A Process for Correcting Workplace Aggression

Jackie Gilbert, Ph.D. and a Professor of Management at Middle Tennessee State

Conflict and the reactions to it are part of the workplace and business. It’s not simple management and easy resolution because it’s complex to understand people, psychology, environments and behavior impulses.

Disagreements, perceptions and emotions are going to affect human interaction quality, reputations and the effectiveness of professional relationships.

Jackie Gilbert, Ph.D. and Professor of Management at Middle Tennessee State University, has authored the important book, “How to Transform Workplace Bullies Into Allies,” and in it she communicates about the challenges that people, leaders and organizations have with the often vexing challenge of aggression and conflicted relationships.

Interestingly enough, Gilbert believes that higher education is not helping matters as it educates students, writing "Unfortunately, people skills at work have long been ignored in traditional college curricula." 

This gap is of course both problematic and an opportunity.

“Curriculum focus is driven by industry knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs). In a global economy, college graduates who relate successfully with a variety of people and who possess social and emotional finesse are in demand,” she says. “The Future of Jobs Report 2020 for example cited emotional intelligence as a key emerging skill set. Courses that explain the fallout in terms of bullying, abuse, misconduct and a resulting toxic workplace, can help students understand their role in building community, and their position as problem solvers.”

In a competitive culture, organizationally and at times, individually, unmet expectations occur and boundaries get breached. When ethical, skilled conflict management or resolution are not core values and competencies, costs and losses transpire.

The need for prevention training, more than a policy book, and increasing awareness are areas for room for improvement.

“As David K. Williams explains in ‘Nice Companies Really Do Finish First’ Gilbert notes, “‘Nice companies aren’t just nicer—they’re more profitable.’ The flurry of leaders gone rogue suggests that interpersonal training, even before employees begin work, is essential. Education that helps them to recognize which behaviors constitute abuse, how they contribute to the problem, and how they can create positive, shared norms is a form of leadership development.”

The realization and warning is that when people, as individuals and a collective are left to randomly operate, is clear.

“A culture left to its own, one where company standards are absent, creates a leadership vacuum where the aggressive rule,” Gilbert declares.

It’s not common that human beings and organizations believe the origin of problems are, if not fully theirs, then at least due to their contributions. Gilbert writes about this in the chapter "Recognizing Our Part in Problem Creation." As to how it develops and what we do to create our part, she explains.

“Behaviors have a ripple effect at the office. An ill-timed, offhanded remark, one where offenders fail to apologize or offer restorative justice to make people whole sends a message that targets are deserving of their abuse. Recipients can mistakenly turn the blame inward — ‘What did I do wrong?’ Because of social learning theory, where people take cues from their coworkers, employees may receive a message that it’s OK to discredit certain people. Targets are then abused twice when pile-on ensues, when others join in to score points with coworkers they perceive as powerful,” she says.

Prevention or remedy is not likely to occur when fear, self-interest or character deficiencies are present. These are obstacles to people being protected from becoming targets.

“Scapegoating occurs when people do not exhibit the courage to confront bullies, and in the case of managers, to administer consequences,” Gilbert says. “A  2021 WBI U.S. Workplace Bullying Survey revealed that forty-five percent of surveyed employees reported feeling worried about their physical and-or psychological safety at work. In toxic, or laissez-faire cultures, workers who experience abuse may, paradoxically, be regarded as pariahs or ‘damaged goods’ who had a hand in creating their misfortune. Abusers may become emboldened and attract bully minions.”

The use of the word bullying in the workplace or business has become more mainstream in conversations about misbehavior and mistreat in a professional context. Yet that particular wording doesn’t resonate well with everyone, as it can be associated with childhood behavior and be interpreted as a frivolous complaint in the workplace and business.

People in authority often disregard behavior troubles as immature complaining, despite the problems aggression creates for individuals and the culture. Gilbert scoffs at the blindness of that perception of the phrasing.

