Chapter One - What is Toxic Organizational

Transcription

1
CHAPTER 1
tion?
oxic
t
a
c
s
i
i
n
t
u
a
m
h
W
al com
n
o
i
t
a
z
i
n
orga
Chapter 1 Learning Objectives
•
•
•
•
•
•
Explain what is meant by toxic organizational communication.
Defend why “surviving” is an appropriate term to describe a newcomer’s
existence in a toxic workplace environment.
Articulate the risks associated with standing up against sources of a toxic
workplace environment.
Follow and articulate the reasoning of using solid communication principles to develop toxic communication principles. Understand how the People Pleaser represents a source of toxic organizational communication.
See how the techniques for dealing with People Pleasers represent a survivalist mentality within toxic organizational settings.
CHAPTER 1
©2013 Shutterstock Photo, Inc.
2
The natural habitat of poison dart frogs ranges from
Costa Rica to Brazil.
The most poisonous species of poison dart frog
to humans is the golden
poison dart frog.
FACT:
The coloring of the poison dart frog can be yellow,
gold, copper, red, green, blue, or black.
In the upper half of South America, reside the incredibly small (about the size of
a standard paperclip), but beautifully colored members of the Dendrobatidae family. You may know these creatures better by
their more popular name: poison dart frogs.
These vibrantly hued amphibians come in
a vast array of colors from blue to green to
gold to red. While gorgeous, these frogs
are some of the most toxic animals on earth,
with the blue poison dart frog possessing
enough toxin to kill nearly a dozen adult
men. As a testament to the potency of its
toxin, the indigenous Embera-Wounaan
people have, for centuries, coated the tips
of their blow darts with it in order to hunt
prey (this practice lent itself to the frog’s
common name) (Poison Dart Frog, 2013). These creatures represent a curious combination of beauty and toxicity. Perhaps it is
this unique mixture that has led many people to keep poison dart frogs as pets. You
see, scientists believe that the frog develops
its toxicity through eating specific insects
in its environment. As long as they don’t
repeat their natural diet in your home, they
remain poison free. Just as people have developed a fascination
with the poison dart frog, many have started to develop a fascination with the term
“toxic” and the meaning it carries. In 2003,
pop singer Britney Spears recorded a song
under this name, which earned the performer her first Grammy. More recently,
the term evolved to describe certain undesirable organizational members or organizations themselves, as in “Oh, stay clear of
What is toxic organizational communication?
3
her, she’s toxic” or “That entire department is toxic.” Our usage of
“toxic” is a metaphor to draw attention to the poisonous forms human
interaction takes in the workplace and its impact on larger organizational functioning.
FACT:
Britney Spears has stated
that if she wasn’t in enterUnlike other textbooks and studies focusing on
tainment she would have
maladaptive human interactions, we have designed
gone into teaching.
this text by drawing inspiration from the Leimadophis Epinephelus. (With a name that difficult to
pronounce, you will understand if from here on out, we refer to the
Leimadophis Epinephelus as just “the snake.”) While this name might
not ring a bell for many people, this is the name of the poison dart
frog’s only natural enemy, a diminutive snake, which has developed
a resistance to the frog’s poison (Leimadophis Epinephelus Snake,
2012). We stress, however, that while the snake has developed a resistance to the frog’s poison, it is not immune. The snake’s resistance
demonstrates how an organism (the snake) needed to evolve in order
to keep another organism (the frog) in check (by eating them, the
snake helps to make sure the habitat is not overrun
FACT:
The black mamba is the
with these rainbow-hued amphibians). Aside from
world’s fastest snake,
the fact that there is only one snake in all of nature
clocked at just over 14
that can withstand the frog’s poison (which is cool
miles per hour.
all by itself ), the snake-frog dynamic inspired us to
write a book that didn’t stop at just describing the types of destructive
organizational interactions. Instead, we wish to suggest techniques
(rooted in communication theory and practice) YOU might use to
EVOLVE in order to survive the workplace. Unlike the snake, however, we do NOT believe that what this textbook shares will make you
a workplace predator (figuratively gaining sustenance at the expense of
your colleagues). Rather we hope it will enable you to more adeptly
survive (hence our use of the term in the title of our book) when confronted with sources of workplace toxicity.
Toxicity in the Workplace
A recent survey of 5,000 families conducted by the Conference Board,
a nonprofit business membership and research association, reported
CHAPTER 1
4
FACT:
that between 1987 and 2010, the percentage of people satisfied with
their jobs plummeted from 61% to 45% (Thompson, 2010). For some
reason(s), people are finding their work-related experiences less and
less satisfying. Further research shows that this level of increased dissatisfaction is hitting all ages and income groups, leaving no sector of
the population immune. While a number of factors play a role in this
decline in workplace satisfaction, Thompson (2010) reflects our own
suggestions that this disconnection emanates from the widespread
perceptions that today’s workplace has become
more toxic. We should consider how other parties
The world’s largest landfill isn’t a landfill at all. The
conceptualize the term “toxic” when applied to the
Great Pacific Garbage
workplace.
Patch is a floating junkyard of human-created
waste that stretches across
the mid–Pacific Ocean.
Currently it is larger than
the state of Texas.
toxic organizational
communication
FACT:
In her text, Toxic Work, Barbara Bailey comments
that a toxic workplace exists when people see their
jobs as a major source of negativity to the degree that
it hinders their ability to enjoy the non-work areas of
their life. In a toxic organization, people find their
imagination, innovation, and energy levels greatly depleted. While
a widely accepted definition of toxic workplace communication has
yet to be accepted in the Communication discipline, we find themes
in Reinhold’s (1996) conceptualization with which we easily connect. For example, regardless of the specific source of toxicity in an organization, its effects spread far and deep. From Reinhold’s description
we see that toxicity in an organization can be so pungent that it easily crosses the line from one’s professional life to one’s work life. If
toxicity pervades across an organization and human processes constitute that organization, then it stands to reason that human interaction
(i.e., communication) produces and sustains organizational toxicity. In
other words, we see organizational toxicity as fundamentally a communication topic. Upon this foundation, we lay the following definition as our conceptualization for toxic organizational communication, “dysfunctional communication practices which continuously and
negatively impact the experiences of organizational members.”
Most heart attacks in the
workplace happen on
Monday.
Hopefully, you stuck with us through that explanation. Now that we have laid that as a foundation, it
makes even more sense to us that a primary way to
distinguish a toxic workplace from a nontoxic workplace is how people
talk about the workplace. For instance, do comments like these sound
familiar?
“I’ve got to find a new job or I will lose my mind.”
“My life revolves around work.”
“My manager is making me crazy.”
If you answered yes, then it could be you are hearing a toxic workplace
being described. To bring this conversation close to home again, we
are going to share a personal story about our experiences with toxic
organizations.
Our Personal Encounters with Toxic Workplaces
Everybody has them—stories about coworkers/bosses whose actions
seem self-serving at best and downright evil at least. One of our coauthors, we will use the ambiguous name Jordan to provide anonymity,
had a boss once (named Charlie) who asked female employees if their
underwear matched what they were wearing. Another of Jordan’s male
colleagues asked another female colleague if she had “gotten laid” over
her vacation. Now you might be wondering, “Aren’t there legal statutes
in place which are supposed to prevent such tasteless behaviors in the
workplace?” The answer is yes. Equal Rights Advocates (ERA) is an
organization dedicated to ensuring that no one (regardless of gender)
has to be made to feel uncomfortable in the workplace due to another’s
sexist behaviors. ERA states on their website, “The
FACT:
federal law prohibiting sexual harassment in the
One in four women
workplace is Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act,
reports being sexually
harassed in the workas amended. The law makes certain employers replace. One in ten men
sponsible for preventing and stopping sexual harassreport being victimized.
ment that occurs on the job” (Know Your Rights:
One in four men is
Sexual Harassment at Work, 2012). Unfortunately,
afraid of being falsely
accused of it.
the strength with which organizations enforce these
