Tag Archives: Toxic employee

All About Toxic Employees in the Workplace

Posted on by
1

What motivates Toxic employees? How do Toxic employees control other employees?

Introduction

If you run a business, you’ve likely encountered a “toxic employee.” You hear complaints about or you experience a worker who is mean or abusive. But you hesitate to deal with the employee because he/she might be technically gifted/hard to replace. This article discusses the complicated social dynamics that arise when one or two employees engage in abusive and intimidating behavior. Also covered here is how toxic employees and their tactics harm the business and coworkers.  Toxic employee tactics consolidate and maintain informal power in the workplace and control coworkers for personal gain. This behavior goes against healthy workplace values and conflicts with company goals. Unproductive drama distracts surrounding work units, victimizes workers and prevents the achievement of company goals.

This material addresses a workplace where well-meaning leadership is disengaged or fearful. It does not address a workplace where the prime abuser is the chief executive. When the chief executive is abusive and fails to respond appropriately to employee feedback, employee behavior will become understandably negative in response. In this situation employee acting-out is a natural consequence of poor leadership and requires a special, tailored intervention not precisely covered by this material.

Who are toxic employees?

I have defined “toxic employees” by observing the techniques they use. Looking at what sets them apart from typical employees, toxic employees are motivated by getting and protecting personal gain (power, money, or special status) NOT by achieving company goals. What the company wants of his/her individual performance is of less interest to a toxic employee. He/she typically does not recognize a duty to an overriding principle of ethics or respectful treatment of others. Finally, relationships with coworkers are not defined by the formal organization structure but are defined by the toxic employee’s own power; coworkers they favor in the moment and coworkers they do not trust.

Toxic employees are not just difficult coworkers.  They plan ahead and use strategies to neutralize supervisors and detractors.  Sometimes they are just protecting their personal power.  Sometimes they are protecting secret misdeeds or malfeasance. Finally, they may be inoculating themselves from performance feedback.

In addition, toxic employees are not just bullies.  A bully punishes, teases and abuses others at work.  This alone is grounds for performance counseling.  Venting emotions inappropriately, yelling and other forms of abuse should not be tolerated in the workplace. When bullies repeatedly target a particular employee, the effects can be devastating. This can and should be stopped by a carefully crafted performance intervention.  I have covered this topic in several other blogs.

Toxic employees use bullying tactics but there’s more. A toxic employee is more deliberate and strategic and more difficult to stop than a straight forward bully. This is because of their clever means of discrediting those who speak up AND dis-empowering supervisors and others who possess the power on paper, to make changes in the workplace.

The problem

I am often engaged to address one employee’s negative workplace performance. Once on site I find the situation is more complex than simply establishing a performance improvement plan for the offending employee. The greater the informal power residing with this one individual, the more likely the employee group around him/her has chosen up sides. Because negative social dynamics become well entrenched, any real solution requires an intervention addressing both the main offender and the surrounding social system.

How this dynamic harms employees

Victimized employees can and do suffer emotional and physical harm such as stress-related illnesses. Employee victims of ongoing workplace abuse and intimidation (bullying) will eventually require support to re-establish healthy boundaries with others even after the offender’s termination. Employees with a good perspective and a desire to support business goals often draw fire from powerful negative employees. Employees who express disapproval of the negative dynamics or who try to resist those dynamics have likely learned who has the power in both subtle and in more overt, public ways. Negative messages from toxic employees to NOT speak up can be so powerful as to render even strong, competent peers unwilling to alert leadership. It is very much worth the effort to retain those who disagree with negative approaches by re-establishing positive supports and rewarding their instincts to speak up. Intervention timing is key.

How this dynamic harms your business

Toxic employees who operate from a negative, abusive perspective and who mistreat fellow workers rarely treat customers with respect. Employees distracted by a work atmosphere of squabbles, choosing up sides and consolidating informal power structures do not perform at their best. This atmosphere serves to preserve the negative dynamics and consistently drains productivity. In addition over time, highly motivated and positive employees who have tried and failed to improve things will move on to other companies and those more comfortable in a negative environment will stay. The longer these dynamics continue the worse the environment generally becomes. All of this combines to distract even high-performing staff from promoting business goals and quality client service delivery. The failure to exercise supervisory power creates a vacuum through which ill-motivated staff can emerge and divert attention from the organization’s goals. It can take years to reverse the behaviors and the effect of the abuse on others.

