Blog

Is It Harassment? Try Our Twist Test™.

December 7, 2011

workplace harassment - wrong or right?Let’s say that you just observed a behaviour in the workplace that somehow made you uncomfortable, where your gut tells you that maybe some offensive line was crossed. Or – heaven help us! –  let’s say that it was you who said or did something that makes you wonder whether you’ve just crossed that elusive line between ‘appropriate’ and ‘inappropriate’.

But you’re not really sure. The more you mull it over, the less sure you are.

You’re not alone. These ‘grey’ harassment situations are very difficult to diagnose. And if we don’t diagnose properly, we also cannot take intelligent action.

There’s a little thinking-tool I’ve devised, to be used a litmus test. I call it The Twist Test™, and here’s how it works: When you’re unsure whether ‘the line was crossed’, take one fact related to the situation, change it (=twist) and see whether the answer becomes clear.

Here’s an example – based on a real-life situation:

A well-liked colleague has a strong French accent. It’s actually cute and endearing and everyone comments on it on a regular basis, mostly fondly. One day as you’re listening to that colleague’s presentation to a large group, another colleague whispers to you: “hey, what do you think – is she speaking English or French right now?”.

You feel uncomfortable and confused by this comment, but not sure how to react. 

This is a great opportunity to use ‘The Twist”! Ask yourself, “If this person had another type of accent (Chinese, Arab, Indian….), would it be okay to make these comments?”. If your answer is ‘no, it would not be okay to make this comment’, then diagnostically the line between ‘appropriate’ and ‘inappropriate’ had been crossed. The comments about the French accent should cease.

Typical situations to use The Twist Test™ might be:

  • When people are making fun of a male trait – twist it by asking: Would we allow the same comments about females?
  • When it’s a joke or comment about low weight, would it be okay to make a similar comment about being overweight?
  • When it’s a joke/comment about a generally-respected group (say, Catholics), would it be okay if the same comment were directed toward a more vulnerable religion (Muslims, say, or Jews)?

Discussion Questions

In your team, consider the following questions:

  1. In our organization…. in the domain of respectful behaviour, what are three ‘lines’ that everyone knows are not to be crossed?
  2. In our organization…. in the domain of respectful behaviour, what are three ‘lines’ that are not as clear (and may cause some confusion, upset, unrest or conflict)?
  3. What are the effects of having unclear lines on our team? On individuals? On customer service (internal or external)? On the work itself?
  4. Regarding the unclear lines we discussed in response to question no. 2: in our team, what would we like to make clearer (and abide by) regarding those lines?
  5. If we were to better define the lines as per question no. 3, what difference would it make to our group’s performance? To the way we each feel about the team? Other differences?

[contactpiece]

Seven Fail-Proof Action Planning Criteria

December 7, 2011

Do you have a million ideas you want to implement but not sure where to start? Well, join the club!

If you want to start taking meaningful action, here are some criteria you can use (any one will work, or a combination):

  1. Which idea is a `low hanging fruit’? (i.e. possible to implement immediately, with relative ease)
  2. Which action/s are urgent and must be taken now?
  3. Which action (borrowing from Stephen Covey’s ideas) is important but not urgent?  Don’t neglect important-not-urgent items, because if you don’t take action on these type of matters, they have a funny way of becoming
    urgent!
  4. Which action will provide most visibility (for you personally or for the issue)?  This is an especially useful concept when you’re a leader and want to demonstrate that you really are serious about a particular issue.
  5. Which action, if taken, will give you the best ROI? (best return on your
    investment of effort, time, money and other resources).
  6. Which action, once taken, will create a meaningful ripple effect?

    And finally, the BIG one, the `core values’ criterion:
  7. Which action, if implemented, will be most aligned with your legacy and the way in which you want to be remembered many years from now?

As you can see, there are many ways to look at the selection and implementation of ideas, and each has its own merit.

Are there any that you’d like to add? what has worked for you?