statutes varies. In reality, laws on paper do not necessarily translate to laws in action. You might ask what Jordan did about Charlie? We wish we could say
that Jordan reported Charlie to the proper authorities and that his boss
5
CHAPTER 1
6
was reprimanded for his tasteless actions. In reality, the action Jordan
chose required much less energy: Jordan did nothing. Why, you might
ask? Well, as with many of our workplace experiences, nothing is ever
simple. Jordan could have reported Charlie but there were some important factors to consider. Like many employees, Jordan wanted to
be promoted and this required Charlie’s support. Charlie had been
at the organization for nearly three decades. While he stayed in the
same managerial position all this time, he came to informally know
nearly everyone of influence (even those in higher organizational positions than chair). This group of higher-ups included people whose
approval would be necessary for any type of promotion or pay raise. Jordan’s colleagues warned that if Jordan reported Charlie, such an
action would erase any hope of long-term employment. Choosing to
stay employed, Jordan said nothing about Charlie’s behavior. In other
words, Jordan chose to survive the workplace. “If you want to know what a man’s like, take a good
look at how he treats his inferiors, not his equals.”
—Sirius Black
Blowing the Whistle on Toxic Workplaces
whistleblowers
Jordan’s story is just one of the countless examples of toxic workplace
interactions that we all encounter every day. To be fair, some workers risk workplace survival in order to do something about toxic organizational interactions. Communication scholarship (along with
several other fields) has labeled such individuals as whistleblowers. Near and Miceli (1985) define whistleblowing as “[t]he disclosure by
organizational members (former or current) of illegal, immoral, or illegitimate practices under the control of their employers, to persons
or organizations that may be able to effect action” (p. 4). Prior to the
term “whistleblowing,” employees who shared such information risked
being called “snitches,” “squealers,” “tattletales,” etc. As mentioned,
whistleblowers risk their own well-being for the greater good. Examples of the impact of whistleblowing abound.
•
•
•
Karen Silkwood was an American chemical technician and a labor
union activist who worked to raise public concern about corporate neglect toward workers’ health in nuclear facilities. Specifically, she looked into and reported failing safety practices at the
Kerr-McKee plutonium plant in Oklahoma
FACT:
There are more than
where she worked. At the time, the com4,000 known cancerpany was under the gun to complete some
causing agents in one
contract work, and as a result, started getting
cigarette.
sloppy with its safety practices. Silkwood
was in the process of gathering evidence when she died in a suspicious single-car collision in November 1974 (Karen Silkwood
Biography, 2013). In 1994, several CEOs of major American tobacco companies
swore before Congress that nicotine in cigarettes was not addictive. A few years later, Jeffrey Wiggand, a vice president in
research and development at the Brown & Williamson Tobacco
Company, blew the whistle on his employer during the American television news program, 60 Minutes, that his employer
actually engineered the nicotine levels in its cigarettes to cause
physical dependency in its customers. Wiggand received death
threats for sharing this information (Whistleblowers Heard
Around the World, 2013).
One of the worst examples in modern history of the corruption
that lies underneath the Olympics was the 2002 Winter Games
in Salt Lake City. Frustrated at repeated failures to win the
Games, Salt Lake officials decided that they were going to get
the games no matter what it took. And what it took was a whole
lot of gifts to the people who choose the host. They gave cash,
expensive trips, jobs, and even plastic surgery to IOC members in
order to secure their votes. No one knows exactly how much was
paid out, but it wasn’t an accident that the Salt Lake City Games
were nearly $400 million over budget. UnforFACT:
As many as 1.5 million
tunately, this was business as usual. But then
Americans suffer from a
one member, a former Swiss ski coach named
peanut allergy.
Marc Hodler, had had enough. He went to
the press and threw a light on the whole sordid affair. Thanks to him, several members were sacked and a
new set of rules was introduced (Top 10 Whistleblowers, 2013).
7
CHAPTER 1
8
•
Retaliation for Whistleblowing
Verschoor (2012) reports that
while the number of people
willing to blow the whistle
on illegal activities increased
from 58% to 65% from 2007
to 2012, the increase in retaliation against whistleblowers
also grew (from 12% to 22%)
during the same period. Indeed, the primary reason people give for not whistleblowing
is fear of retaliation. Research
indicates that whistleblowers
have a right to be afraid. Beard
(2007) listed several other types of retaliatory actions taken against
whistleblowers (p. 34):
FACT:
Between September 1, 2008 and April 20, 2009, salmonellatainted peanut butter originating from the Peanut Corporation of
America (PCA) sickened 714 people across 46 states, contributing to nine deaths. Prior to the outbreak, former PCA assistant
plant manager, Kenneth Kendrick, had made multiple attempts
to alert both state and federal officials to incidences of rat infestation and feces in the product. Additionally, he reported a roof leak
that allowed rainwater contaminated with bird feces to drip onto
the peanuts. Following the outbreak, Kendrick worked with GAP
(Government Accountability Project) and the consumer group,
STOP Foodborne Illness, to blow the whistle on PCA’s dangerous
practices (Kenneth Kendrick, n.d.).
• Dr. Victoria Hampshire worked for the Food and Drug Administration as a veterinarian. She focused on measuring the effects
of drug testing on animals and received many awards
Homicide is the leadfor her work. In 2004, she discovered that a popular
ing cause of death for
heartworm medication was killing hundreds of pet
women in the workplace.
dogs. Her research pulled the drug off the market
(ProHeart6, n.d.).
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Ostracism, shunning, or exclusion from meetings
Obscene mailings, displays, gestures, or insults
Failure to recognize the individual’s contributions, accomplishments, and honors
Surveillance or sharing of confidential information
Reprimands or negative evaluations
Reassignment, demotion, suspension, discharge, reduction of responsibilities, failure to promote, or reduced opportunity for advancement
Threats, harassment, and other forms of discriminations or adverse
action
Individuals who place their own well-being at risk for that of the larger
populace demonstrate a level of morality and ethics, which is both
inspiring and laudable. However, as the aforementioned cases demonstrate, morality and ethics come with a price that many employees
may be unwilling or unable to pay. How to Spot Toxic Organizations Before It’s Too Late
You might be thinking if only there were some kind
FACT:
Google has consistently
of warning Jordan or any of the whistleblowers
been ranked on Fortune’s
could have received before joining their respective
list of the top 100 Best
organization, then all of these situations may have
Companies to Work For.
turned out differently. Sadly, because each organiMaybe it’s because the
company offers unlimited
zation exists as a unique grouping of personalities,
sick leave or perhaps it’s
there is not just one set of characteristics that can
the $500 take-out meal
be used to distinguish a toxic organization from a
fund for new parents.
healthy one. However, Thompson (2010) does offer
us some strategies to assess a workplace’s toxicity level:
1. Find out if the organization respects employees at every level. It
makes sense that administrators leading the organization are treated well, but if the people at the bottom of the chart love working
for the company just as much as the people at the top, then that is
a really strong sign that the organization is not toxic.
2. Find out what people in powerful positions value. If the primary goal of the workplace is to make a profit, then this might
9
CHAPTER 1
10
FACT:
indicate that things such as treating employees well on a personal level may not be seen as important.
3. See if how the organization was explained to you during your
recruitment interview matches up with reality. Organizations
often put on their best face when they are hiring talent. You
may want to investigate the organization’s presence online, in
the community, through social media networking, by doing a
walkthrough of the facility, and by casually talking to current
employees to see if your validations confirm what the organization said about itself.
4. See if you fit with the organization’s culture, climate, and values. Pay attention to employees and the organization’s social and
physical environment to see if you would feel comfortable or
anxious working there.
5. Monitor how you feel when you interact with the organization. Instinct is a powerful thing. Examples abound in popular culture wherein someone turned down a stranger’s offer of a ride
home only to see the stranger’s profile plastered on the evening
news for sexual assault. Our instincts more times