Informal power structures and dynamics

Today’s workplace is full of unwritten “agreements.” Status quo power structures and informal processes are established over time and become well-entrenched. For example, those with informal power steer their peers away from employees who they see as a threat to their power and can punish those who ignore these warnings with silent treatment and rumors. Eventually, everyone “gets the message” and learns to go along. Disturbing the status quo is met with resistance and dynamics that worsen just before they begin to shift. Those who stand to lose their informal power will up the ante to preserve it. Knowing what to expect along with a well-thought out plan is essential to moving away from abuse and intimidation toward comprehensive positive change.

Ringleader motives

It’s helpful to think about what motivates abusive employees in the workplace. Mistreatment of others comes from a self-centered perspective. It is sometimes constructed to cover personal insecurities or fears. It is generally maladaptive social behavior. This behavior might be learned or may the result of formative trauma. More specific answers are beyond the scope of this material.

  • Acquisition of informal power and control
  • Advancing ones value and position in the organization
  • Decreasing (or neutralizing) another’s value and position in the organization, particularly those seen as a threat – supervisors and other change agents
  • Retaliating against perceived slights by fellow employees

 Control techniques

Ringleaders as toxic employees generally collect information to either withhold or use against targets for maximum advantage.  In addition, they use strategies to prevent complaints about them from getting traction and to weaken the power of others. The foundation of most toxic techniques is a near universal need humans have to be liked by others in the workplace.

Negative contracting is an agreement to keep secrets, look the other way, do something harmful, or spread a rumor about someone else. Contracts are typically a secret agreement between the toxic employee and others with a goal of avoiding consequences or reducing someone’s power.

Emotional manipulation is when a coworker is manipulated into questioning his/her judgment or instincts and controlled to believe the story spun by the toxic employee. Often the appeal is to the target’s sense of responsibility for the feelings of others. Clever manipulators can make anyone feel responsible for what’s gone wrong.

Blaming the victim is using clever manipulation to exploit victim mistakes and attack their credibility. This is done in a manner that shifts focus away from whatever the victim was trying to raise for management attention onto the victim’s “misdeeds.” In some workplaces employees give up trying to get management’s attention because the futility has been demonstrated repeatedly.

Marginalization is the process of ostracizing targets, giving them the silent treatment or withholding information as a way to demonstrate power over others or as punishment for a perceived offense. Depending upon how much the targeted employees want to be liked at work, this can be a very powerful deterrent.

Negative dynamics thrive when . . .

There are certain environments in which negative dynamics are promoted and enhanced and very difficult to shift. This would include those situations where:

Ringleaders are often technically strong . . .

  • Ringleaders often have access to historical information, company lore and information needed by other employees to carry out their assignments
  • Ringleaders are in positions of specialized skill and perceived to be difficult to replace
  • Organization performance evaluations are based upon technical performance results without accountability or demonstrated command of:

 Negative dynamics are more difficult to maintain when . . .

Some workplaces actively promote positive values and respect for one another. In these environments positives are rewarded and negatives are addressed. Tactics that make it difficult for abusive employee strategies to take hold include those where:

  • The organization articulates its vision of a healthy, productive workplace through a code of ethics or set of employee relations values
  • The organization informs staff how it plans to shift and maintain the desired culture with examples of what is positive and what will be discouraged
  • Performance evaluations measure end results AND the demonstration of corporate values in the areas of teamwork, collaboration, corporate ethics and pro-social behavior
  • Supervisors are connected to what’s going on in their areas
  • Supervisors operate as a well-coordinated team with good communication and consistent management techniques
  • Supervisors are well-trained in identifying and responding to negative dynamics
  • Offending employees are cautioned and counseled with escalating consequences
  • Offending employees are eventually moved out of the organization

Strategic plan to shift negative workplace dynamics

Shifting the workplace toward a more healthy and productive environment requires a comprehensive plan and approach that lets employees know where you are going and why. It also requires simultaneous extinguishment of negative behaviors and encouragement/skill building for victims and others.