“People who confuse bullying with playground antics are the same ones who understand that unkindness causes harm. To combat workplace abuse, organizations should firstly define abusive conduct, implement civility policies, and communicate and model these frequently and in a visible manner,” she recommends.

“The Model Abusive Conduct Prevention Policy was developed by the Tennessee Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations (TACIR) workplace civility workgroup. The policy defines abusive conduct, outlines employer responsibility, and explains the employee complaint process.”

Policy is a beginning yet many will argue that policies are not often lip service. Yet without it, there is no progress.

“Policy can spearhead a cultural change effort, because it affects every single aspect of an organization—human resources, interpersonal relations, and promotion criteria. In a people-centered climate, employee development, or the degree to which people assist peers, should be a criterion on which they are judged,” Gilbert advocates. “Top management sets the tone. How do administrators treat workers? What behaviors do they tolerate and condone at the office? Do they meet in person with new hires, welcome them to the department, and reiterate an open-door policy?”

It’s worthwhile to differentiate between misbehavior and bullying and it’s something Gilbert has done.

“Misbehavior, or incivility stems from ignorance, or a lack of education: if someone knew better, they would do better. It’s a matter of not knowing rather than a deliberate act of the will,” she says. “Bullying, on the other hand, consists of premeditated attacks to discredit colleagues and by contrast, make abusers look better. Bullies are on the lookout for targets who appear noncombative and a supervisor who looks the other way, or supports their efforts.”

The puzzling questions of why leaders and organizations endure toxic workplaces, for anyone, has always existed. It would seem to reflect weak governance, desired ignorance or leadership failure. Gilbert believes whatever the reason, it’s not wise to accept it as acceptable because there are numerous ways to prevent such behavior and environments.

“Even if people choose not to file complaints, leaders should know what’s transpiring within their firms. They can discover ‘unspoken knowns’ by instigating one-on-ones, conducting personal interviews, sending anonymous surveys, and attending subgroup meetings,” she says. “If employees know there is a line in the sand, they are less likely to cross it. If however they perceive nebulous boundaries and little pushback, then infantile, churlish behavior may flourish. Managers are either enablers of a lax system or champions of a civil culture.”

The Bystander Effect, where people choose not to step in and help a person of need when other people are present because someone else could assist them, can also happen in the workplace. The same with the unsavory behavior of mobbing. These two damaging choices are not often skillfully, effectively responded to and corrected.

“Climates emerge from what workers see modeled, who gets rewarded, and what behaviors replicate on the job,” Gilbert says. “Employees closely watch who’s tight with the boss and who gets promoted to a higher rank. Taking a stand can imperil possible benefits, and anger top level power brokers. ‘Going along to get along’ is how most people in companies behave. At a dysfunctional workplace this choice entails actively, or tacitly, condoning colleague shenanigans and possibly misbehavior.”

She clearly states what is well known and yet not discussed or addressed among most organizational leaders, including boards of directors.

“Enablers choose not to acknowledge poor conduct, and they neatly compartmentalize problems to a person. They may even convince themselves that the perpetrators are in the right.”

Gilbert is a big proponent of what she defines as effective dialogue, which is a critical part of the remedy for transforming cultures and turning out-of-control, damaging, costly behavior within organizations into more ethical interactions and healthy relationships.

“Effective dialogue, online or F2F (face-to-face) is both mutual and respectful. Speaking to others as an equal, soliciting their opinion, checking for understanding, and choosing to respond — and not react—are all ways to create synergy at work,” she says.

“Effective communicators are gracious. They are the first ones to offer an olive branch, and the last ones to leave in a conflict resolution,” Gilbert adds. “They demonstrate EQ (Emotional Intelligence) by asking themselves, ‘How will this message be received?’ ‘Am I meeting the needs of my recipient?’ ‘How can I clarify my message?’ and ‘Am I using the correct medium?’”