tag:theconversation.com,2011:/au/topics/workplace-behaviour-27472/articlesworkplace behaviour – The Conversation2023-10-25T20:26:39Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2158622023-10-25T20:26:39Z2023-10-25T20:26:39ZWorkplace tensions: How and when bystanders can make a difference<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/554617/original/file-20231018-17-tq49jv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=35%2C43%2C5806%2C3835&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The modern workplace is no stranger to political tensions, differing viewpoints and interpersonal conflicts.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Shutterstock)</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>In today’s climate of global political tensions and polarization, workplaces are filled with conflicting viewpoints. When employees hold political identities and perspectives that do not align with their co-workers, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/smi.2856">they perceive greater incivility from them</a>, which can result in greater stress and burnout.</p>
<p>Amid all this, bystander intervention has emerged as a key strategy for handling interpersonal conflicts. A <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2017.07.006">substantial body of research</a> advocates for <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-017-3692-2">bystander interventions</a> as a means to <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206317702219">support targets and curb aggressive workplace behaviours</a> ranging in severity from rudeness to confrontation, threats and, rarely, violence. </p>
<p>However, the effectiveness of bystander intervention remains largely uncertain. This is where our research comes in. <a href="https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2020.0396">Our recent paper</a> dives into this crucial topic by constructing a theoretical model outlining how perpetrators respond to bystander intervention during incidents of interpersonal workplace aggression.</p>
<h2>The bystander’s dilemma</h2>
<p>There are complex emotional dynamics at play when individuals witness workplace aggression. Bystanders often <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000249">experience moral anger toward those who they perceive as perpetrators</a> and empathy for those they perceive as targets. These emotions, in turn, drive bystanders to support targets and penalize perpetrators. </p>
<p>However, there are several things that can reduce the likelihood of bystander action. One problem is that bystanders often lack the courage or skills to act on their convictions, failing to get involved in workplace tensions. </p>
<p>Another reason bystanders avoid intervening is fear of backlash from the perpetrator. And this fear is not without merit; <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/1076-8998.8.4.247">research has found</a> that perpetrators often retaliate when individuals voice concerns about mistreatment. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A group of people having a conversation in a conference room" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/555670/original/file-20231024-24-mwuadj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/555670/original/file-20231024-24-mwuadj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/555670/original/file-20231024-24-mwuadj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/555670/original/file-20231024-24-mwuadj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/555670/original/file-20231024-24-mwuadj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/555670/original/file-20231024-24-mwuadj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/555670/original/file-20231024-24-mwuadj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">There are complex emotional dynamics at play when individuals witness workplace aggression.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Shutterstock)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Even when bystanders do intervene, their actions can be ineffective, and, in some cases, counterproductive. In our paper, we argue this is because an intervention questions a perpetrator’s sense of goodness, causing a <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12378">moral identity threat</a> and making them feel like a “bad person.” </p>
<p>At the same time, it also threatens the perpetrator’s <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/20159278">relational identity</a> by conveying that standard norms for acceptable co-worker behaviour have been violated. This suggests that the perpetrator is also acting as a “bad colleague”. Threatening messages are likely to be met with resistance from the perpetrator, who is then inclined towards self-protective action. </p>
<h2>The perpetrator’s perspective</h2>
<p>Our paper theorizes that, in most cases, a perpetrator’s initial response to an intervention will be defensive and resistant to feedback. This is especially the case when emotions are running high, making it difficult for individuals to consider alternative viewpoints. In such instances, perpetrators are likely to condemn intervening bystanders and may even react to them punitively.</p>
<p>But there is some encouraging news. Specific aspects of the bystander intervention — like who intervenes and how — can help perpetrators see the intervention as an opportunity for growth. For instance, when an intervention offers the perpetrator a chance to feel morally and relationally accepted by the bystander, they are more open to feedback. </p>