Malcolm Gladwell wrote
than not serve us well if we listen to them. an excellent book on
trusting your instinct,
called Blink.
Thompson (2010) suggests that we monitor our
emotional states in order to assess whether our organizational experience has become or is becoming toxic. Specifically, she recommends keeping an eye out for increased anxiety,
increased anger, a depressed sense of control, a loss of confidence,
and/or a diminished satisfaction with our non-work relationships. While a temporary dip in one of these areas may mean nothing, a
prolonged despair in one or multiple areas may be due to the toxicity levels of your workplace increasing.
WAYS TO TEST IF YOUR ORGANIZATION IS TOXIC
• Find out if people feel respected for what they do at every
level of the organization.
• Find out what the people in power think is important and
what is not important.
• See if how the organization actually is, matches up with
how it was described to you on your recruitment interview.
• Do you fit in with your organization’s culture?
• Monitor your gut reaction when you’re in the organization.
• Do you feel more anxious or less anxious?
• Are you generally more angry or less angry?
The Principles of Toxic Organizational Communication
As we mentioned earlier, communication lies at the heart of any toxic
organization. If you have a toxic organization, then you have toxic
communication. If this were a traditional textFACT:
The first known book
book about workplace/organizational communiever printed on a press
cation, then this is the part where we would lay
was the Bible
out the fundamental principles that guide solid
organizational/workplace communication. Well,
we are going to level with you and share a few tips we have picked
up during our years of teaching. (1) There are many communication
textbooks out there, and more being written every year. (2) Each of
these books attempts to make its own unique contribution to your
understanding of communication and how it functions. (3) Trying to
make a complete list of all of these principles would drive both you
and us crazy. So, what we are going to attempt to do instead is to list
as many fundamental communication principles as we find related to
workplace communication. Now because these principles are the laws
guiding strong communication, to see how they apply in a toxic workplace, we list and explore them as their opposites.
11
CHAPTER 1
12
1. Communication is continuous. à Communication is not
continuous. Everything that is shared (and that is a lot of stuff,
from what you say, to what you wear, to even what you don’t do)
with the people around you is open to interpretation to anyone
in proximity of the message. If you yawn in class, your classmates and teachers will probably interpret this a certain way, and
thus you have communicated. While discussing these principles
in class, one of our coauthors had a first-year college student say,
“If I didn’t want to communicate with you, I just wouldn’t show
up to class.” To this remark our coauthor commented, “Trust
me, if you don’t show up to my class, you are telling me A LOT.” It is our hope that by sharing this healthy communication principle that communicators will be more aware that everything
they do communicates to those around them. ©2013 Shutterstock Photo, Inc.
Thus, healthy communicators will be on guard to manage how
others might interpret their behaviors. Now when we turn this
belief on its head, we get its toxic counterpart: Communication
is not continuous. “Shallow understanding from people of goodwill is
more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding
from people of ill will.”
—Martin Luther King Jr.
13
According to this principle, don’t worry about other people misunderstanding you. Since communication isn’t continuous, once
you stop talking or have completed an action, communication
stops until you want to start it up again. With this mindset, go
ahead and take out your smart phone during an important meeting
with a new client. Since you didn’t tell anyone explicitly you were
checking your favorite social media website, no one will wonder
what you are doing or think that you value how many “Likes” your
latest posting received more than landing a million-dollar account. After you have said what you need to say or did what you need to
do, feel free to sit back, put your feet up, and relax until you have
something else to communicate. 2. Communication messages vary in conscious thought. à Communication messages all contain the same amount of conscious
thought. To say that communication messages vary in conscious
thought means that the amount of mental preparation you put into
your messages is contextual. Let’s say that you just had an interview for a job you really want. You know it’s good decorum to send
a thank you email to the interviewer within the 24 hours following
the interview. FACT:
Research indicates that
50% of a hiring decision
is made during the first
minute of the interview.
Since you really want to create a good impression in his or her eyes, you will probably spend
a lot of time going over your email for any typos or grammatical errors before hitting send. Similarly, if you
have lost your significant other while shopping at Walmart, you
may be more inclined to shoot them a quick text saying “where
r u?” Now which of these messages involves more thought. If
you said the first one, Ding ding ding! We have a winner! However, the more important point with our example is that messages
vary in how much time and energy people put into them. Formal
emails to individuals who can impact your professional future require more thought, time, and care to craft a desired professional
image, whereas a quick text to a family member typically has more
relaxed expectations. Now to turn this principle into its toxic
counterpart, we argue that all messages contain the same amount
of conscious thought. CHAPTER 1
14
FACT:
FACT:
Once upon a time at the MTV Video Music Awards, hip-hop
artist Kanye West rudely interrupted Taylor Swift’s acceptance
speech for “Best Female Video.” During Taylor’s speech, Kanye
grabbed her microphone and said, “Yo, Taylor, I’m really happy for
you. I’m going to let you finish but Beyoncé [Knowles] had one of
the best videos of all time…one of the best of all time!” Immediately the crowd booed Kanye until MTV had to go to commercial. If you assumed that all communication messages require the same
conscious thought, then you would have a very poor opinion of the
rest of humanity based on Kanye’s example. Kanye
Kanye went on to apoloapparently acted on impulse with almost no regard for
gize to Taylor saying,
the impact of his actions on his own image, or that
“I’m sorry, Taylor. We
are both artists, and the
of Taylor or MTV. If all communication messages
media and managers are
consist of the same thought as that demonstrated by
trying to get between us.
Kanye, then we all seemingly do whatever we want,
She deserves the apology
whenever we want, regardless of any forethought for
more than anyone. Thank
you Biz Stone and Evan
possible consequences. Oh, by the way, please excuse
Williams for creating a
us right now, as we see a young couple walking down
platform where we can
the street out our window and we want to go and recommunicate directly.
mind them ourselves how great Beyoncé’s video was. 3. The meaning in communication is mostly relationally based. à
The meaning in communication is mostly content based. The
healthy interpretation of this communication principle suggests
that the majority of a message’s meanings depend on the relational
nature between the communicators. To demonstrate this concept
in class, one of our coauthors asks students how many would feel
anxious if their meanest, hardest teacher said, “I need to see you
after class.” Without fail, almost every student raised
Currently, the most
a hand. Now when our coauthor changed the example
stressed out segment of
to ask if anyone would feel anxious if their best friend
the U.S. population is
individuals between the
said, “I need to see you after class,” typically no one
ages of 18 and 35.
raised a hand. Why? What happened? While the
content of the message stayed the same, it appears that
“who” asks the question significantly impacts how you go about
interpreting it. The content of a message by itself is rather ambiguous—in other words, you may come away from a conversation with your roommate with one meaning, and your roomie goes
away from it with a completely different understanding. From a
young age we seek out other clues to clarify and add meaning to
content. A key point we look at it is our relationship with whomever tells us something. Differences in relational factors, such as
time together, status, and knowledge, all provide you with valuable
insight into how to respond to what someone communicates to
you. The toxic version of this principle reminds us that the meaning in communication is mostly content based. FACT:
Any fan of the hit comedy Big Bang Theory
Sheldon’s roommate
Leonard Hofstadter has
will testify that a significant portion of the
an IQ of 173.
show’s comedy emanates from the communicative practices of Dr. Sheldon Cooper. A genius theoretical physicist with an IQ
of 187, Sheldon literally takes people at their word. For example, multiple times during the season, when his quirky antics
