Six reasons why we don't address inappropriate behaviour at work

We all say it is important, but in our heart rather leave it to somebody else

Is it really acceptable that we still have colleagues who do not keep their word and do not deliver in time? And what about colleagues who say ‘yes’ in the meeting but once outside the room, do not follow through? Are we really okay listening to colleague A make negative remarks about colleague B behind her back? And how about our manager who shows up 15 minutes late for the team meeting, or the board member who continues to make sexist jokes?

My research on 'addressing inappropriate or ineffective behaviour at work'[1] revealed that these are examples of work floor behaviour that disturb us all. But it continues to occur, because we do not intervene. We all hope somebody else (the chairman, the manager, the Management Team) will say something about it. In the meantime we stay silent and explain this to ourselves (and others) with perfectly reasonable (and usually true) excuses; it is not my responsibility, the timing is not right, he is having a difficult time at home, etc. Or we hesitate to act, wondering what might happen after the conversation; 'what if I damage our relationship?' or 'this could lead to a negative evaluation about my performance in the employee satisfaction survey'.

We explain our silence to ourselves (and others) with perfectly reasonable (and usually true) excuses.

What is going on? How come we often talk about 'giving constructive feedback' or 'addressing inappropriate behaviour', but hardly do it? I carefully studied scientific research in biology and psychology and found six reasons why we struggle with these kinds of conversations.

1)   We hate bringing bad news

Psychologists in various studies proved that we hate delivering bad news. We are less precise if we expect our message is contrary to what our audience wants to hear. In 1970, Rosen and Tesser called this the MUM effect; keeping Mum about Undesirable Messages. They discovered that people feel uncomfortable delivering bad news because they feel empathy for 'the victim' and are concerned about how their message comes across and whether it will hurt the self confidence of the 'receiver'.

'So, we just have to be tougher', you might think. But empathy is an instinct, like surviving. We cannot turn it off. Empathy does not come from our rationale, as we often think. "Rather than our head getting into the other person’s head, it’s our body that maps the other” biologist De Waal writes. This adjusted pose changes our mood and makes us feel what the other person feels. And that does not help if we need to address inappropriate behaviour.

Recently, a board member I am working with was totally fed up with the stubborn behaviour of one of his managers (X). He told me he had a clear conversation with X the day before. "I told her this behaviour needs to stop today!" he said. One hour later, I coincidently bumped into Miss X. She told me she had had a very strange meeting with the board member; “It felt like I have to work harder to fit in the team, but he also stressed several times that he appreciates my independence and autonomy. I really did not grasp what he was trying to tell me” she said. To this day, she still does not understand the goal and message of that extra bilateral meeting.

2)   We avoid risk and pain

The primal part of our brain is still focused on scanning for risks and eliminating them in order to survive. Losing 100 euros has twice as much impact on our mood as winning the same amount. Scientific research shows that people avoid risk when they are winning and face risk when they are losing. That explains why we are not critical of our manager’s behaviour as long as we are aiming for a career in the company, but we throw all our frustrations on the table when he or she ends our contract.

The risks always pop up immediately and feel more relevant than the possible rewards.

When we need to address inappropriate behaviour, we consciously or unconsciously weigh the possible risks and rewards. How big is the chance that the situation will improve after the conversation? The risks will always pop up immediately and feel more relevant. What if we end up in a conflict? What if he decides to escalate the matter? Or what if he calls in sick the next day? What if he loses face? Or what if I do?

We also avoid pain instinctively. For ourselves, but even more for the other person. Watching somebody in pain activates the same part of our brain as having pain ourselves. We do not want to hurt other people. Of course, addressing inappropriate behaviour is very different from hurting someone, but in our minds we associate addressing inappropriate behaviour with bringing bad news. And we assume that it will be painful for the person involved. Unless put under pressure, we therefore avoid these difficult conversations.

A few weeks ago, I joined a team meeting. Andy was explaining his proposal. The agenda was full and he needed to be brief. After 15 minutes I noticed some of his colleagues started staring outside the window or grasp their mobile phone under the table. Nobody intervened. Peter (not his real name), the chairman, tried to speed up the process by saying 'you have 5 minutes left'. When these five minutes had passed the chairman asked Andy to speed up. Another five minutes later Peter asked Andy 'to work to the conclusion' and when Andy had been speaking for half an hour the chairman said 'we really need to go to the next subject on the agenda now’. After the meeting, Peter and I walked back to his office together and he sighed; 'Why does Andy always needs so much time? He loses everyone in the public! But imagine how he would lose face if I would mention that in the meeting...'. The chairman had focused on managing the time, but the real feedback ('Andy, please stick to the essence') was not mentioned.

3)   We focus on short-term results

The 'framing theory' of Tversky and Kahneman shows how decisions change when perspectives change. If we have to choose between two bad scenarios, we choose the scenario that gives us a little bit of hope. People generally only look at the direct consequences of their choices and do not pay attention to the possible long-term effects. This framing helps us to simplify the decision process.

Douglas Stone and Sheila Heen describe in their book[2]; "Receiving negative feedback is like adultery or drugs. Doing what feels good now, finding a way to stop or ignore the feedback, can harm you in the long term; you can be abandoned or fired". This also applies to giving negative feedback. Doing what feels good now, such as avoiding the confrontation with an employee who behaves inappropriately, can harm the whole team or project in the long term.

Do what feels good now - avoid the confrontation - can harm the whole team or project in the long term.

