obviously be tied to the presence of incivility in the workplace, as it is so easy to explain organizational departures otherwise (retired, got a better job, left to have a baby and then never came back).“Bullying” is a descriptor that is frequently used to describe these behaviors.
Policy Implications
Any intervention related to correcting employee performance must clearly be tied to a formalized performance expectation. Failure to do so renders the organization vulnerable to litigation. It is important to have some type of policy outlining professional behavior in the workplace. Some organizations go beyond and have a policy in place specifically prohibiting bullying. Some policies include bullying/incivility in with larger policies prohibiting workplace violence. Indeed, allowing mistreatment in the workforce would seem to increase the potential for serious workplace aggression.
Organizational Response
Even with the support of formal polices, effectively addressing complaints of uncivil treatment creates challenges for leadership. There are three common responses to these complaints.
Ignore it. Hope it will go away. Assume it was just a fluke in the accused’s behavior. Believe that perhaps the employee(s) who complained will “get over it”. This strategy is rarely successful with any performance problem, let alone one as complex as is alleged abusive behavior.
Organizations need to be careful with this strategy; a complaint of this nature that is on record and is not responded to can be grounds for litigation brought by staff who feel unsafe in the workplace. Complaints labeled as harassment and discrimination are common. Staff may feel there is no option other than to resign, which can result in a wrongful termination claim (constructive discharge).
Talk to the accused about the complaint. Oftentimes the hope is that by simply bringing the complaint to the individual’s attention, the person will make a change. Leadership may erroneously believe that by engaging in this single intervention, they have met their obligation to respond to the complaint. Unfortunately, this strategy is also rarely successful. A primary reason for the failure is because the accused likely does not view their behavior as problematic. It is easy for them to attribute the complaint to a single “sensitive” or “problem” employee. Too, the allegation can easily be dismissed if the alleged perpetrator presumes there cannot be a problem because “I did not mean to affect the complainant the way they received it” (i.e., it’s ok because that was not my intent). Either way, because they have no motivation to do so, they are unlikely to change their behavior, or if they do, the change will be temporary, with them soon reverting back to former habits.
Formal Investigation. A formal investigation involves individual interviews with the complainant, the respondent, and any witnesses named in the complaint. The investigator tries to make a determination about what response the organization should take. Human Resources typically administers formal investigations or at least assists the leadership with them. Formal investigations may determine the existence of the problem but the organization is still left with needing to decide how to respond to it.
Leadership Challenges
Complaints about uncivil treatment in the workplace are notoriously difficult to address for the following reasons.
Allegations of mistreatment are difficult to prove. Often, interpersonal mistreatment occurs in the absence of witnesses. Without witnesses, the supervisor or investigator’s attempts to solve the problem quickly spiral down into a “he said she said”, and they are left trying to make a call based merely on their perceived credibility of the witnesses.
Problems with witnesses. Even if there are witnesses, sometimes the witnesses do not want to get involved. There may be fear of retaliation, which can preclude the witness testimony entirely or at the very least taint it.
The complainant may be the problem and may be illegitimately perceiving and/or claiming mistreatment. This presents a separate personnel problem, but the Boss Whispering method (described below) will help uncover this.
There could be a culture that supports treatment of employees that is acceptable within the organization, but that may be different from what an individual has experienced at previous organizations. Hence, a complaint emerges as the employee experiences the new organizational culture which they find offensive. Management will find it difficult to address a complaint made against one, solitary individual, if the case is that many, if not most employees, are behaving in a similar manner.
There can be a level of discomfort in approaching an individual relative to the topic of their interpersonal interactions. Leaders may be hesitant to talk to an employee about how they interact with others for fear of embarrassing them. Far easier to talk with someone about their performance – about something that can more easily be measured and corrected. But someone’s behavior? Question the way they hold themselves? The way they relate to people? Their very personality? This is a very personal arena and is a difficult topic to approach.
Because the nature of the complaint is related to uncivil behavior which normally includes a short temper and abrasive interactions, there will frequently be a desire on the part of the supervisor to avoid being a recipient of the difficult behavior. They may well know that talking with the accused about their abrasive behaviors is likely to result in them being on the receiving end of the defensive and abrasive behavior, and they may fear they will not know how to manage the conversation. In short, they may be afraid of them just like everyone else.
Incomplete Interventions
Merely talking with an employee about the fact that complaints have come in about their abrasive behavior will normally not solve the problem. Nor will running an investigation do so, even if the investigation conclusively shows that the accused individual engaged in uncivil treatment of a co-worker. What do we do when we have definitively determined that we have an employee who is exhibiting abrasive behavior? The problem has been identified but has not been solved.