bother another character to a severe enough degree, Sheldon is
asked, “Are you insane?” Adhering to the toxic principle that
communication is mostly content based, when questioned about
his sanity, Sheldon replies (in all seriousness), “No, I’m not. My
mother had me tested.” If you find yourself in line with Sheldon’s approach to communication, then take comfort in the clarity that is your communication. People mean only what they say to you. You never
need to worry about hidden meanings, innuendos, misunderstandings, bypassing, etc. Take comfort in being able to choose
any medium to communicate with another. Since all meaning is
mostly content based, you can tweet, text, heck even use a carrier
pigeon, because the recipient of the message will only focus on
the words you choose.
4. Communication is guided by culture. à Culture has no impact
on communication. The healthy version of this principle suggests
that when you communicate, you are heavily influenced by the cultural context in which you find yourself. While there are MANY
different definitions of culture, most of them highlight things such
as the attitudes, values, and beliefs, which underlie the behavior of
the members of a specific social group. Culture has been concep-
15
CHAPTER 1
16
tualized on MANY different levels. A unique mixture of attitudes
and behaviors guides each of these levels. “A nation’s culture resides in the heart and
in the soul of its people.”
—Mahatma Gandhi
Census data predicts that by the middle of this century, there
will be no racial or ethnic majority in the United States (Kerby
& Burns, 2012). In other words, diversity will be the norm,
especially in the workplace. Well aware of this trend, more and
more companies require that their new hires demonstrate a familiarity and comfort with diversity (Heathfield, 2013). If you
will soon be entering the workforce for the first time, or reentering it for the umpteenth time, then your chances of working
with people from a different cultural background are really high
(okay, let’s just say they are almost certain). If you accept that
one’s cultural background impacts how they communicate, then
it would make sense that someone from a culture that places
value on the group (collectivist) over that of the individual (individualist) would not be a fan of open conflict. Thus, you would
be well served to use this knowledge to
adjust your communication style accordingly to avoid misunderstandings. However, the toxic equivalent of this principle
argues that culture has no impact on how
people communicate.
If you fall into this camp, again clarity runs rampant over your communication experiences. You can feel completely comfortable being exactly who
you are no matter where you travel. You
won’t encounter any negative stereotypes
about how Americans handle themselves
abroad, because CULTURE DOESN’T
17
MATTER. Don’t worry about offending anyone who’s different
from you, because you will handle all communication issues the
same. There will be no silliness like people approaching time differently. Go ahead and make that lunch with your client from
West Africa exactly at noon, and rest assured that he or she won’t
keep you waiting past 12:00 PM. Similarly, don’t worry about anyone handling uncertainty differently from you. If you’re American, you rest easy knowing that everyone else around the world
embraces uncertainty as part of life. Everyone is accepting of new
ideas from everything to technology, to business practices, to food.
And of course, America gets it all right, on the first try. With an
attitude like that, how could anything go wrong?
“I never drink coffee at lunch. I find it keeps me
awake for the afternoon.”
—Ronald Reagan
5. Ethical obligations guide healthy communication. à Ethics
play no part in communication. Like the former principle, this
one interjects an important component into healthy communication: ethics. Whenever one of our coauthors introduces public
speaking to students, our colleagues ask the class, “Who are famous historical communicators?” Without fail, students mention
such figures as Martin Luther King Jr., John F. Kennedy, Ronald
Reagan, and Oprah Winfrey. Seemingly in an attempt to see how
our coauthors will react, one student will always add Adolf Hitler to the group. When Hitler gets mentioned, our colleague admits to the class that if you define communication as being able to
persuade mass amounts of people to follow one’s vision, then yes,
Hitler was stellar. However, if you add ethics into the recipe for a
healthy communicator, then Hitler never makes the cut. Arming
students with communication skills means literally providing them
with tools capable of majorly impacting the lives of those around
them. As Spiderman tells us, “With great power, comes great responsibility.” CHAPTER 1
18
FACT:
FACT:
With this advice in mind, master communicators must carefully
consider the consequences of their words and actions. Thankfully,
examples abound of professional individuals who adhere to this
principle. Since its inception, Ben & Jerry’s ice cream has operated
with the dimension of social justice close to its mission
Ben & Jerry’s has a
statement as evidenced by the following description
graveyard for failed
of its social mission: “To operate the Company in a
flavors which include Oh
Pear, Makin’ Whoopie
way that actively recognizes the central role that busiPie, and Urban Jumble.
ness plays in society by initiating innovative ways to
improve the quality of life locally, nationally and internationally.” Annually, this ice cream giant gives nearly $2 million
to eligible organizations across the United States and their home
state of Vermont (What We Do, 2013). At the same time, toxic communication principles just don’t see
ethics and communication mixing. If you count yourself among
the followers of this principle don’t feel hindered by moral obligations. Instead of great responsibility accompanying great power,
this toxic principle argues, “With great power, comes whatever you
want,” regardless what it means for anyone else. While companies
like Ben & Jerry’s are hampered by their concerns for doing good,
you are only concerned with yourself doing well. It’s not like you
should feel too bad. When bad things happen to people you work
with, you don’t actively seek to cause things, it’s just
Martha Stewart is a
the luck of the draw. You are in good company, as
big fan of the rapper,
there is no shortage of organizational members who
Eminem.
buy in to this principle, and the ease it brings to their
professional lives. Business giants unhindered by the shackles of ethical concern
surround you. The likes of Martha Stewart, Bernie Madoff, and
Enron executives count you among their ranks. The subjective
nature of ethics would just muddy up communication between
different individuals. What is ethical to one person wouldn’t be
ethical to another, and there’d probably be lots of undue fighting. Really, how ethical does that sound to you? What is toxic organizational communication?
19
6. Communication is irreversible. à Communication is reversible. The healthy version of this principle teaches us that once
you communicate, no matter how hard you try you can’t “take
it back.” Let’s say you email your close friend (who is also your
colleague) that you really think your boss is a jerk for making you
work on the weekend but you accidentally send it to the company
list serv. No amount of apologizing is going to erase the impact this mistake is going to have on your career. As the healthy
principle mentioned earlier, communication is constant. Ergo
(we’ve always wanted to use that term in a textbook) much like
a bullet train, communication tends to have one direction and
one speed and that’s forward going really, really fast. As with the
prior principles, this final one also has a toxic counterpart. For those of you who follow this principle, don’t worry. There is
no mistake so big that it can’t be swept under the rug by either
ignoring it or apologizing. If it’s really bad, then you might have
to break down and buy the person you offended the one thing
that has been ending titanic struggles through human history—
a fruit basket.
Types of Toxic Organizational Communication
There are many types of communicative relationships in the workplace to analyze. For simplicity’s
sake we have arranged our book to look at toxic
workplace communication on two levels: micro
(communication occurring primarily between two
people) and macro (communication which impacts
a majority of people within the workplace).
Beware the People Pleaser
FACT:
Franklin’s original quote
was in a letter to a friend
in Europe about the
U.S. Constitution. The
original quote read “Our
Constitution is in actual
operation and everything
appears to promise that it
will last: but in this world
nothing can be said to
be certain but death
and taxes.
Unfortunately, it seems in life that the only things
certain are NOT, as Benjamin Franklin put it, “death and taxes.” If
you have ever had a job (any job), heck if you ever went to preschool,
CHAPTER 1
20
TRANSLATING HEALTHY COMMUNICATION
PRINCIPLES INTO THEIR TOXIC COUNTERPARTS
Healthy Communication
Principles
1. Communication is
continuous.
2. Communication messages
vary in conscious thought.
3. The meaning in
communication is mostly
relationally based.
4. Communication is guided
by culture.