  1. Establish company or departmental values and a clear code of conduct
  2. Identify the various players and research current dynamics
  3. Plan the intervention carefully
  4. Intervene with the group and then primary offenders
  5. Follow up with the group and offenders, as needed
  6. Carry out legal, sound terminations where needed
  7. Develop recruitment strategies to foster desired work climate
  8. Implement ongoing team-building and employee engagement strategies

© Copyright BCSPublishing 2012 all rights reserved – sbenoit@benoitconsulting.com

Quick Tips For Surviving Toxic Worker Run-ins

Posted on by
Reply

Toxic employees understand how to take advantage of others.  They can verbally escalate any discussion to that point which will make you walk away mad.  You know it’s coming but for some reason you fall for it every time.

Common mistakes

  • Thinking you can out-toxic them.  Forget it
  • Thinking it’s about you.  This is what they do to people around them. You happen to be the victim of the moment
  • Thinking because it’s unfair it needs to stop.  No question that it is unfair.  No one thinks abuse and intimidation is fair.  But they’re not driven by a code of fairness.  It’s more like a code of it’s-all-about-me. The problem is they are good at staying below the radar.  It’s complicated to terminate them.

Mental re-frame

Unless you’re the supervisor, you don’t have the power to stop it all together. You can, however, control your behavior and how you see it. Here is a mental reframe to help you stay grounded, healthy and productive at work.

 Five quick tips – think of it this way

  1. It’s not me – you know they do this to others.  If you’re insecure get some help to feel better about yourself but don’t let this toxic person make you feel like any of this is your fault.
  2. It’s not everything – the more your job is everything in your life, the more this person will get under your skin.  Develop a full and rewarding life where work is only a part – hobbies, activities, interests will make this seem less important.
  3. Don’t power struggle – there’s an Al-anon expression that you “don’t go to every fight you’re invited to!” Resist the temptation to set yourself up to lose a power struggle.  Don’t start.
  4. Use a friendly voice – tone of voice is something toxic people read immediately.  If you start there, you’re done.  Start and end with a friendly voice. It costs you nothing.
  5. Talk about what is happening – “So, I came and asked you for a training file and though I’m the trainer you’re saying I can’t have it because it’s Tuesday.  Hmmm, okay.  I’ll let the VP know your reasoning.  Have a nice day (friendly voice).”  Walk away while they try to have the last word.
In the end, be glad you’re you and not them. 
(c) Copyright BCSPublishing 2012 all rights reserved

Employees’ Toxic, Disgruntled and Criminal Behavior at Work

Posted on by
2

Introduction

I am often engaged to help companies resolve the conduct of one employee who’s wreaking havoc in the workplace. After my book came out: Toxic Employees: great companies resolve this problem, you can too!” I was increasingly asked to define the term:Toxic Employee. I hear folks use the term as though toxic employees are just poor performers or as if all toxic employees were criminals. Though employee criminal behavior can be covered up using toxic tactics, the proportion of overt criminal conduct in the workplace is very small relative to straight-forward toxic behavior.

On a scale from very damaging to less damaging employee behavior I would rank criminal conduct in the workplace as the worse. By criminal, I mean embezzlement, overt discrimination of a protected class or intentional violation of a state or federal statute. This behavior carries intent to do wrong and potentially direct financial loss to the company. At the other end of the continuum, I would place general poor employee performance where the employee is trying to do well but just doesn’t have the skills.

What’s the difference?

In my opinion, ranked from least harmful for the workplace and coworkers to the most harmful, these are the subtle differences I see:

Poor performer: as the term implies, these are individuals who don’t measure up in carrying out their duties. These employees mean to do well they just don’t have the skills. Over time and with interventions, these workers can either improve their performance or transition into disgruntled employees. This depends on the supervisor’s skill and handling of performance interventions and the employee’s ability to accept the reality of their own performance short-comings.

