Mean Business
Spurious claims and psychological injury | December 8, 2011
You might like to check out my responses to a recent article in The Weekend Australian Magazine (Nov 26-27) that dealt with the issue of workplace bullying (see also previous posts).
My article is published in The Conversation, and highlights that we need to talk not only about false claims, but real claims, and non-reported claims, and that we need to be more aware of what constitutes a psychological injury.
Be great to have your feedback on this!
15 Comments »
Leave a comment Cancel reply
Author
CarloAbout this blog
This blog is about all the bad stuff that goes on at work, with a focus on workplace bullying and other unacceptable behaviours that are a risk to people's health and safety
Preventing Workplace Bullying; Caponecchia & Wyatt (2011)
Click for info on our book
Categories
Archives
Search
- 6,281 hits
Blog Stats
Join 370 other subscribers
The Cloud
Hits map
Mean Business 
Hi Carlo
I have concerned about some of the claims made in the media about spurious claims. I know from experience the true extent of damage done.
Your response was spot on – I admire the work Anne and yourself are doing in this area. I will soon be completing my degree in applied social science majoring in management and intend to become involved in addressing the issue of workplace bullying and psychological injuries – you provide exactly the type of evidence-based approach I will be constantly referring to.
Comment by John McPhilbin — December 9, 2011 @ 2:15 pm
John, Thanks again for your support…
People using evidence in a balanced manner is exactly what we need more of in this field – best wishes with your studies!
Comment by Carlo — December 10, 2011 @ 7:10 pm
Hi Carlo
I recently read Argument culture by Deborah Tannen.
A great read – it seems to me that the whole debate about workplace bullying (along with a major cause of antagonistic workplaces) has many of the seeds sown in a cultural practice that values conflict and opposition over cooperation and agreement. In other words we attempt to resolve conflict with conflict (the I am right you are wrong dichotomy). Tannen writes:
Our society has become overwhelmingly adversarial, with consequences not only in our ability to solve problems but also in our personal relationships.
The Argument Culture is about a pervasive warlike atmosphere that makes us approach anything we need to accomplish as a fight between two opposing sides. The argument culture urges us to regard the world–and the people in it–in an adversarial frame of mind. It rests on the assumption that opposition is the best way to get anything done: The best way to explore an idea is to set up a debate; the best way to cover the news is to find spokespeople who express the most extreme, polarized views and present them as “both sides”; the best way to settle disputes is litigation that pits one party against the other; the best way to begin an essay is to oppose someone; and the best way to show you’re really thinking is to criticize and attack.
Comment by John McPhilbin — December 9, 2011 @ 3:27 pm
Comment by Carlo — December 10, 2011 @ 7:13 pm
HI John
Sounds like an interesting read that could describe several recent events and happenings…I’ll have to look it up.
Btw, did you see the report on bullying in today’s Australian (December 10). Quite different to last week’s…
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/state-politics/victorias-office-of-police-integrity-let-toxic-culture-of-bullying-flourish/story-e6frgczx-1226218658722
Comment by Carlo — December 10, 2011 @ 7:13 pm
Hi Carlo
Yes, I have thanks ( I get Google alerts for workplace bullying, which is handy). I’m also surprised that the Australian is running with the story, simply because they seem have a history of minimising the reality of workplace bullying. Times may be changing, I certainly hope so.
The accused ” Ms Reynolds, has started a new job as a mediator with a US-based dispute resolution company?
I can see why she would want to vehemently deny the allegations. How embarrassing?
It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
Kind regards
John Mc
Comment by John McPhilbin — December 11, 2011 @ 12:08 am
Hi Carlo
Here’s sad case of bullying that more than likely cost people their lives. I think that awareness workplace bullying in a multitude of contexts poses will only increase (fingers crossed)
http://www.stuff.co.nz/manawatu-standard/news/national-news/6115133/Pike-River-inquiry-Safety-manager-bullied
It’s often not until people are impacted personally that they realise just how devastating workplace bullying actually is, and how it can happen to anyone at any level of an organisation. It took my own crisis for me to awaken from my own ignorance (I’d seen it happen to others and not really appreciated the damage being done). And I thought I was untouchable (too tough to be taken down – I was wrong)
http://workers.labor.net.au/features/200410/b_tradeunion_summit.html
McPhilbin, a former soldier who had undergone interrogation training, had come to tell how systematic bullying at Chubb Security had destroyed his physical and psychological health.
The Opera House conference had been called by the NSW Labor Council to tackle the problem of bullying at work.
McPhilbin, who blew the whistle on bullying at the security firm, dedicated his speech to the family of Linda Costa, who committed suicide after bullying and harassment at the Speedo factory in Windsor.
Comment by John McPhilbin — December 11, 2011 @ 1:51 pm
Thanks John
Always great links from you!