5. Ethical obligations
guide healthy
communication.
6. Communication is
irreversible.
Toxic Counterpart
1. Communication is
not continuous.
2. Communication messages all contain the
same amount of conscious
thought.
3. The meaning in communication is mostly content
based.
4. Culture has no impact on
communication.
5. Ethics play no part in
communication.
6. Communication is
reversible.
you know the cold hard truth: You will not like everyone you meet.
In reverse order: Not everyone you meet will like you. Now, it may
seem that these are commonsense facts of life hardly worth mentioning in a college-level textbook; however, they can be very hard realities
for some people to accept. People Pleaser
You probably know someone who could be described as a People
Pleaser, a person whose self-worth is based on the belief that everyone
he or she meets likes him or her on some level. In the workplace, the
People Pleaser feels that saying no to a colleague is the same as saying
no to a beloved family member. For example, Brooke Ray served as
21
a youth minister in Memphis, Tennessee. She eagerly attempted to
ingratiate herself into the favor of her colleagues by working hard to
accomplish everything they asked of her. Brooke commented, “People
ask me to do things like serve on committees, and I’ll accept without
evaluating whether I’m really passionate about it…
FACT:
Because I say yes a lot, I’m too busy. I’m too stressed,
It has been estimated that
and my attention is divided” (Svoboda, 2008). Linonly 2% of the general
da Tillman, a psychologist at Emory University,
population can actually
multitask effectively, evcommented that People Pleasers like Brooke are
eryone else just does a
unable to estimate the worth of their own time and
lot of things poorly at the
energy; because so much of their energy is spent on
same time.
measuring others’ satisfaction, they ignore their own
(Svoboda, 2008).
Consequently, these folks constantly seek to make themselves feel better by gaining the approval of those around them. Sadly, constantly
pleasing other people does not lead you to discover what you want out
of life. In the end, People Pleasers may feel they are not in control
of their own lives, which could result in them lashing out at the very
people that they have worked so hard to please. “Don’t worry about growing older or pleasing others. Please yourself.”
—David Brown
There are some lessons to be learned from People Pleasers. To some
extent we are all People Pleasers (at least if we have any inclination
to succeed in our respective organizations). If you want to get ahead
in the workplace, it helps if your superiors and colleagues see you as
someone who fits the culture. At the same time, we realize that left
unchecked, people pleasing can result in our bosses and coworkers
(knowingly and unknowingly) taking advantage of our good nature. So this begs the question, What do you do if after reading this you
think you might be a People Pleaser? Or what do you do if you find
that your work life is being affected somehow by People Pleasers?
CHAPTER 1
22
How do you know if you are a People Pleaser? Assess your
level of self-assurance by answering “true” or “false” to the
following questions:
1. I hesitate to compliment the skills of someone whom I
admire.
2. When someone cuts in front of me in line, I can get angry
but keep it to myself.
3. If my coworker owed me $15 from happy hour last week,
I would avoid bringing it up.
4. I can express my thoughts even when I know someone in
the room disagrees with me.
5. I can end videoconferences when I want.
6. I replay social encounters in my head and worry about
how my actions were interpreted.
7. I can initiate contact with someone I don’t know without
feeling awkward.
8. I don’t concern myself about what others think about me.
9. I express my feelings openly even if it might hurt another
person’s feelings.
10. I feel guilty when I take time for myself to exercise, read,
meditate, or relax.
Score: The responses of a 100% non-People Pleaser would
read as follows: 1F, 2F, 3F, 4T, 5T, 6F, 7T, 8T, 9T, 10F. If you
scored 6 or more self-assured responses you don’t have to
worry about being a People Pleaser. If your responses differed in 6 or more ways, you probably fall into the People
Pleaser camp.
FACT:
All right, let’s assume that you scored high on the
People Pleaser quiz, and you wish to alter this behavior. What can you do? Altering one’s personality
is a significant endeavor, which, to be done completely, often requires prolonged guidance from a
career coach. While we do not claim to be career coaches, this type of
People who have a deep
desire to please others
tend to overeat in social
situations even when
they are not hungry.
THINGS TO CONSIDER BEFORE SAYING “NO” TO A
COWORKER/BOSS
• Can I actually accomplish what he is asking me to do?
• Am I genuinely interested in doing what she is asking me
to do?
• Could I learn something valuable by doing this task?
• If I say no, but am really able to help, what are the
chances he will find out?
• Is the issue so important to her that by saying “No” I am
burning a bridge?
• If I say “No,” is he vindictive in nature and likely to retaliate against me?
• Is the assigned task one that could be useful in forwarding my own career?
advising does make use of several foundational communication strategies. Before we share these beliefs and strategies be forewarned that
there will be times that you CAN’T say “No” to the person asking you
for a favor because of his or her high level of organizational status or
your low level of organizational status. For the strategies, keep in mind that they are not presented in any sequential order, but serve as a toolbox for you to pick and choose what
feels best for you. All things being equal, however, imagine you’re sitting at your work desk and your coworker/manager stops by and says
he or she needs a big favor. What races through your head and what
do you do?
“Chinese proverb: A gem is not polished without
rubbing, nor a person perfected without trials.”
23
CHAPTER 1
24
Things to Keep in Mind When Entering People
Pleaser Rehab
Remember that saying “No” has its benefits.
You, as a living, breathing human being are
entitled to time for yourself. You need to rest
and rejuvenate so that you can be at your best. This thought reminded us of the Chinese
proverb, “Rotten wood cannot be carved.” In
other words, if you aren’t good to yourself,
then you are no good to other people (Saunders, 2012).
Don’t be scared of the fallout. People Pleasers often worry that after
they say “No,” the fallout will be catastrophic. While we can’t predict
what will happen to you, in our experiences, things never turn out
quite as bad as we envision they will. In fact, the outcome is usually
insignificant. Why? Well, think of it this way: If someone comes
and asks you for a favor, and you turn them down, that person is more
focused on whom he or she should ask next for help instead of plotting
revenge for your refusal (Tartakovsky, 2011).
Strategies to Draw Upon
Say “No” with conviction. If you’re going to say “No” to someone say it
like you mean it. Oftentimes the first time you say “No” is the hardest,
but it gets easier with each successive occurrence (Tartakovsky, 2011).
FACT:
The record for the longest
filibuster (a stall tactic in
parliamentary bodies
like Congress which is a
prolonged speech meant
to obstruct progress) goes
to the late U.S. Senator
Strom Thurmond of South
Carolina who spoke for
24 hours and 18 minutes
against the Civil Rights
Act of 1957.
Stall. When you are asked for a favor, it can be a
wise move to ask for time to consult your schedule. This tactic grants you time to think over if you can
(or want to) commit to the askee’s project (Tartakovsky, 2011). Also it is important to ask the person for details about the commitment. Tartakovsky
(2011) suggested asking yourself questions like:
• How stressful is the task going to be?
• Do I have the time to do this?
• What am I going to give up?
•
•
25
How pressured am I going to feel to see this project through to the
end?
Am I going to be upset with this person who’s asking if I am not
able to focus on what I want to do?
If time is of the essence and your colleague requests an immediate
answer, your default response can always be “No.” Think of it this
way: If you say “Yes” right away, you’re really stuck. Few things kill
workplace relationships faster than committing to do something and
then backing out. By saying “No” automatically, you leave yourself
the wiggle room to come back to that person later on and say “Yes”
after you realized you’re available. So, regarding the scene mentioned
above, when that coworker/manager asks you for a favor, practice any
of the following responses (feel free to change the phrasing around so
it sounds like something you would actually say):
“Tone is the hardest part of saying no.”
—Jonathan Price
Coworker/Manager: Can you help me out with this favor?
You: I’d love too, but I am swamped with this other project. I
will have to get back to you.
OR
You: I’m afraid I can’t assist on that as I am focusing on this
project. You might consider asking Sam. He’s an expert on
that topic. (In this response, you’re giving the coworker/manager another avenue to meet his or her needs versus hanging
the person out to dry.)
CHAPTER 1
26
