30 Oct Part 1: Combating Incivility and Toxicity in the Workplace
Rudeness and incivility in the workplace — seemingly inconsequential, inconsiderate words and deeds that violate conventional workplace conduct — creates a wide range of spillover effects. Examples include things like talking down to others, not giving credit where due, hoarding ‘plum’ assignments, taking credit for others’ ideas, failing to return phone calls or excluding people from meetings.
The cost of employee incivility can be measured by analyzing turnover and commitment rates, productivity levels, and the estimated number of work hours lost because of negative interactions. Research gathered via focus groups and surveys, as well as scientific experiments revealed that people literally did not perform as well, weren’t as creative and became more dysfunctional and aggressive when someone was rude to them.
For example, a U.S.-based survey of 775 managers and employees found that of those who faced incivility at work:
- 48 percent intentionally decreased work effort.
- 47 percent intentionally decreased time at work.
- 38 percent intentionally decreased work quality.
- 80 percent lost work time worrying about the incident.
- 63 percent lost work time avoiding the offender.
- 66 percent said their performance declined.
- 78 percent said their commitment to the organization declined.
Other researchers report similar findings. In a U.S.-based study of over 400 leaders, ninety-four percent reported that they had worked with a toxic individual in the last five years. There are three primary types of toxic behavior:
- Shaming, such as verbal humiliation, potshots and sarcasm.
- Passive hostility, such as passive aggressiveness, manipulation and territoriality about physical space and information.
- Team sabotage, such as meddling in team performance and using one’s authority to punish others.
Some believe that toxic behavior is a solo act, but there is often a “toxic protector” who enables the individual to get away with things and a “toxic buffer” who shields the team from their antics. Toxic protectors may enable this kind of behavior due to their relationship with the toxic person (such as a subordinate) or because the individual has valuable knowledge or is highly productive. Toxic buffers, on the other hand, place themselves between the toxic individual and the rest of the team, as needed, and may try to rationalize the toxic behavior.
Though feedback doesn’t generally work when it comes to the toxic individual, it can be an effective means of curbing the behavior of protectors and buffers.
Tomorrow we will look at how organizations respond to, contain and train toxic behavior