Disgruntled employee: these employees are unhappy about something done or said by the “company,” “management” or a supervisor. They could be a poor technical performer but they may also be performing well but in disagreement with the company. Perhaps they don’t like the way they are supervised or they might not like the company’s interpretation of a particular policy. These employees generally see those in management as bad, paternalistic or authoritarian. Often disgruntled employees are someone with whom the company has expressed dissatisfaction. When a company attempts to correct or improve the performance of an individual who does disagrees with the assessment troubles can begin. Supervisors do not always pay close attention to the statements, questions or misunderstandings from the employee in question. If the supervisor slows down and responds to the content of the employee questions or observations some issues might be resolved amicably.  Unfortunately, some inexperienced or insecure supervisors hear questions as insubordination and continue with increasingly harsh evaluations over time. This process will lead to employee disgruntlement.

Human resource professionals and consultants specializing in employee relations have an alert antenna for disgruntled employees because they are several times more likely to sue the company over a dispute. Monetary settlements with former employees is often the painful fallout of failure to deal quickly and professionally with a disgruntled employee situation. Having said that, even poor performers can remain friendly with the company while acknowledging a poor performance fit. This outcome requires deft response by supervisors and human resource professionals. Prevention is so much easier than having to respond to an employee’s attorney!

Toxic employee: this is an employee with a particular approach to the workplace defined by personal motives and not the company’s goals or best interest. Toxic employees may be good performers in a technical sense but their manipulative tactics result in harm to coworkers and the company’s workplace atmosphere over time. These employees do not necessarily see their manipulation and abuse of fellow workers as such and generally resent or reject supervisory feedback that attempts to improve their “people skills.”  In fact they are very skilled at reading people and appealing to their desire to be liked at work in a way that increases their informal power in the workplace.

Toxic employees do not generally improve as a result of performance interventions and will ratchet up their negative conduct when under threat. Strategic, toxic employees sometimes mount a retaliatory campaign to diminish the credibility of the evaluating supervisor individually, or perhaps company leadership generally.  Supervisors I coach name this dynamic as their number one source of stress and unhappiness at work. There are some patterns of how companies are forced into dealing with toxic employees.

  • A new leader comes into the workplace with little tolerance for this work style and leads the organization in an overhaul of workplace culture
  • The toxic employee targets a protected class employee with vitriol
  • Coworkers unite and approach management to deal with the toxic behavior

Unresolved toxic employee behavior can be extreme co-worker stress and physical ailments.  A failure to meet company goals continues because employees are so distracted by chosing up sides and protecting informal power. The longer this goes on, the more damaging to coworkers and the company. For a fuller explanation of the phenomenon of the toxic employee, see “Toxic Employees: great companies resolve this problem, you can too!” available at benoitconsulting.com.

Criminal employee: these employees ignore company policies, violate federal or state statutes, engage in financial malfeasance or other forms of theft. In companies with proper financial process checks and balances, embezzlement may be the result of a complex and intricate scheme.  In companies without the proper procedures and oversight, malfeasance my be less subtle (favors for friends, free tickets, etc.) with little effort to cover it up. Sometimes criminals resort to toxic tactics: verbal abuse, threats and manipulation of others to prevent discovery of wrong-doing but this is only a means to achieve the end.  The toxic atmosphere created to prevent discovery of wrong-doing can go on for generations and can be much worse for the organization that the original illegal acts. Here’s a modern day example: This American Life: Steve Raucci

Another type of criminal behavior in the workplace involves assaults or threats of violence toward supervisors or fellow employees. Of all negative employees, embezzlers and/or assaultive employees appear to have overt intent to take something or harm someone. This conduct harms the company in a number of ways.  First, embezzlement means immediate financial loss which is rarely recovered.  Second, embarrassment and loss of community reputation may take years to overcome particularly when inadequate company procedures contributed to the crime.  Finally, and most importantly they are a threat to coworker safety through physical assault and emotional distress. Severe assaults or workplace homicides traumatize employees with long-lasting effect.  Negligent retention claims are likely if the proclivity for violence was discoverable in advance through proper reference and background verification.

Sound leadership training programs must address the issue of negative employees as the best means to prevent the more serious behaviors described here.  Inexperienced supervisors who don’t receive proper mentoring and backing by company leadership will end up being victimized by certain types of supervisees.