Set a time limit. If you agree to help, then put a limit on when you can
assist. Make sure that the time you suggest works for you and if you
know for certain, pick a time that might not work for your coworker/
manager (Tartakovsky, 2011). In other words, deliberately pick a time
that doesn’t work for your coworker/manager, to provide you with an out.
If this sounds like a situation you might find yourself in, feel free to
practice the following responses:Coworker/Manager: Can you help
me out with this favor?
You: My schedule is tight this week, but I could assist you
from 10 AM–12 PM.
Coworker/Manager: Oh, geez, I’m busy then. Do you have
anything else open?You: I’m really sorry, I’m just swamped.
Don’t give a litany of excuses. Sometimes it seems like a good idea
to provide a laundry list of reasons why you can’t help out. This tactic
can blow up in your face. As soon as you start talking, the person asking the favor may start shooting down every reason by saying things
like, “Oh, you can do that later,” or “You can adjust your schedule,” or
“That’s not as important as what I’m asking” (Tartakovsky, 2011).
27
“Those who stand for nothing fall for anything.”
—Alexander Hamilton
Don’t apologize—if it’s not your fault. People Pleasers tend to be
serial apologists. Pay attention to when you’re apologizing and consider if you’re really at fault. Ask yourself if you’re responsible for the
situation. Usually, the answer is no. This may require you to bite your
tongue (sometimes literally). Because once you apologize, in essence,
you are putting yourself in debt to the other person (Tartakovsky,
2011).
Self-soothe. Saturday Night Live used to have a skit involving Al
Self-soothe
Franken called “Daily Affirmation with Stuart Smalley.” In this
skit, Franken plays Stuart Smalley, the host of a mock self-help show. Smalley develops multiple catchphrases which poke fun at the selfhelp pop literature, but his most famous one was “I’m good enough,
I’m smart enough, and doggone it, people like me.” This is an example
of using positive self-talk. Also called affirmation, positive self-talk is
an attempt for you to soothe your nerves in stressFACT:
To date, no bull has ever
ful situations. For People Pleasers, saying “No” to
been given a proctology
a coworker/manager is about as stressful as giving
exam.
a prostate exam to a bull. Through self-soothing,
you can remind yourself of your priorities and
boundaries. For instance, you might say: “I can do
this,” “I have the right to park in this parking spot,” “I made the decision that’s right for me,” or “My values are more important than saying
yes in this situation” (Tartakovsky, 2011).
Now that we have discussed how to handle yourself if you wish to
reinvent yourself from People Pleaser to Assertive Go Getter, we are
going to review strategies on how to handle yourself if you find that
you are surrounded by People Pleasers in the workplace (because even
one People Pleaser can sometimes seem like ten). Please remember
that People Pleasers can be some of the most toxic individuals in any
workplace.
CHAPTER 1
28
So what leads to People Pleasers being so toxic? The following list is
just the tip of the iceberg.
1. People Pleasers are typically individuals who want to belong, and
they will often do anything to do so, even if the action is immoral,
illegal, or just plain evil. 2. People Pleasers may mislead you on their credentials by portraying
themselves as credible on very important issues when they are really not.
3. People Pleasers can make bigger promises to prospective clients
than you or your organization can deliver. 4. People Pleasers can become resentful over time especially if they
don’t feel they have been appropriately appreciated or rewarded for
their loyalty.
5. Because they want to succeed, People Pleasers will often resort to
coercive retaliatory actions if they feel slighted.
6. People Pleasers may tactically throw you under the bus if they feel
it will further their own career.
7. People Pleasers may often not speak truthfully or even speak at all.
There are three categories into which People Pleasers tend to fall:
FACT:
The Silent says, well…nothing. These individuals do have confidence
that they can present themselves as intelligent or credible. Thus, they
elect to remain silent, hoping that this will win over
other people. The Catholic Church
recognizes St. John of
Nepomuk as the Patron
Saint of Silence.
Waffler
Yes Person
The Waffler is tactical. Such people realize they
have to respond when spoken to, but also know they
can’t deliver what is asked of them. Wafflers hesitate
giving a direct “No” in fear of how it may impact their own position in
the company. They remain decidedly neutral as long as possible with
a fine-tuned “perhaps.” The Yes Person so desperately needs the approval of others that he or
she rarely stops to think before committing to something. Yes People
believe that it’s their duty and mission in life to help out everyone, no
matter the cost to self (Reynolds, 2012). What is toxic organizational communication?
29
Regardless of the type of People Pleaser,
they all fear being ostracized by others
in the workplace, and as such do whatever is needed to remain in everyone’s
good graces. To be fair, sometimes as
you gain power in a workplace, you can
(knowingly or unknowingly) surround
yourself with your own People Pleasers. If you build a reputation as someone who does not like to be challenged
on an issue or proven wrong, then
people may hesitate to do so. Having
People Pleasers can be quite appealing,
for they will (1) do what you tell them
and (2) never challenge your authority. Regardless of their appeal, surrounding yourself with People Pleasers tends to do more harm than good in the long run. Over time
People Pleasers typically come to see themselves as having sacrificed
their wants in lieu of those of others, even when they were not asked
to do so. When People Pleasers start blaming others for their own lack
of progress, they may become difficult to be
FACT:
Because of the placement
around. Thus having strategies to deal with Peoof the human voice box,
ple Pleasers can be quite useful (if not necessary.)
humans are the only mam-
mals who can’t swallow
and breath simultaneously.
Surviving the People Pleaser
So what do you do when you find yourself face to
face with the untamed People Pleaser? Try the following suggestions.
FACT:
Recently, a Revolutionary
War cannon which had
been on public display in
New York City’s Central
Park from the 1860s to
1996 was found to be
loaded and ready to fire.
Help the People Pleaser find a voice. In order to
defuse this person (who feels he or she has sacrificed
his or her own needs) from blowing up, you may
consider coaxing out of this person thoughts and
feelings about the situation. Specifically, tell the People Pleaser in your
life that you genuinely want to know what he or she thinks and why
CHAPTER 1
30
WHAT WERE THOSE THINGS YOU SAID ABOUT NOT
BEING A PEOPLE PLEASER?
Things to Keep in Mind When Fixing the People Pleaser in You
1. Saying “No” has its benefits.
2. Don’t be scared of the fallout.
How to Convince Others You Have Left Your People Pleasing
Ways Behind
1. Say “No” with conviction.
2. Stall.
3. Set a time limit
4. Don’t give a litany of excuses.
5. Don’t apologize—if it’s not your fault.
6. Self-soothe.
Types of People Pleasers
1. The Silent
2. The Waffler
3. The Yes Person
it is important. You may attempt to prompt the person to share with
open-ended questions. Be certain to reassure the individual that there
will be no ramifications for the self-disclosure (Reynolds, 2012). So what would this strategy look like put into practice? As before,
please indulge us with a little imagination theater. Envision that you
are in a management position and your organization has just been
handed a complex project with a tight deadline. You wish to assess the
stress level of your subordinates at being handed such a scenario. You
start by talking with Paul, an organizational member who is a wellknown People Pleaser.
31
You/Manager: So, Paul, what do you think about the new project? Sounds like it might be a little stressful, don’t you think?
Paul: With you at the helm, I’m not worried at all. “If you love something set it free, if it returns it’s
your forever, if not it was never meant to be.”
—Anonymous
You/Manager: Thanks, Paul, that means a lot. But if something comes up that stands out as a red flag to you, please let
me know (GENUINE DESIRE TO KNOW WHAT HE
KNOWS). You’ve been with this company almost as long as I
have and I really value that experience (WHY HIS KNOWLEDGE IS IMPORTANT). How do you see our team’s chances of meeting the deadline (OPEN-ENDED QUESTION)? Please feel free to be candid; I honestly won’t hold anything
against you, even if you disagree with a call I have already made
(ASSURANCE THAT THERE WILL BE NO RAMIFICATIONS FOR SELF-DISCLOSURE).
Provide People Pleasers a way out. In order to not back them into a
corner you may consider providing People Pleasers with a few indirect
hints that you can manage a project they have agreed to help on, if they
are too busy.
This strategy requires that you tell People Pleasers
that you appreciate their generosity, but that you
have managed to make other arrangements. This
statement encourages People Pleasers to not feel
guilty for having left you in the lurch. Remember,