Incivility Risk: Time to Connect the Dots (5)

November 18, 2011

If you want to prevent or address workplace incivility, you’ll find no shortage of obstacles.

The vast majority of the comments found in our HR Reporter survey on workplace incivility’s open-ended sections, point to two major obstacles.

Not surprisingly, the first obstacle respondents describe is this: senior managers are often the biggest offenders. And if the leaders model these bad behaviours, there’s no chance of taking meaningful action to curtail it elsewhere.

The second obstacle relates to the murky nature of the problem, and its multi-dimensionality. For example, “more often than not, things are said in a joking way”; “sometimes what was ok yesterday, is not okay today!!!”; “some people are perceived to have ‘untouchable’ status”; “most incidents of incivility are not brought to the appropriate personnel”;  and; “there are no laws about incivility, so companies have no specific policies on this”.

Still, these complexities are no excuse for letting incivility damage both the business and its people.

The time is now for organizations to begin connecting the dots: incivility is a risk that needs to be managed just like any other risk. It needs to be diagnosed correctly and addressed in a thoughtful way.

 

Don’t hesitate to contact us with any questions or to ask about our services.

Incivility Risk: Time to Connect the Dots (4)

November 9, 2011

Having seen the effects of workplace incivility on key organizational indicators, how do HR folks deal with the issue?
With their ability to take meaningful action limited by the (very) questionable support they get from management, here’s what HR folks do:

  • They get busy revising policies (69%), however only 7% initiate the creation of Team Charters that would help employees take ownership of these revised policies.
  • They provide training to management (51%) and front line staff (54%), but only 17% are able to create an overall strategic organizational response.
  • 34% hang posters, distribute pamphlets and do newsletters write-ups, however only 34% make it `a topic of conversation across the organization’.
  • And many, as gleaned from the survey’s open comments sections, simply `do nothing’, or they deal with the issue on a case-by-case basis.

These results point to a glaring incongruence between the magnitude of the incivility risk (we’ve covered that in the previous entries in this series) and organizational responses to it. The organizational resources dedicated to solving the problem dwarf in comparison with the costs associated with its impact.
But before we get all up-in-arms about a lack of initiative and focus on HR’s part, it might be worth looking at the (very real) obstacles they face.
Which is exactly what I’ll do next week, in the final instalment of this series!

Incivility Risk: Time to Connect the Dots (3)

November 2, 2011

So what happens when HR gets a complaint about workplace incivility? (= those seemingly inconsequential, discourteous or rude words or actions, where the intent to harm is ambiguous at best.)

Okay, we’ve established through the recent HR Reporter survey that workplace incivility does impact key organizational indicators. However, a set of questions about how organizations respond to it revealed a troubling reality.

As the numbers below show, we see within HR itself large pockets which lack both confidence and skill in dealing with the issue. This is true despite the fact that 73% of survey respondents comprised of executives, managers and supervisors, and another 17% identified themselves as `senior individual contributors’.

When asked about their reaction when they received formal or informal civility-related complaint…

  • 77% “wished they had more knowledge and tools to deal with this situation”
  • 39% “felt unsure how to handle the situation”
  • 37% did not “know exactly what to do” to fix it
  • 81% “wish management was more aware of how incivility impacts the business”
  • 72% “wish they had more organizational support”

This lack of information and skills is disconcerting. It demonstrates that there’s little understanding and support from the organization’s management tiers. And it also shows that HR’s lack of skill leads to a compromised ability to support the business and its leaders – and that HR professionals may inadvertently mishandle situations.

So how do organizations actually handle incivility on the ground? We asked about that too, and I’ll relay the data to you next week!

Incivility Risk: Time to Connect the Dots (2)

October 25, 2011

We’re back with the hot-off-the-press of the first ever cross-Canada survey on workplace incivility!

As seen from HR’s unique vantage point, incivility is exceedingly damaging to business. An overwhelming majority of our 308 respondents `strongly agreed’ or `somewhat agreed’ that incivility has a significant negative effect on crucial organizational indicators.