Even if the individual is advised of the need to change their behavior, they may not know how to do so. They may additionally remain in denial about the existence of the problematic behaviors at all, despite being spoken to and/or investigated.
Specialized Coaching
The answer to both of these dilemmas is to provide specialized coaching for the abrasive employee that will assist them in making the necessary behavioral changes. This is no different in many respects from any corrective conversation a supervisor has with an employee: when any correction is administered, it is incumbent upon the supervisor to ensure the employee is provided with the tools necessary to them being able to improve their performance.
There is a tendency to assume that someone can immediately change behaviors. But would we make a similar assumption if the employee needed to be proficient in a new and foreign computer program? Or if they were required to create and manage a departmental budget with no experience in this area? No. Likely we would recognize the need to provide training for the employee so they could meet their job expectations relative to a skill they lack. In this particular case, the optimal tool is to provide specialized coaching to assist with changing abrasive behaviors, as an individual typically does not innately know how to change these significant and likely long-standing behavioral patterns.
The Boss Whispering Method
The hallmark of the Boss Whispering method is its use of interviews that make inquiry into the perceptions of the individual’s colleagues. The coach asks the client’s colleagues about the individual’s leadership strengths and challenges. This information is put into themes and is provided by the coach to the client, starting with the strengths. That is, the meeting starts out with “Here is why your colleagues appreciate you…” This is extremely impactful; the client is normally both encouraged and touched by the positive feedback.
Next comes the presentation of the challenges with which the colleagues indicate they suffer. This, of course, is not so edifying, but is a very necessary part of the process. This is what breaks though the denial that is normally present. The client needs to fully understand the negative perceptions their colleagues are experiencing. The feedback is presented in the exact words of the colleagues. The ensuing coaching process works on continuing to develop and build on the positive traits and beginning to extinguish and replace traits that are harmful.
Following the completion of several coaching sessions, the colleagues are re-interviewed to ascertain if change is occurring. This secondary feedback will normally show positive changes the client is exhibiting and may also include areas where continued improvement can be made.
The Importance of Setting Consequences
It is vitally important that the organization provides the client with clear consequences if they do not change their behaviors that are causing complaints in the workplace. Without consequences, there is no motivation to make any effort to change. The consequences are unique to each individual, the position they hold, and the organization they serve. A few common consequences can be termination, demotion, lack of promotion, missing out on a bonus, not being allowed to supervise, etc.
The consequences selected must be tied to the needs of the job as opposed to being punitive. For example, it would make sense to tell the employee they will not be eligible for promotion because the organization cannot trust them to effectively manage and develop staff. It would not make sense to tell the employee they are going to lose their corner office, unless, of course, this was a demotion made so the employee no longer manages people, and the loss of the office is simply a collateral effect. The coach consults with the supervisor on how best to intervene with the employee in introducing the coaching and the consequences.
It is important to note that the implementation of consequences occurs if the individual’s behavior does not change, and not if they fail to agree to engage in coaching. The coaching must be voluntary. The supervisor continues to monitor and address the employee’s performance regardless of if they agree to engage in coaching or not.
Conclusion
The causes for poor interpersonal interactions can be complex and difficult to both address and change. Most supervisors are not equipped to adequately address this complex performance problem. However, there is effective help available.
One of the biggest impediments to an organization addressing abrasive behavior is fear. The consultation provided by the coach trained in the Boss Whispering method is extremely supportive to the organization as well as to the client. The coach can help the supervisor work through these fears.
One fear that can come up is fear that the employee will quit. It is possible that, if the employee is so resistant to the idea of changing their behavior that they will quit – and if their behavior is causing serious disruption to the workplace - then they may be doing the organization a favor by leaving. Another fear is that they will sue. It is important to note that, if an employee ultimately must be terminated or have another consequence imposed, being able to show that the employee was given every opportunity to improve places the organization in a better position to effectively respond to any legal challenges the employee may make to the personnel action that was taken.
It is important to note that, although the Boss Whispering method can appear to be confrontational due to the involvement of the very frank colleague feedback, the coaching process is very supportive, compassionate and kind. The coach works diligently to develop a trusting and safe relationship with the client. Many clients report that what they learned in coaching has improved their personal relationships as well, including their relationship with themselves.
A Final Note - Confidentiality
Confidentiality is paramount to the Boss Whispering process. A trained and accredited Boss Whisperer is acutely aware of the importance of confidentiality for all parties and works continually to protect everyone involved in the process.