however, that People Pleasers may say “Yes” multiple times before confessing they are in over their
heads (Reynolds, 2012).
FACT:
Famous escape artist,
Harry Houdini, who
could find his way out of
almost anything, was not
actually named Harry
Houdini. His birth name
was Erik Weisz.
CHAPTER 1
32
How might this strategy unfurl? Imagine this time that you have asked
a coworker to assist you on a project. You suspect that this People
Pleaser, named Kate, is already overwhelmed with a full plate, but she
just doesn’t like to say no to anyone in need. This scenario requires
two run-throughs.
You: Hi, Kate. Thanks again for agreeing to help me with the
Castle account. I know we are all really swamped at this time
of year, but this is going to require a lot of time. Are you sure
you can spare that (CAN KATE REALISTICALLY SIGN
ON TO THE PROJECT)?
OR
You: Hi, Kate. Thank you again for agreeing to help me with
the Castle account (APPRECIATION FOR INDIVIDUAL’S GENEROSITY ). I was thinking that I know we are all
really busy and this project is going to require a lot of energy. That being said, I don’t want you to sacrifice your own work for
my sake if you can’t spare the time. I had lunch with Javier and
he said his schedule has lightened up and that he could assist
if the need arose. I’d love to work with you, but if you’re busy,
I have it covered (DON’T FEEL GUILT FOR BACKING
OUT, YOU WILL BE OKAY ).
FACT:
Surround yourself with a team of rivals. In order to ensure that People Pleasers do not lead you astray, make it your business to know your
business by listening carefully to credible people who dare to speak
their mind. Remember that it is important to listen to differing points
of view and then make your decision. The CabiLincoln’s advisors did not
net of America’s sixteen president provides a keen
initially support
example of this strategy. After he won the 1860
the Emancipation
Proclamation.
election for president of the United States, Lincoln
populated his Cabinet not with his closest friends
or allies, but with his major rivals for the Republican nomination. Many of these men objected to the inclusion of each
other in the Cabinet. One reason Lincoln appointed so many rivals to
Cabinet posts is he never felt bound by the prevailing opinion in the
Cabinet, for they all knew that in the end it was his word that was the
final decision (Reynolds, 2012).
Nothing. There may be times the People Pleaser is protected politically from on high. In the 1999 film adaptation of Stephen King’s
The Green Mile, Oscar award–winning actor Tom Hanks plays Paul
Edgebcomb, a death row corrections officer during the Great Depression. Edgecomb is a member of a four-person team
FACT:
charged with executing condemned convicts. Things
When Stephen King
visited the movie set he
remained rather consistent for Hank’s character
asked to be strapped
until the inclusion of a fifth team member, Percy
into the electric chair. He
Wetmore (played by Doug Hutchinson). Percy is
didn’t like it and asked to
a sadist who only achieved his position because he
be released.
is the nephew of the governor’s wife. Despite his
rampant abuse of death row inmates, Percy’s constant pandering to his familial connections provided him a degree of
freedom to act as he wished on the job. In this situation, as much as it
may pain you, the best survival strategy you may be able to enact is to
do nothing. At the same time, this may be a good time to start believing in karma, and hopefully what goes around really will come around
(Reynold, 2012).
WHAT TO DO WHEN CONFRONTED WITH THE
UNTAMED PEOPLE PLEASER
1.
2.
3.
4.
Help the person find a voice.
Provide the person a way out.
Surround yourself with a team of rivals.
Nothing.
33
CHAPTER 1
34
Aside from dealing with People Pleasers, there are countless other
sources of toxic workplace communication. We cover the following
topics in the ensuing chapters:
• Dysfunctional workplace personalities
• Dysfunctional workplace interactions
• Dysfunctional organizational elements
• Dysfunctional excess
• Dysfunctional technology
Overview of Following Chapters
FACT:
Chapter 2: Dysfunctional Workplace Personalities. Science has determined what we have known for a long time: Interacting with toxic coworkers and managers can be a major headache. Taking our metaphor of
a headache to the next level, Trevor Blake, a serial entrepreneur and author
of Three Simple Steps: A Map to Success in Business and Life, describes how
neuroscientists have observed the impact interacting with negative personality types (Blake’s book cited a study looking specifically at complainers) has on the human brain. Research demonstrates
Harvard maintains a Brain
that listening to another person complain for 30 minBank where over 7,000
human brains are stored
utes or more actually erodes neurons in the hippocamfor research purposes.
pus (FYI, that part of the brain is pretty important for
skills like problem solving). While research involving
the other personality types may not reveal that they turn your brain to
mush, they are nonetheless still irritating. Chapter 2 identifies and deals
with many of the most common dysfunctional workplace personalities
you are likely to encounter in organizational settings:
• Lackeys
• Complainers
• Busybodies
• Control Freaks
• Lazy Bums
• Overachievers
• the Full of Excuses
• Drama Kings/Queens
• Credit Stealers
• Hot Heads What is toxic organizational communication?
35
While this is not an exhaustive list of dysfunctionFACT:
In 2007, the Vatican
al workplace personalities, it does cover a signifiissued a list of 10 commandments for drivers in
cant amount of territory. As we demonstrated in
an attempt to lessen the
this introductory chapter with the People Pleaser,
number of traffic fatalities.
Chapter 2 provides a thorough description of each
personality type (for colleagues and superiors that
fit the bill); an examination of its social, productive, and monetary impact on the workplace; and strategies on how to handle such people.
Chapter 3: Dysfunctional Interactions. While everyone’s personality
definitely influences how they interact with others, the characteristics
and impacts of some workplace interactions are so poignant that they
deserve their own names. A recent survey of 168 members of the
Institute of Management Accountants in Arkansas, Illinois, Kansas,
Missouri, and Oklahoma revealed that nearly one of three males in
the study reported having been bullied in the workplace, whereas three
of five women reported being the victims of such bullying (Greer &
Schmelzle, 2009). Defined as “the repeated mistreatment of an employee targeted by one or more employees with a
FACT:
38% of workers said they
malicious mix of humiliation, intimidation, verbal
have dated a coworker
abuse, and work interference” (p. 42), occupational
at least once.
bullying is only one type of dysfunctional workplace interaction. Other types we cover include:
CHAPTER 1
36
•
•
•
•
•
•
Backstabbing
Gossiping
Office romance gone wrong
Intergenerational turmoil
Workplace violence
Workplace cliques
This chapter proceeds with a thorough detailing of the interaction
type; its personal, productive, and monetary impact on the workplace;
and strategies for surviving such toxic interactions.
FACT:
Chapter 4: Dysfunction at the Organizational Level. A recent survey from Deloitte revealed that 94% of executives and 88% of employees find an organization’s culture to be central to its success. Another
finding, however, indicated that only 19% of executives and 15% of
employees strongly feel that their own organization’s culture pervades
the workplace (Spiegelman, 2012). Why the huge disconnect? This is
the conversation on which Chapter 4 begins. Specifically, the chapter surveys the topics of poor leadership and negative organizational
culture. Obviously each of these topics is richer than its name alone
describes. Regarding leadership, the chapter overviews the impact
poor leadership has on the organization. Viewing managers/bosses
as the traditional leader in the workplace, we explore poor leadership
emerging from bosses being inept, unethical, and resistant to chance. As with our prior chapters, after
America has been
called the “No Vacation
the description of these subcategories, we provide
Nation.” Thirty percent
strategies for survival. With culture being such a
of older workers (55+)
actually have between 5
huge concept, we further break this chapter into the
and 10 days of vacation
impact of an organization’s culture on its success or
time left over at the end
failure and the key components of sexual harassof the year.
ment, discrimination, and disgruntled employees. Chapter 5: Dysfunctional Excess. Is there too much of a good thing? Yes, the answer is definitely yes! A recent study revealed that the number of Americans using cocaine on the job has dropped nearly 30%
in just the last couple years. That’s the good news. The disturbing
news is that since the federal government tightened the drug testing
of pilots, airplane mechanics, and train operators, the number of em-
ployees testing positive for heroin and prescription painkillers on the job has more than doubled (Fisher, 2011). We conceptualize excess
as engaging in any behavior past the point of
superabundance. For the modern worker this
includes imbibing in illegal substances, privileging your work at the expense of other areas