Here’s where they saw its impact…  ready for some striking data? here goes:

  • Effects on productivity: 92% observed that incivility had negative effects in this domain.
  • Customer service: 72% noted impact in the arena.
  • Absenteeism: 79%
  • Talent retention: 78%
  • Interdepartmental collaboration: 90%
  • Damage to brand reputation: 52%

These figures tell us that incivility poses a tangible risk to organizations. Previous U.S.-based research has already pointed to a relationship between incivility and similar organizational indicators, however our survey’s high figures go well beyond what has been previously observed. What respondents relayed is that this seemingly benign form of bad behaviour comes with hefty price tags. When your brand is eroding, customers are going elsewhere, you’re having difficulty attracting and retaining talent and the cost of sick leaves is rising, your capacity to carry out the organization’s objectives is severely hampered.

Given this, you’d naturally assume that organizations, and their HR professionals, would be busy dealing with this risk head on. You’d surely expect them to be equipped with the necessary skills and confidence, right?

Well, wrong again.

Stay tuned to hear what organizations do in response to incivility!

 

Need help with challenges in your organization? Don’t hesitate to contact us. 

Incivility Risk: Time to Connect the Dots (1)

October 18, 2011

Consider this: if we define incivility as `seemingly inconsequential, rude or discourteous words and actions’, it would be utterly logical to assume that its effects on the workplace would be equally inconsequential, right?

Well, wrong!

Indeed, a survey I designed in conjunction with the Canadian HR Reporter magazine (published October 12th , 2011) demonstrates that the exact opposite is true. The data in this survey was the first data of its kind collected here in Canada. And the findings are striking, even shocking.

Have you experienced problems with incivility in your workplace? If so, please stick around for the next few blog entries. I will share with you relevant information extracted from this survey; it will likely be helpful to you in your own role within your organization.

For starters, some stats: 308 Human Resources professionals provided online responses to the questionnaire. 73% of respondents were HR executives, managers and supervisors, another 17% identified themselves as `senior individual contributors’.

The responses covered all Canadian provinces, coast to coast, from organizations ranging in size from one to 5,000+. As to frequency of incivility, most of the respondents relayed that they recieve formal or informal complaints about Incivility (as defined above), on a regular basis, up to 15 times in a six months’ period.

I had the privilege of presenting the survey’s results at the 2011 Health Work and Wellness conference in downtown Toronto on the very day of publication in the HR Reporter. I dare say that the audience was hugely impacted by these findings (and other eye-opening information related to workplace incivility which I was pleased to share).

So please do stick around, more to come next week!

 

Don’t hesitate to contact us with any questions or to ask about our services.

My Pet Language Peeve

September 20, 2011

Warning: there’s a good chance that in the last 24 hours, dozens or even hundreds of times, you’ve compromised your personal power, image and expertise.

Wonder how I know this and what on earth you might have done to deserve such harsh criticism?

Well, it’s simple. Chances are that you’ve peppered your speech with lots of unnecessary fillers. Some of them may have gone unnoticed, others may have annoyed your listeners, and yet others may have outright damaged you in seemingly small but corrosive ways.

Here are some of the phrases you may have used, along with some blunt commentary…..

  • “To be honest…”  – why, have you not been honest up until now? (Leaders beware, using this phrase feeds into people’s innate mistrust of management)
  • “Sort of” and “kind of” –  the current winners in Canadian popularity contests. “Sort of” strips your speech of all conviction and sense of expertise. (For example, do we really “have the winning product” or only “sort of” have it?)
  • “Really” – a highly useful word when used properly to emphasize a word or idea. Even when used as occasional filler, it’s quite harmless. But when used 5 times in the course of 7 sentences, it robs everything around it of intensity and meaning. And you too are in danger of seeming bland and monotonous.
  • “Know what I mean?” – frankly, at some point, after being asked this again and again (and yet again) , I won’t WANT to know what you mean!
  • “Alright?” or “okay?” – are you really asking if people are `alright’ with your idea? If so, stop and listen. If not, cut it out.