<p>In other words, interventions that criticize behaviour without attacking the person allow perpetrators to maintain their belief in their moral character and keep seeing themselves as a good colleague. Under these conditions, they are more likely to adopt a <a href="https://hbr.org/2016/01/what-having-a-growth-mindset-actually-means">growth-oriented mindset</a>. This ability to save face can lead them to consider the intervention as an opportunity to change their behaviour.</p>
<p>The identity of the person intervening also plays a crucial role. People are more willing to accept feedback from those they like and trust. Talking to people in a safe setting and listening to different viewpoints can help perpetrators consider other perspectives. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Two women having a serious conversation at a table. One of the women has her back to the camera." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/554616/original/file-20231018-28-8f4jb4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/554616/original/file-20231018-28-8f4jb4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/554616/original/file-20231018-28-8f4jb4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/554616/original/file-20231018-28-8f4jb4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/554616/original/file-20231018-28-8f4jb4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/554616/original/file-20231018-28-8f4jb4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/554616/original/file-20231018-28-8f4jb4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Interventions that criticize behaviour without attacking the person allow perpetrators to maintain their belief in their moral character.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(Shutterstock)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Power dynamics at work have a considerable impact on intervention effectiveness. Powerful perpetrators tend to be <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/a0012633">less concerned about the social implications of their actions</a> and are more likely to become defensive. In contrast, those with less power tend to be more dependent on others and, as a result, are <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01824.x">more attuned to the expectations of their peers</a>. To ensure perpetrators are more receptive to an intervention, bystanders with more power than the perpetrator may need to step in.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, not everyone is equally susceptible to influence from others. While most people want to behave in a morally and socially acceptable manner, a minority of individuals are not concerned by such considerations. It can be hard to convince such individuals to change their mind, unless the bystander has the power to impose change. </p>
<h2>Strategies for effective intervention</h2>
<p>Our research offers several practical recommendations for effective bystander intervention in the workplace:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Carefully consider the best time to intervene. Unless there is a clear risk to the target (and a safe way to meaningfully intervene), it is best to wait until emotions have cooled.</p></li>
<li><p>Intervene in ways that allow the other person to maintain their sense of being a good person and colleague. Focus on addressing their behaviour, not their personal attributes, values or beliefs.</p></li>
<li><p>Recognize that powerful bystanders and those trusted by the other person are more effective in eliciting constructive responses than those with relatively less power.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Bystanders can play a pivotal role in resolving workplace tensions, with the power to shift the narrative from conflict to resolution. As workplace tensions mirror global and social turmoil, the ability to step in, intervene and shape outcomes becomes ever more valuable, especially for vulnerable populations. </p>
<p>The essence of bystander intervention is not just about stopping a negative act, but also about fostering an environment where respect, growth and collaboration thrive. Every time a bystander is able to intervene effectively, we move a step closer to a workplace where everyone feels valued and heard. We should not underestimate <a href="https://mitsloan.mit.edu/ideas-made-to-matter/fixing-a-toxic-work-culture-how-to-encourage-active-bystanders">the ripple effect that one thoughtful, constructive action</a> can have.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/215862/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Sandy Hershcovis receives funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Brianna Barker Caza, Ivana Vranjes, and Zhanna Lyubykh do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The essence of bystander intervention is not just about stopping a negative act, but also about fostering an environment where respect, growth and collaboration thrive.Sandy Hershcovis, Associate Dean and Future Fund Professor in Equity, Diversity and Inclusion, University of CalgaryBrianna Barker Caza, Associate Professor of Management, University of North Carolina – GreensboroIvana Vranjes, Assistant Professor of Social Psychology, Tilburg UniversityZhanna Lyubykh, Assistant Professor, Beedie School of Business, Simon Fraser UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1512692020-12-03T13:35:51Z2020-12-03T13:35:51ZHow TikTok is upending workplace social media policies – and giving us rebel nurses and dancing cops<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/372655/original/file-20201202-20-rszkut.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=80%2C116%2C5910%2C3871&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Front-line workers frequently make short TikTok videos while on the job. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/mobile-phone-taking-video-to-two-asian-barista-royalty-free-image/1249940526">Tzido/iStock via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>As the Thanksgiving holiday was winding down, a medical center in Salem, Oregon, found itself in the middle of a frothing <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/30/us/oregon-nurse-tiktok-mask.html">social media mess</a>. A nurse named <a href="https://www.truthorfiction.com/oregon-health-nurse-on-administrative-leave-after-tiktok-about-not-wearing-masks-or-social-distancing/">Ashley Grames</a> posted a video on TikTok that went viral in which she mock-confessed to ignoring coronavirus health guidelines. </p>