For my research, I interviewed 500 managers online and 30 in person. During one of the live interviews I spoke with a senior manager in a governmental organisation. A firm manager with a strong personality. She honestly told me how she struggled with addressing inappropriate behaviour of her staff, because this could have all kinds of undesired effects in the short term. 'Of course it is important to be clear about your expectations and talk about it when an employee is not behaving accordingly. But what if this colleague - there is one I now actually need to talk to- makes a scene or calls in sick; then we are even further away from the desired situation.' A difficult dilemma. A few weeks later she sent me an email explaining that she decided in the end not to talk to this specific colleague now, 'because the workload of the team was to high'. 

4)   We want to be part of the tribe

Although we like to see ourselves as autonomous and independent, biologists, sociologist and anthropologist clearly proved that we are herd animals. In adolescence, we start looking for peer groups and that continues to be relevant our whole lives. In our hearts, we all want to be part of an alliance and we hunger to be seen, acknowledged and appreciated by our peers.

Imagine how difficult it is to start clapping your hands if nobody else is applauding after the performance you've just seen. Or to not applaud if everybody else is. We might not like it, or not be aware of it, but in essence we are herd animals. And if we become afraid (for example when the company is downsizing and we might lose our job), this need to behave as everybody else gets even stronger. The social bond makes us happy and helps us to protect ourselves and be safe. It is like a school of fish who stick together as soon as a shark appears. We simply need the care of others to survive, also on the work floor. You had better have a good relationship with your colleagues and manager to prevent being kicked out of the herd. This of course does not stimulate addressing inappropriate or ineffective behaviour.

5)   We overestimate ourselves

We all know people with little talent for a specific task who believe they perform above average. For example, the manager who sees herself as a strong communicator, while you only hear complaints about her tone of voice. Or the employee who never delivers on time, who keeps telling you he is such a good planner. Maybe you have colleagues who regularly need the help of others to deliver, but think they are doing well and do not understand why others are stressed. Or maybe you remember your first 360 feedback; where you thought you where extremely flexible and entrepreneurial but it turned out your manager and some colleagues experienced something else.

Roos Vonk, professor in Social Psychology at the Radboud University in Nijmegen explains: "to be able to judge the quality of your work in a specific task, you need the same competence that you need to execute the task. Therefore, it is possible that bad singers blame a professional jury for a lack of musicality or that people who talk a lot themselves blame their conversation partner for not being able to listen." People tend to overestimate themselves, particularly if they perform poorly in a specific task. If you are very good at it or have a lot of knowledge about it, you also have insight into your shortcomings. And if it comes easy to you, you think the same task is easy for others as well. This is also true for addressing inappropriate behaviour. If you’re not good at it, you usually overestimate, and think you are doing okay. If you are actually good at it, you do not understand why it is difficult for others or why they end up in a conflict.

Climbing up in the organization and having more power strengthens overestimation. If you empower people, their self-confidence grows, they see fewer obstacles and become more bold and unrestrained. Managers therefore, more then employees, overestimate how clearly they communicate and how candid and consistent they are addressing ineffective or inappropriate behaviour.

I recognize this behaviour in the leadership teams I am coaching. Sometimes a manager is convinced he clearly explained that he disapproves of the blunt behaviour of an employee, while this employee after the conversation proudly tells me how happy his manager is that he is sharing his honest opinions. And recently I spoke to a manager who thought he clearly explained to a colleague that she absorbed too much time in the meeting. In the meetings I joined, however, I never saw him set a clear limit. He usually said something like 'can we now move to the next topic?'. We often think we are more courageous and straightforward then we really are.

6)   We want to keep our self-esteem, whatever it takes

It may not be noticeable on the work floor, but most people have a low self-esteem and underestimate what they actually accomplish. We constantly compare ourselves to our 'equals' in age and education. It can be very confrontational to read that someone of your age has become the president of your country or CEO of a global company. We have made up a story about our own identity and how we stand out. We are, for example, the person that continues where others give up. Or we are the brave man or woman who stands up when others stay silent. And in our heads, we are like that all the time and everywhere. It is a simplified version of reality that helps us to stay on track. As soon as it becomes visible that we are not as strong, courageous or engaging as we tell ourselves, we feel totally worthless. It is therefore important to keep up a certain image of ourselves.

We would rather continue to believe we are good at addressing ineffective behaviour than to actually do it. What if the conversation derails and we discover we are not as good at delivering bad news as we thought. A comparable mechanism is in place when we receive negative feedback about our own behaviour. Criticism destroys our self-image. Therefore, we instinctively try to avoid it (while on second thought, we understand we might learn from it).

It is inhumane to ask people to address inappropriate behaviour.

All of the six challenges described are part of human nature, regardless of gender, country or religion. And they reinforce each other. Because 95 percent of our behaviour comes about unconsciously, these six instinctive drivers have a huge influence on what we do (or refuse to do). It is almost 'inhumane' to ask people to address inappropriate behaviour. In other words; addressing inappropriate or ineffective behaviour demands an intervention that goes against our human nature. But we do not realize that. This is why we keep sharing our good intentions about creating a 'constructive feedback culture' but hesitate to do it. Attending a feedback workshop is not enough to change this. For a real breakthrough, we need to dive deeper, become aware of our instinctive behaviour and help each other to overcome the described barriers.

-

Gytha Heins is a leadership and team coach, lecturer and author of the bestseller ' Aanspreken? Gewoon doen! - hoe je écht een aanspreekcultuur creëert' ('Address inappropriate behaviour? Just do it! - how to really create a constructive feedback culture at work).

More information (in Dutch) can be found on www.succesvolaanspreken.nl .

If you would like to receive more information in English, please send an email to info@be7.nl.

[1] 'Research on addressing inappropriate or ineffective behavior at work' by Gytha Heins, managing partner of Be7. Phase 1 in co-operation with Kien Research. 2014-2017.

[2] 'Thanks for the feedback - the science and art of receiving feedback well', Douglas Stone and Sheila Heen.