Surviving a Toxic Workplace Without Losing Your Mind

Posted on by
Reply

Today’s workplace culture

Modern American employees are under extreme stress today due to a combination of several related factors:

  • Cost cutting measures;
  • Operating for months or years with over-lean staff;
  • Lack of supervisory training/poor quality supervision
  • Overall pressure to maintain production and quality with fewer and sometimes less-qualified staff

These factors combine to increase pressure and stress in the workplace.  Owners and partners are under their own stress trying to secure financing and to retain profit margins despite increases in the cost of materials and operating expenses. These accumulated pressures will eventually affect relationships among employees and between employees and management.

The workplace includes toxic employees and bullies

One of the most successful articles I’ve written discussed toxic employees and the complicated issues associated with terminating them and shifting workplace dynamics. This online article was viewed roughly 3 times more often than any other article I’ve posted.  Articles on toxic employees, toxic bosses and workplace bullies are increasingly popular today as business owners understand the connection between positive work culture and company success.  Toxic employees control others through bullying.  In a 2010 Strategic, Toxic Employees and Negative Social Dynamics I listed tactics used by toxic employees and how companies need a planned approach to neutralize this behavior. I got to thinking about the employee victims of this kind of manipulation and abuse. I have also been approached by colleagues about how to keep their job when the atmosphere is quite negative.  Today I am writing to these employees who, because of health insurance, financial commitments and job market challenges, cannot easily leave such a workplace.

A 1999 study on workplace stress, Stress at Work reported that 40% of workers surveyed felt their job was “very or extremely stressful” (DHHS, 1999). Though I could not find a more recent survey of employee reports it’s likely that things have become even more stressful for today’s employee.   With high stress and a poor job market more employees must learn to work around these challenges and maintain acceptable job performance.   Avoiding the social and informal power minefields is a skill you can learn.  Those who have the strength and natural instinct for it can be successful without support.  But even with skills if the workplace bully makes you the target, you can find yourself overwhelmed and powerless.

Just use the grievance policy to register your complaint?

Many workplaces are decent and healthy; and some have grievance policies or other dispute resolution strategies that can get workplace disagreements back on track. When this is possible, use these processes. The following material addresses the less healthy and often abusive workplace.  Formal grievance procedures may or may not work.  It might not be safe to speak up in some workplaces due to potential retaliation by a toxic employee or manager. When coaching clients in this situations I urge caution because of the potential backlash.  Please consider any such action very carefully and seek advice from experts before taking steps that might draw negative attention at your office. HR staff can often be trusted to provide support. Trust your instincts as you are the best judge of what course will get the best result. Finally, you are free to consult a legal representative in confidence, when needed.

Abuse is sometimes in the eye of the beholder

A final word of caution on your interpretation of this material.  I’ve worked with employees who felt these behaviors were happening to them when in fact they were treated professionally. Some employees have a keen sensitivity to issues that don’t go their way. Sometimes, employee mental illness can interfere with the ability to interpret reality around them.

Employer responsibilities

A company owner’s first priority is to make the business successful.  From this evolves the need for additional staff—which benefits employees, economic stimulation—which benefits the community and personal success—which benefits the owner’s family/dependents.  Some drastic differences between companies derive from how the owners define “success.” If you define success in only monetary terms, one kind of workplace atmosphere results.  If you define success as a balance of monetary measures, client satisfaction and an employee-friendly, professional work environment, a different kind of workplace atmosphere is created.

Regardless of the owner’s philosophical viewpoint, as long as he/she does not break the law, they are within their rights to run the business as they see fit.  Employees are sometimes of the mind that employers have to be nice, have to take care of them, have to give them time off, etc.  But owners can place as much focus on the bottom line as they wish. That is our free-market economic system.  If this means they are difficult and unfriendly and experience employee turnover as a result, that’s the consequence. Sometimes the nature of the workplace is a result of active philosophical choices and sometimes owners are ignorant of the connection between the way they treat employees and level of turnover or social suffering that results. The amount of discord and employee bickering an employer tolerates through ignorance or neglect is related employee turnover. Those employees complain to everyone about what takes place at work. These matters are somewhat different in union environments.  The article applies primarily to the non-union workplace but the dynamics described here affect union employees and their supervisors.  I know because I have presented to both union employees and their supervisors.