Comment by Carlo — December 11, 2011 @ 4:37 pm
Hi Carlo,
It would seem from the article in The Australian that you commented on The Conversation website that there is a pattern of stories of workplace bullying which want to focus on the ‘spurious claims’, trot out an industry expert (or so-called), and generally downgrade the act. It’s even more unflattering when it involves public servants, because this then allows for some ‘public servant bashing’ into the argument, or at least innuendo of it, particularly where waste of time and costs is highlighted. You are correct when you say that we (and that definitely includes the media) need to also talk about the non-spurious claims. To allow the media (as in this case) to run an article that is more leaning towards the spurious claims sends the wrong message to the wider public. Quite clearly the publication in question has another agenda on the matter.
You will recall here in NSW that the SMH took the issues at Workcover NSW seriously and actually did a follow up story in light of the final report/review conducted by Premier and Cabinet. However, this matter has fallen away from the minds of the public, and no follow up to date has been undertaken by the media. These are the sorts of stories that the media need to focus on, because they were real, and proven. We all know that the spurious claims go on, and they are turned into sensationalised stories like the ACA does for supermarkets and Centrelink recipients, but industry experts like yourself and others may need to be proactive on the matter and step in when one of these articles is written (like you’ve done on this occasion). And as for the likes of me, well, I can find a place in writing to the media to request follow ups on real and proven incidents.
To John McPhilbin, your comment the impact of workplace bullying is never fully understood until it is experienced is so true. I stand as a testament to that very sentiment. I now understand.
Regards
Comment by John — December 12, 2011 @ 10:13 pm
Hi John
Not sure about the agenda, but I know the media cycle can be really frustrating, with important events being “lost” very quickly. It can be hard to break that cycle. I hope The Conversation, and this blog can be among the media through which we can address all sorts of important issues even when they are not hitting the front page.
regards
Carlo
Comment by Carlo — December 19, 2011 @ 10:55 pm
This is worth posting – my own experience tells me this is the major barrier in Australian management culture.
Research on’ Kiwi Managers Contribution to Workplace Bullying’ revealed that New Zealand managers either:
1. dismiss workplace bullying as “tough management”
2. turn a blind eye because “it’s too hard to prove” or
3. believe that the “victim” is too ‘sensitive’.
The same ethical ‘blindspots’ seem to exist with Australian managers. Workplace bullying, in my opinion, will continue to thrive until a major shift occurs in management thinking. I would argue that it is hard to deny that workplace bullying destroys employee motivation and productivity – and is a major $$$$$$$ liability for business and government.
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/ED1112/S00069/workplace-bullying-research-wins-prestigious-award.htm
Comment by John McPhilbin — December 15, 2011 @ 10:47 am
Thanks John M for this interesting link about happenings across the Tasman!
Comment by Carlo — December 19, 2011 @ 10:57 pm
Hi Carlo
There’s those words again – ethical blindspots. It seems NoW was rife with them. Where ethical blindspots are rife, bullying is sure to follow. It’s not hard to imagine the pressures endemic in the NoW.
http://www.journalism.co.uk/news/union-chief–appalling-culture-of-bullying-at-now/s2/a547271/
News Group Newspapers, publisher of the Sun and formerly the News of the World, has been accused of allowing an “appalling culture of bullying” that “pressured staff to behave appallingly”.
Speaking at the Leveson inquiry today, Steve Turner, general secretary of the British Association of Journalists, said that NGN staff were put under “enormous pressure to produce more exciting stories and more revelations”.
“There is no doubt that reporters are being put under incredible pressure to obtain stories and it’s no wonder that it leads to people cutting corners.”
Comment by John McPhilbin — December 22, 2011 @ 12:52 pm
Hi Carlo
I know I have a lot to say on the subject. Here’s another great read. Hence, my reason for referring to ethical blindspots when it comes to organisations addressing workplace bullying.
http://failuremag.com/index.php/feature/article/ethical_blind_spots/
When confronted with an ethical dilemma, most of us like to think we would stand up for our principles. But we are not as ethical as we think we are. In Blind Spots , leading business ethicists Max Bazerman and Ann Tenbrunsel examine the ways we overestimate our ability to do what is right and how we act unethically without meaning to. From the collapse of Enron and corruption in the tobacco industry, to sales of the defective Ford Pinto and the downfall of Bernard Madoff, the authors investigate the nature of ethical failures in the business world and beyond, and illustrate how we can become more ethical, bridging the gap between who we are and who we want to be.
Kind regards
John Mc
Comment by John McPhilbin — December 15, 2011 @ 1:36 pm
Hi John M
Thanks for this interesting info – I’d like to have a closer look at how “blind spots” might be a useful tool in explaining some of the behaviour that goes on around bullying
Regards
Carlo
Comment by Carlo — December 19, 2011 @ 10:59 pm