<p>The video – which Grames has since taken down, though <a href="https://www.tiktok.com/@amandabutcher2/video/6899924311990095110">it remains available on other feeds</a> – is less than 15 seconds long. And if you’re not <a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2018/12/10/18129126/tiktok-app-musically-meme-cringe">familiar</a> with TikTok tropes, the video will seem very weird. The nurse is wearing scrubs and seemingly at a medical facility. She lip-syncs to a short audio clip from “The Grinch” and mocks her co-workers’ outrage at her decision to flout the <a href="https://apnews.com/article/virus-outbreak-health-oregon-4e805bc5750cdb3b29f34e8239bc605a">state mask mandate</a> outside of work.</p>
<p>The nurse’s antics drew some unflattering attention to her employer, Salem Health, which on Dec. 8 <a href="https://twitter.com/LisaMirandoCNN/status/1336343342498668546">confirmed she’s no longer employed there</a> after an investigation. But it highlighted the ease with which employees can pull out a phone on the sly and share a little clip before the boss is any the wiser. Popular examples include a <a href="https://www.tiktok.com/@kieran_burgess/video/6867879485572648198">Domino’s Pizza cook</a>, an Amazon warehouse worker and <a href="https://www.tiktok.com/@starbucksrecipeswithm">Starbucks baristas</a>. Their employers thus serve as unwitting backdrops – with the logos, uniforms and workplaces on full display.</p>
<p>As a <a href="https://law.uoregon.edu/people/faculty/tippett">law professor who studies workplace practices</a> and policies, I find the mass of workplace TikTok videos somewhat surprising. That’s because even the most innocuous videos likely violate <a href="https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:l7P0FZyf114J:https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/tools-and-samples/policies/pages/socialmediapolicy.aspx+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us">standard corporate social media policies</a>, which tend to require a <a href="https://www.acfe.com/uploadedFiles/ACFE_Website/Content/documents/sample-documents/sample-social-media-policy.pdf">strict separation</a> between the corporate brand and one’s personal life. Workers are generally not allowed speak on <a href="https://www.delltechnologies.com/en-us/policies/social-media-policy.htm">behalf of the company</a> or use the <a href="https://www.thehrspecialist.com/10245/sample-policy-social-media">company brand</a> or <a href="https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:l7P0FZyf114J:https://www.shrm.org/resourcesandtools/tools-and-samples/policies/pages/socialmediapolicy.aspx+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us">facilities</a> without permission. These policies also warn against <a href="https://www.shrm.org/hr-today/news/hr-magazine/Pages/0813-social-media-policy.aspx">embarrassing the company</a> or mocking <a href="https://www.nordstrom.com/browse/customer-service/policy/social-networking-guidelines">customers</a>. </p>
<p>It’s pretty much impossible to dance with your uniform on in the backroom without violating those rules – so why aren’t companies cracking down more?</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/zAusjblCpDU?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Cops love to dance.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>TikTok teems with uniforms</h2>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/tiktok-is-a-unique-blend-of-social-media-platforms-heres-why-kids-love-it-144541">TikTok</a>, the preferred social media platform of the <a href="https://edition.cnn.com/2020/01/16/media/tiktok-news-publishers/index.html">Gen Z set</a>, is not really about connecting with friends. It’s more about recording the trending dance or fluffy topic of the moment and hoping the <a href="https://www.wired.com/story/tiktok-finally-explains-for-you-algorithm-works/">algorithm</a> will spread your post to its billions of users. </p>
<p>Since much of TikTok is wordless and anodyne, TikTok seems the perfect corporate antidote to more pointed and politicized commentary on Twitter or Facebook. </p>
<p>And for the most part, it is. In 30-second bites, workers conjure up a mini fantasy world of a job free of supervisors. A man twirls and glides in a <a href="https://www.tiktok.com/@420doggface208/video/6856789173186186502">glum potato warehouse</a>. An Amazon worker <a href="https://www.tiktok.com/@thepackman123">packs boxes</a> with Olympic speed and precision. Hospital workers in protective gear groove with <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PbapuhCq1nk">balloons bulging</a> out of their scrubs.</p>
<p>And of course, there are cops – so many <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zAusjblCpDU">dancing cops</a>. Police officers in full uniform, usually standing on the road or next to their patrol car, following <a href="https://time.com/5880779/best-tiktok-dances-2020/">prescribed dance moves</a> to snippets of R&B or hip-hop.</p>
<p>Why do cops love TikTok? Why does TikTok love cops? Their dancing is merely OK. But the uniform pops on the camera and the videos have a subversive quality – like, they probably aren’t allowed to do any of this, but they’re doing it anyway. The man thumbing his nose at the man. </p>