Too bad to stay—Too hard to leave

All of the above combines to set the stage for workplace atmospheres which fall within wide extremes on a continuum. I imagine folks generally know when they are in a very bad or very good job.  The problem is more difficult when the negative parts come on gradually, over time.  These things are hard to see coming and most people wake up at some point to realize that things are not as they wish them to be.  It can also be difficult when you know you have to leave and are looking but the job search is going poorly.  Finally when some things are positive and some are not, what is the right decision?

  • You like the boss but the co-workers are gossipy
  • You like the co-workers but the boss is abusive
  • The money is great but the atmosphere is troubling
  • You like the workers but clients are abusive

Individuals have to decide what will work for them.  Much will depend upon the nature of the employee’s temperament, the specific negative aspects, external employment environment and the marketability of the employee’s skill.

Skills and perspectives needed to navigate today’s workplace

When faced with a negative workplace we have to ask: Do you want to be true to yourself, tell the truth and damn the consequences? Or, do you want to preserve your sanity, fly beneath the radar and leave with some degree of professionalism?  Some employees do fight back; some sue successfully for various negative affects of abuse in the workplace.  The vast majority, however, lose their job and the possibility of any reference for future job seeking.  What’s worse is that some may develop a reputation in the community as a trouble maker.  This doesn’t make him or her a trouble maker but the perceptions are powerful particularly in a small community.

I generally advise two potential courses

You’ll need to figure out how to navigate the least stressful for you while still allowing yourself some performance success, or, find a position elsewhere.  Not on my menu is: stay and complain.  The complaining strategy rarely works out for you, your co-workers or your boss. The way to remain sane in a crazy or chaotic atmosphere is to maintain a clear perspective; remain observant; and use skilled boundary setting to prevent being drawn into battles that you cannot win or situations that will make you a social target.  “flying beneath the radar” is a good way to picture it.

If you can, focus on this approach

In my coaching practice, the following strategies are possible when working with a private, competent support person who can reinforce this kind of detachment:

  • Set realistic expectations of others – supervisors and coworkers
  • Accurately read the landscape
  • Focus on what you can control (what you do and think and say)
  • Perform your job duties to the best of your ability within what you can control
  • Do the best you can within the parameters you are given
  • Avoid whining, complaining or gossip
  • Don’t tell others what they should do (supervisory responsibilities not-withstanding)
  • Mind disclosures to employees who are not trustworthy
  • Get objective, confidential emotional support outside the organization

When should you look for another position?

Workplace dynamics can run from mildly unhealthy to intolerable.  Every individual has his/her personal tolerance level.  Sensitive employees often see the issues coming early and may need to exit sooner than others who are more oblivious to the negative dynamics around them.  In addition, employees who are targeted by negative employees specifically, may have to exit earlier. It is really an individual decision. I find that when I’m having stress symptoms (tight chest or stomach aches) and have tried to resolve issues without success I generally begin searching for another assignment.

Given the above, there are a few things that no employee should have to endure:

  1. When your supervisor or coworker yells, throw things and verbally abuses staff;
  2. When your supervisor gets visibly angry if you talk about things that need to improve;
  3. If a supervisor uses confidential information against you or discloses this information to others who do not have a need-to-know;
  4. If supervisors or coworkers gossip and criticize staff in any public manner or to clients;
  5. Companies in which laws are being broken;
  6. When employees are singled out and punished after privately or professionally disclosing the behaviors described in 1-5.

Looking for another position

Finding a job while working full-time is a considerable challenge.  Employees are cautioned not to do this on company time nor with company computers, email or Internet connections.  Working on resumes, checking advertisements and other job pursuit activities should be done on home computers.  Begin contacting trusted friends in the community and network in a low-key manner.

Giving notice

I’ve heard from many victimized employees who are dying to give the employer a piece of their mind.  Perhaps the company has an exit interview process for terminating employees. Most of the time, exit interviews are conducted in a professional and good-faith manner.  However, in companies compromised by fear and intimidation this may not be an effective strategy.  I can feel my HR colleague’s irritation when I say because terminating employees are a potential source of valuable candid information.  You are not obligated to provide your observations. It’s your choice.  In addition, burning any bridge can come back on you at employment reference time.. If you feel you must give some feedback, do it in a non-personal and professional way.

