The other victims at work

My doctrine is this, that if we see cruelty or wrong that we have the power to stop, and do nothing, we make ourselves sharers in the guilt. ~ Anna Sewell (1820-1878)

In the mid 1800s horses were not well treated, and Anna Sewell’s famous book, Black Beauty, lead to a change in public attitudes and, eventually, better treatment of horses. It seems sad that frequently, in workplaces around the country, and apparently around the world, people continue to be bullied or mobbed. If bullying View definition in a new window and mobbing View definition in a new window behaviours are naturally occurring human behaviours (and I believe they are) then it comes as no surprise that they do occur. What is an issue, however, is that colleagues watching the activity frequently stand by and do nothing. They look, smile sadly - knowingly - and do nothing.

It is not as though people don’t know what the behaviours are. They do. It could be than management could or should step in and sort it out, but they don’t/can’t/won’t. HR could or should step in and sort it out, but they don’t/can’t/won’t. Unions might, but rarely do, because the delegates are colleagues in the first instance, and they don’t/can’t/won’t. The people nearest, the ones who are seeing the target and the attacker(s), have three choices. They can step up to the mark and make a difference. They can join in with the attack. But what seems to be a very popular choice is for people to turn a blind eye to the plight of their colleagues.

This is not an innocent act, this is the face of guilt. The end result is the target leaves, the attacker(s) are left growling and ruffling their feathers, and the colleagues can barely look at each other knowing full well that if it happens again no-one will defend them either. They have become collateral victims, and the overarching atmosphere of guilt coupled with the tacit approval of inappropriate behaviours is demoralizing for all concerned.

The next step is the staff will create narratives to re-write history and provide justifications for the behaviours - note this is the avoidance behavior, not the bullying/mobbing behaviors - this is strategically ignored, or can even be justified - ‘we had to do this because X was a bad person’…

I overheard a conversation the other day about how …needed to be ‘performance managed’ out… in other words, someone had been targeted for removal from the pay roll. The other person nodded sagely, yes, that would be wise. Both parties had that special blank look protecting them from identifying the person as a person. Somewhere there was an unwitting victim about to suffer, somewhere there is team (unless some bold individual or two has stepped forward) also about to feel the guilt of inaction and subsequent demoralization.

When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle
. Edmund Burke in Thoughts on the Cause of Present Discontents (1770)

Share/Save/Bookmark

Is bullying a natural condition? - II

Reflecting on the first posting on the ‘natural’ behaviour of bullying View definition in a new window, I’m not convinced of my own writing. I noted that I’ve seen fish bullying - I didn’t really express that as I would’ve wanted. I have seen fish chase other fish and ‘push’ them around. But this is hardly a natural condition - a fish tank, at best, is a glorified puddle compared with a decent pond, lake, river, or ocean. Forcing fish into a space where territory is impossible can only lead to the strongest fish pushing weaker ones into a corner.

I think the pecking order of chooks is no more (or no less) than a ’strongest gets to mate’ or other hierarchy. Not uncommon in nature - the biggest, boldest, strongest, most colourful gets the pick of the babes. Or whatever - the female picks the male who can provide the most impressive set of genes. The alpha male sees off the scungy wannabes, so he can share the lurve.

Neither of these behaviours are bullying. I have heard that if you take the chicken at the bottom of the totem pole, and set it apart for a few days in a equal sized space, and then introduce a chicken a day in ‘up’ the pecking order, the pecking order can be reversed - i.e. the least shall be first. To be confirmed.

Now, sandpit. I’m less convinced about that too. Sure, little kids fight over toys (resources), space, and attention; but that’s a long way from bullying. I’m not sure I saw bullying at school until the kids were a bit older. I’m now wondering if, instead of being a natural condition, in which case I’d perhaps expect to see it in animal behaviour and in pre-schoolers. Perhaps bullying is a uniquely human behaviour, and one that is adopted with maturity.

Mobbing View definition in a new window, in the case of animals, is something I haven’t seen. I believe that in the past hunters would put a captured owl out in a cage knowing that an owl in the day time would attract birds primed to attack the owl. Right within the hunter’s strike. This is an cross species attack - I’ve never seen a group of - say - birds - of the same species single out and attack an individual of the same species. Further research required.

Share/Save/Bookmark

Is bullying a natural condition?

I’ve been wondering if bullying View definition in a new window is a naturally occurring activity. That’s not the same as an activity that would be welcomed, of course. I’ve seen bullying in tropical fish, seen plenty of it in the sandpit at school, and, while I’ve never seen evidence of it myself, the pecking order of chickens is well known.

I wondered if Konrad Lorenz had anything to say about in his books - On Aggression, or my childhood favourite, King Solomon’s Ring.

Professor Westhues sees mobbing as a natural fact and makes the following observation:

The best starting point for a research program on workplace mobbing View definition in a new window is recognition that the phenomenon is rooted in impulses we share with many other species. Ganging up to attack a target is not only learned, cultural behavior. Nor is it only an act of human will. It is indeed a matter of culture and of ethics, but more basically, a matter of nature or biology. Mobbing is best understood as the coming to the surface, the expression in distinctly human ways, of instincts we are born with, tendencies to which we are genetically, physically inclined.

Turns out Lorenz has plenty to say on the subject, so I’ll have to dig out my copies and give them a read. Westhues notes that Lorenz actually coined the word ‘mobbing’, and explores the idea that mobbing (if not bullying) recognising ‘that mobbing is no mere cultural artifact, but a cultural overlay on a natural fact‘.

Share/Save/Bookmark