<p>It’s free promotion for the employer, as <a href="https://recruitingtimes.org/recruitment-and-hr-features/26078/what-does-tiktok-mean-for-the-workplace/">recruiting</a> and <a href="https://www.abetterlemonadestand.com/tiktok-influencer-marketing/">marketing</a> <a href="https://theundercoverrecruiter.com/unlock-the-potential-of-tiktok/">companies</a> <a href="https://www.modernretail.co/platforms/retailers-are-pushing-their-employees-become-tiktok-influencers/">have</a> <a href="https://www.convenience.org/Media/Daily/2020/Oct/22/3-Dunkin-OKs-Employee-TikTok-Videos_Tech">pointed out</a>. Even before the COVID-19 era, these types of jobs could be difficult, dangerous, boring or low paid. Videos that present an alternate narrative, from the workers’ perspectives – showing them looking cool or being silly – can’t really be replicated in formal marketing. </p>
<h2>The honeymoon is over</h2>
<p>On the other hand, TikTok may just be following the same trajectory of social media predecessors like Facebook, Twitter and Instagram. It all seems like fun and games until the scandals mount. </p>
<p>Beyond the <a href="https://theconversation.com/banning-apps-like-tiktok-and-wechat-is-a-good-way-to-ensure-a-country-will-trail-in-tech-leadership-and-profits-145821">Trump administration’s attempt to ban the app</a>, companies have also pounced on the faintest whiff of embarrassment. Before there was Ashley Grames, there was Tony Piloseno, a popular TikTok paint mixer fired <a href="https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/tanyachen/college-student-behind-a-massively-popular-paint-mixing">over the summer</a>, <a href="https://www.tiktok.com/@tonesterpaints/video/6894015641829903621">apparently</a> for posting a video in which he mixed blueberries with paint.</p>
<p>And there have been less high-profile scandals in recent months: a Chik-Fil-A worker fired over a <a href="https://www.tiktok.com/foryou?lang=en#/@anasteeezy/video/6854616578726677766">video advising viewers</a> to save money by ordering a drink with two extra pumps of mango syrup; a police officer suspended over a <a href="https://leoaffairs.com/magic-crocs-tiktok-video-with-amiri-king-gets-deputy-suspended/">homophobic video</a> about “magic” Crocs; and a Domino’s worker fired for <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8829279/Dominos-worker-claims-FIRED-TikTok-videos-showing-slicing-pizzas.html">posting videos</a> of himself <a href="https://www.tiktok.com/@kieran_burgess/video/6867879485572648198">spinning a pizza slicer in the air</a>. </p>
<p>[_<a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters/science-editors-picks-71/?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=science-corona-important">The Conversation’s most important coronavirus headlines, weekly in a new science newsletter</a>.]</p>
<p>With Grames all <a href="https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/laurenstrapagiel/salem-nurse-placed-on-leave-for-covid-tiktok">over</a> the <a href="https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/oregon-nurse-suspended-after-her-tiktok-bragging-about-breaking-covid-19-rules-goes-viral/ar-BB1bv8Qf?appwebview=true&item=personalization_enabled%3afalse">news</a>, companies that have not been monitoring workplace TikTok posts may be scrambling to avert the next crisis, however minor.</p>
<p>As sociologists Steven Maynard-Moody and Michael Musheno observe in their book “<a href="https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.11924">Cops, Teachers, Counselors</a>,” front-line workers are mired in rules and procedures. The inevitable response to scandal, they argue, is just to impose more rules.</p>
<p>But much of the appeal of TikTok resides in its patina of transgression. Dunkin’s <a href="https://www.convenience.org/Media/Daily/2020/Oct/22/3-Dunkin-OKs-Employee-TikTok-Videos_Tech">official TikTok squad</a> is as humdrum as any other corporate social media account. Reaping the viral rewards of TikTok may ultimately require companies to accept a little risk – and at least pretend they don’t approve.</p>
<p><em>This article has been updated to include new information.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/151269/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Elizabeth C. Tippett does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Workers are increasingly making short videos of themselves on the job and posting them to TikTok, creating a new challenge for employers trying to police their behavior.Elizabeth C. Tippett, Associate Professor, School of Law, University of OregonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1348202020-03-27T17:17:59Z2020-03-27T17:17:59ZAlex Salmond acquittal: looming fall-out for SNP could ignite civil war<p>Monday March 23, 2020 may go down in history as the day the UK went into lockdown over coronavirus. But the virus relegated another piece of startling news, certainly in Scotland, that in different times would have had sent shockwaves through the political world. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.britannica.com/biography/Alex-Salmond">Alex Salmond</a>, former first minister of Scotland, was <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/mar/23/alex-salmond-acquitted-of-all-charges-in-sexual-assault-trial">acquitted</a> of all 13 alleged sexual offences against nine women, following a two-week trial at the High Court in Edinburgh. The jury found him not guilty on 12 charges of sexual assault and not proven on a charge of intent to rape. <a href="https://www.scottishsentencingcouncil.org.uk/about-sentencing/jargon-buster/">Not proven</a> is a unique verdict in the Scottish criminal justice system which amounts to an acquittal.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/w1MR9Arr2WA?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<h2>Legal and political battles</h2>