Exaggerated feedback examples to make the point

  1. Personal: “My supervisor is a jerk.  I have never seen a more abusive, horrible person!”
  2. Non-personal: “I am surprised at the manner in which my supervisor conveys his dissatisfaction with our performance.  I don’t think yelling and intimidation are effective tactics and I should think this method won’t help the company meet its operational goals in the long run.”

Good luck.  Email me with your own survival stories- sbenoit at benoitconsulting dot com

_________________________

Sources

1. Benoit, Suzanne V. (2010) Toxic Employees: great companies resolve this problem; you can too! to see an excerpt or to purchase go to: purchase book

2. DHHS and NIOSH Publication 99-101 (1999) Stress at Work, accessed March 2011 at: http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/99-101/

Toxic Employees: Resistance to Positive Organizational Change

Posted on by
Reply

Context
This article covers the situation of a typical, well-meaning company owner whose organization is harmed by the presence of one or more negatively motivated toxic employees.  The arguments offered here do not respond to the situation in which the owner is the bully. 

Terminology
Here are some helpful terms to break toxic dynamics into their component parts.

Change-agents—usually consultants, supervisors or company executives formally identified and brought in to make changes or fellow employees who have openly challenged toxic employee ringleaders.

Ringleaders—toxic employees who typically have long service and who initiate strategies to acquire and use informal power for negative goals. Typical techniques include intimidation, manipulation and neutralization of others for self-centered goals

Informal power—this type of power is different from the power relationships articulated by the organization chart.  On the chart, the supervisor has some oversight and evaluation responsibilities over those who report to them.  Informal power interrupts or neutralizes this power when toxic employees control co-workers and even their supervisors through the treat of isolation, silent treatment and other forms of retaliation. 

Informal workplace dynamics
Today’s workplace dynamic consists of unwritten “agreements.” Status quo power structures and informal processes develop over time and become well-entrenched unless directly challenged. In a healthy workplace, informal power structure mirrors the formal structure. When the workplace involves toxic employees, the informal structure can be very different from that of the organization chart. In this situation orderly work flow and respectful relations between co-workers suffers. Toxic employees collect informal power over time using rumors, intimidation and retaliation against those they perceive as threats.These tactics can even intimidate supervisors who actually have the authority to change procedures. Those with informal power steer their co-worker “friends” away from employees who they see as challenging their power.  Employees who fail to heed subtle and not-so-subtle directives by those with informal power are often punished with silent treatment, isolation and rumors. Eventually, coworkers “get the message” and learn to go along with Toxic employee desires.

Positive change initiatives
During a human resource program change or major employee relations initiative, toxic employee resistance increases and negative dynamics temporarily worsen before they begin to shift. Toxic employees want and need for the patterns to stay as they are.  This preserves their power and keeps them in control of office activities. When the pattern is challenged, those who stand to lose power try tactics that worked before. When those tactics don’t achieve the desired result, negative behaviors worsen.

Those initiating the change (change agents) often become the specific target of toxic employee activities.  The more determined and strategic the toxic employee, the more challenging and sometimes personal this negative campaign will get. Change agents with thick skin and the ability to see these as social dynamics rather than personal attacks, will have an easier time maintaining the will to follow through with desired changes and improvements. 

Planning
Human resource professionals and company owners who know and understand these dynamics develop a comprehensive and well-thought-out plan that anticipates resistance.  Knowing what to expect is essential to maintain forward momentum.  When negative tactics escalate, you know you are on the right track.  This is a key decision point where the faint of heart may abandon the change initiative. With courage and good planning, you can re-enforce the desired change, hold saboteurs accountable and demonstrate that you have the will to overcome informal power structures.  The chances of successful change implementation are greatly enhanced when owners have the overall intention to create a positive work culture built around business goals, respectful employee conduct and accountability for those who 1.work against company goals, and 2.abuse and intimidate co-workers.