of your life like family and your health, and of
course, stress. This chapter looks at the impact
each of these areas has on the workplace and
provides strategies to overcome them.
Chapter 6: Dysfunctional Technology Issues. It is hard to imagine any modern workplace without the technological mainstays of a
computer, fax machine, telephone, or at the very
least, a typewriter. While the growth of the
amount of technology found in the modern office is staggering, the technological capabilities that
FACT:
Workers spend double
the individual worker has via cellphone are beyond
the amount of time online
while at work than they
the comprehension of someone from just 20 years
do at home.
ago. It might seem to be common sense that with
the advent of more effective technology in the modern workplace, employees would become more productive. However,
a survey by Websense.com in 2006 found that the average American
worker spent about 24% of the workday hours for non-work-related
behaviors (Schings, n.d.). Many workplaces view the purchase of the
latest technology to be the answer to whatever troubles they experience in the moment. Yet, this rarely turns out to be the case for many
different reasons. This final content chapter addresses three primary
areas of dysfunctional technology: an inappropriate online presence,
cybersmearing, and cyberloafing. Staying true to form, we approach
each of these concepts with a description of it, its impact on the workplace, and strategies to survive it.
Chapter 7: Final Thoughts. This chapter reviews the main concepts
from all of the chapters in the textbook.
37
CHAPTER 1
38
In summary, your entrance/reentrance/however the heck you would
describe your current workplace related situation is not likely to be the
smooth transition you may have envisioned. When we were undergraduates, for some reason we framed graduation as a magical rite of
passage, which guaranteed a wonderful lifetime of work-related experiences. At the very least we would be better off than our peers who
did not receive their diploma. While we firmly believe that our lives
are better due to our educational experiences, we have also come to believe that a dysfunctional workplace remains dysfunctional regardless
of how many college courses you, as an individual, take. As a student
of Communication you have an advantage (and an obligation) to use
your knowledge and skills to make your workplace a little less dysfunctional when you can. What is toxic organizational communication?
However, the ability to enact change for the better typically accompanies the attainment of higher organizational status, which in turn
typically accompanies the more years you have at a workplace. In order to get to the level where you can enact change, you have to survive. The following chapters offer guidelines (please note we did not say
HARD AND FAST RULES) on how to prolong your tenure at your
workplace so you can get to a position to make things a little more
functional. DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
1. In what other ways or areas have you heard the term
“toxic” utilized? Are they primarily negative? Are any
positive?
2. Aside from the term “toxic,” what other terms could be
used to describe the dysfunctional communication patterns our textbook addresses? What does each term
offer or highlight that others do not?
3. Aside from the term “surviving,” what other terms could
be used to describe how to exist in a workplace defined
by dysfunctional communicative practices?
4. If you buy into the notion that our workplace experiences
are socially constructed, is it possible that only certain
aspects of our workplace experiences may be “toxic”
while others remain untainted?
5. With what negative workplace personality type (other
than a People Pleaser) have you most recently interacted? What was your goal in your interactions with this
person?
39
CHAPTER 1
40
Glossary
Organizational Communication—the processes by which humans systematically coordinate their actions, values, and beliefs in order to
achieve both individual and group goals.
People Pleaser—a person whose self-worth is based on the belief that
everyone he or she meets likes him or her on some level.
Self-Soothe—engaging in the practice of talking to one’s self (either
aloud or silently) and saying reaffirming messages in an attempt to
counteract the anxiety one may be feeling.
Toxic Organizational Communication—dysfunctional communications practices which continuously and negatively impact the experiences of organizational members.
Toxic Organizational Communication Principles—guidelines that
facilitate the usage and perpetuation of dysfunctional communicative practices.
Waffler—an individual who speaks or acts in a vague or evasive manner.
Whistleblowers—a person who exposes organizational wrongdoings in
hopes of improving the situation for others.
Yes Person—similar to a People Pleaser, a person who agrees to anything
someone else says or asks him or her to do.
References
Beard, D.F. (2007). Retaliation: Unlawful, unethical, or just to be expected? Strategic Finance, 89, 32-38.
Blake, T. (2012). Three simple steps: A map to success in business and life. Dallas, TX: BenBella Books.
Fisher, Anne. (2011, February 11). Drug use at work: Higher than we
thought. CNNMoney. Retrieved from http://management.fortune.cnn.com/2011/02/03/heroin-use-at-work-higher-than-wethought/.
Greer, O.L., & Schmelzle, G.D. (2009). Are you being bullied: You’re
not alone. Strategic Finance, 41-45.
Heathfield, S.M. (2013). Diversity in the workplace: Search for similarities. Human Resources. Retrieved from http://humanresources.
about.com/od/diversity/a/diversity.htm.
Karen Silkwood Biography. (2013). Retrieved January 14, 2013 from
http://www.biography.com/people/karen-silkwood-9542402.
Kenneth Kendrick. (n.d.). Retrieved January 14, 2013 from http://www.
foodwhistleblower.org/the-lifecycle-of-food/the-problems-ofprocessing/contamination/kenneth-kendrick.
Kerby, S., & Burns, B. (2012, July 12). The top 10 economic facts of
diversity in the workplace. Center for American Progress. Retrieved from http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/labor/
news/2012/07/12/11900/the-top-10-economic-facts-of-diversity-in-the-workplace/.
Know Your Rights: Sexual Harassment at Work. (2013). Retrieved January 10, 2013 from http://www.equalrights.org/publications/kyr/
shwork.asp.
Leimadophis Epinephelus Snake. (2012). Retrieved January 11, 2013 from
http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Poison_dart_frog.
Marvel Universe Wiki. (2012). Toxin. Retrieved January 4, 2013 from http://marvel.com/universe/Toxin.
Near, J.P., & Miceli, M.P. (1985). Organizational dissidence: The case of
whistleblowing. Journal of Business Ethics, 4, 1-16.
Poison Dart Frog. (2013). Retrieved January 4, 2013 from http://animals.nationalgeographic.com/animals/amphibians/poison-frog/.
ProHeart6. (n.d.). Retrieved January 12, 2013 from http://www.whistleblower.org/program-areas/public-health/proheart6.
Reinhold, B.B. (1996). Toxic work: How to overcome stress, overload, and
burnout and revitalize your career. New York: Penguin Books.
Reynolds, J.P. (2012, March 22). How to deal with “people pleasers” who
annoy you. Retrieved from http://jpr-communications.blogspot.
com/2012/03/how-to-deal-with-people-pleasers-who.html.
Saunders, E.G. (2012, October 30). Stop being a people-pleaser. Harvard
Business Review. Retrieved from http://blogs.hbr.org/cs/2012/10/
stop_being_a_people-pleaser.html.
Schings, Stephany. (n.d.). Cyberloafing: SIOP member’s research shows
not all web activity at work is detrimental. Society for Industrial &
Organizational Psychology, Inc. Retrieved from http://www.siop.
org/Media/News/loafing.aspx.
Spiegelman, P. (2012, Sept 7). Survey says: Workplace culture matters to
employees. Inc. Retrieved from http://www.inc.com/paul-spiegelman/company-culture-matters-to-employees-survey-says.html.
41
42
CHAPTER 1
Svoboda, E. (2008, May 1). Field guide to a people-pleaser: May I serve
as your doormat. Psychology Today. Retrieved from http://www.
psychologytoday.com/articles/200805/field-guide-the-peoplepleaser-may-i-serve-your-doormat.
Tartakovsky, M. (2011). 21 tips to stop being a people-pleaser. Psych
Central. Retrieved January 20, 2013 from http://psychcentral.com/
lib/2011/21-tips-to-stop-being-a-people-pleaser/.
Thompson, K. (2010, Fall). Recognize a toxic workplace. Phi Kappa Phi
Forum on Workplace and Employment, 27. Top 10 Whistleblowers. (2013). Retrieved January 5, 2013 from http://
www.toptenz.net/top-10-whistle-blowers.php.
Verschoor, C.C. (2012). Retaliation for whistleblowing is on the rise.
Strategic Finance, 94, 13-69.
What We Do. (2013). Retrieved January 26, 2013 from http://www.
benandjerrysfoundation.org/what-we-do.html.
Whistleblower Heard Around the World. (2012). Retrieved January 8,
2013 from http://jobs.aol.com/articles/2011/05/30/10-whistleblowers heard-around-the-world/.

Chapter One - What is Toxic Organizational

Transcription

Similar documents

NSilvennoinen_JMccaffrey_Poster

NOM-010-STPS

Poisonous plants

Helsana Business Health

Mobilizer - The WorkPlace

Progress overview 2016

Manage personal work priorities and professional

Presentation - Actuaries Institute

VA Richard L. Roudebush Medical Center

Technical-Vocational 6th Form Albena Lake