Resources > Blog > Attacking or Avoiding: The Toxic Tale of Two Extremes
Based on my decades of conducting workplace investigations and assessments, I strongly believe that almost all costly team dysfunction and harm is caused by one of two factors:
- Individuals are not held accountable at all; (indefensible “avoidance”); or
- Individuals are held accountable in a disrespectful manner (indefensible “aggression”).
Avoidant Leadership – No Accountability
When leaders and organizations turn a blind eye to observed or reported workplace concerns, their employees, clients and consumers wear the consequences of their inaction. Quality suffers, safety erodes and the tolerated behavior becomes the “acceptable norm” for the team in question, regardless of stated policies and procedures. The damage caused by the individuals in question becomes a shared liability with those who have ignored it. Let’s be clear – doing nothing is doing something – it is allowing the dysfunction to continue and it is sending the wrong message to your team.
Disrespectful Leadership – Unfair and Aggressive Accountability
Disrespectful accountability occurs during an investigation, afterwards, or both.
During a workplace investigation, disrespectful accountability shows up when leaders assume that staff have behaved or performed in a particular manner without adhering to principles of administrative fairness, such as a fair, transparent and objective process. Second-hand reports are blindly accepted, not fact-checked; and speculation and snippets of conversations, without appropriately considering context, are treated as fact.
Even where investigations are done properly and concerns have been substantiated, disrespectful accountability shows up in the following ways (by leaders and colleagues alike):
- Ignoring/isolating the person personally and/or professionally;
- Excluding the person from critical information, updates and meetings;
- Gossiping about the person to other staff and leaders;
- Removing tasks and responsibilities from the person’s responsibility without explanation or entitlement;
- Overloading the person with additional tasks to “test them”;
- Shaming the person by mocking, questioning or criticizing them in front of others; or
- Engaging in 1:1 conversations with the person that are replete with sarcasm, threats and belittling messages.
While accountability is fundamental to a successful and thriving organization, it must be delivered in a compassionate, defensible and professional manner.
The MIRROR Method provides leaders with helpful tools to incorporate both “consequences” and “support”, two essential components of “Respectful Accountability”. Respectful Accountability mandates that organizations not “excuse the inexcusable” – leaders are expected to proactively monitor their teams for signs of dysfunction; and then support an early and effective resolution to any issues that arise.
However, such resolution must adhere to the principles of administrative fairness – a neutral inquiry, transparency to the “accused” of concerns that have been reported; and a meaningful opportunity for all involved to be engaged in a fair and objective review. Leaders are expected to respond to events in a measured and deliberate manner, rather than hastily reacting to potentially exaggerated, inflammatory and unchecked reports of wrongdoing.
Finally, following a fair review, The MIRROR Method mandates that any substantiated concerns be communicated in a compassionate and respectful manner and that reasonable supports be implemented to assist individuals in righting any wrongs.
In my experience, there is no expedited path to take or “that was easy” button to push when it comes to respectful and productive workplaces. Avoiding accountability is not respectful – it prolongs the problem. That said, reacting aggressively to the problem aggravates the harm already caused.