There are many more fillers (`basically’, `pretty much’, `actually’, and of course ‘like’, to name a few), but the above seem to be most prevalent these days. They all make you look tentative, unsure, a non-expert. And they grade on people’s nerves to boot.

Here’s a great way to kick your habit:

Ask someone who sees you often to partner with you. Their job is to comment every time you employ your beloved filler. Your job is to put a dollar in a charity box every time they – or you! – catch yourself doing so. This strategy will cure you in no time.

HOWEVER, in being the coach helping people apply this strategy, I have found that a new habit tends to immediately replace the old one – it just sneaks up on you while you’re busy tending to the first one! So pay careful attention…

Now, go out there and reclaim your personal power and image!

__________________________________________

PS  one of you had written the following in response to the above:

Well, actually to be totally honest I sort of get this blog and I kind of like it , if you know what I mean. Okay?

What Makes a Group Stupid?

July 6, 2011

What reduces a group’s collective intelligence? Well, the Carnegie Melon University research I mentioned last week suggests that a dominant, even abrasive person can do exactly that. “In groups where one person dominated, the group was less collectively intelligent than in groups where the conversational turns were more evenly distributed,” says Anita Williams-Woolley, the lead researcher.

Frankly, this is not surprising, is it? You may have noticed this phenomenon yourself!

When people are afraid of someone, they become risk averse. They shift into survival-and-safety mode. In this mode, creative problem solving is inhibited and conformity reigns.

You may have noticed that this problem is magnified when the abrasive person happens to be the formal leader, one who has real power to actually `punish’ people. So what do people do when the boss is abrasive? They stop innovating. They resign. They go on sick leave. They speak badly of the company. And that’s a very partial list.

So you – yes, you! – the one sitting quietly in your chair while this is going on and behaving like it doesn’t concern you…. what are you going to do about it the next time the dominant person gets control and everyone retreats into their protective shells?

As the French author Anais Nin’s put it: “Life shrinks or expands in proportion to one’s courage”. We all have a choice in how much we want to impact the environment around us for the better.

(PS  Speaking of abrasive behaviour, I’m in the early stages of launching a unique program designed to help organizations turn around the behaviour of abrasive managers. It’s called “Boss Whispering”. I’ll tell you more about it when it’s fully rolled out, but do feel free to contact me anytime for assistance or inquiries.)

What Makes a Group Smart?

June 27, 2011

Take a guess: which of the following factors will most contribute to a group’s `collective intelligence’ in solving difficult problems and performing tasks?

a) Group members’ cumulative individual I.Q. levels

b) The number of women in the group

c) The presence of a dominant group member

d) The freedom to make mistakes without suffering negative ramifications

If you chose `B’ (did you?), you were right!

Surprisingly, according to new research from Carnegie Melon University, “Having a bunch of smart people in a group doesn’t necessarily make the group smart”.

These researchers had 699 people placed in groups of two to five. The groups worked together on tasks that ranged from visual puzzles to negotiations, brainstorming, games and complex rule-based design assignments. What they did not at all expect to find is this: the more women in the group, the better the group’s `collective intelligence’.

The exact reasons for this result require further research. However, initial analysis of the data led the researchers to conclude that “higher social sensitivity exhibited by females,” contributed to these results.

There was another intriguing piece to this research… stay tuned!

LEARNING Hub

Access free learning tools, articles and other resources for you and your team.

REAL™ Solutions for Abrasive Leaders

Find out how you, as a senior executive or HR leader, can help restore the effectiveness of an abrasive leader.

Training Services

Discover how our training programs will energize and grow your people.

Organizational Solutions

Find out how we can help you with organizational development and initiatives.
Copyright © 2024 Bar-David Consulting Inc. All Rights Reserved. Website by Geist Creative.