<p>The trial was the culmination of a lengthy legal process. Charges were brought one year ago, when heavy restrictions on media coverage came into play. After his acquittal, Salmond stood on the steps of the capital’s court building and ominously declared that “information will see the light of day” which was not allowed to be presented in the evidence – although this seems to be unlikely until the worst of the pandemic is over. He is now said to be using his time in lockdown to <a href="https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/18332316.iain-macwhirter-salmond-won-one-battle-now-another-will-begin/">write his own account</a> of the last two years.</p>
<p>It seems like a distant memory now, but the legal shadow boxing that took place prior to the actual criminal trial may regain significance. In January 2019, Salmond succeeded in <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-46428570">winning a judicial review</a> against the way the Scottish government – the government he used to lead – investigated complaints against him.</p>
<p>This meant the government had to pay his legal costs when the civil law legal process – which was nothing to do with looking at the substance of the complaints – ruled that the investigation was “unfair”. But shortly afterwards, criminal charges were brought after a full Police Scotland investigation – which did not rely on the internal government complaints system.</p>
<p>However, Salmond’s acquittal has led to some of his supporters to link the two. MSP <a href="https://www.parliament.scot/msps/currentmsps/alex-neil-msp.aspx">Alex Neil</a> has said there should be a judicial inquiry into the Scottish “organs of the state” to see if there was a conspiracy to “do in” Salmond. </p>
<p>In his summing up, chief defence lawyer Gordon Jackson told the jury that, “Something doesn’t smell right about the whole thing”. It was revealed during the trial that the complainers – who retain anonymity under Scottish court rules – included government civil servants and pro-independence activists.</p>
<p>Yet such talk of conspiracies in relation to sexual offences was <a href="https://www.rapecrisisscotland.org.uk/news/news/statement-on-salmond-verdict/">condemned</a> by Rape Crisis Scotland. In the light of the verdict, the organisation pointed out how difficult it is for victims of sexual assault to come forward, particularly when they have to appear in court, as all the women in this case did.</p>
<p>The conviction rates in Scotland for rape and attempted rape are very low. In 2017-18, there was a <a href="https://www.gov.scot/publications/criminal-proceedings-scotland-2017-18/pages/4/">success rate in the courts of 43%</a>. Sexual Assault charges stand a bit higher at <a href="https://www.gov.scot/publications/criminal-proceedings-scotland-2017-18/pages/4/">63% success</a>, but this is way below the rates of other crimes.</p>
<h2>Behaviour in the workplace</h2>
<p>Salmond is not guilty of any criminality. He argued that innocent behaviour involving touching members of staff had been turned into allegations of sexual offences. Many of these charges took place in a professional setting where Salmond admitted personal boundaries were blurred. He called it an <a href="https://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/alex-salmond-trial-mr-salmond-claims-allegations-have-been-fabricated-2480368">“informal family environment”</a> with a large degree of socialising not as common in other governmental departments. </p>
<p>This working environment had led several civil servants to complain of stress, according to their line manager. And according to evidence given in court, following two complaints, <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-51908343">work rotas were changed</a> to ensure no woman worked alone with the former first minister. </p>
<p>A picture of this stressful workplace emerged, where the most powerful person in government was failing fully to respect personal space, an issue that caused Gordon Jackson to say that Salmond “could have been a better man on occasion”. That, however, did not amount to criminality.</p>
<p>Much was made in the trials of incidents that “no one thought twice about” at the time turning into criminal offences. Ultimately, the behaviour was not ruled as criminal, but there is no doubt on the law and definition of sexual assault. The <a href="http://www.legislation.gov.uk/asp/2009/9/contents">Sexual Offences (Scotland) Act 2009</a>, passed by the Salmond government and justice secretary <a href="https://www.snp.org/your-team/kenny-macaskill/">Kenny MacAskill</a> to help increase the Scottish conviction rate, outlines exactly what it can amount to.</p>
<p>Some have argued that charges should not have been brought at all following the acquittal, but that ignores the nature of criminal prosecution. There will always be people found not guilty, but it does not mean that potential criminal behaviour should not be investigated and brought to court for a jury to decide upon. In Scots law the defence can ask the judge to throw out the charges if they think the evidence is flimsy, stating that there is “no case to answer”. This was not done in this case, although the prosecution withdrew one charge of sexual assault where no evidence was led.</p>
<h2>New challenges</h2>
<p>In the immediate aftermath of the decision, much of the political tension within the SNP that had been in hiatus during the criminal proceedings resurfaced, if only temporarily, due to the COVID-19 issue. High-profile MP <a href="https://www.snp.org/your-team/joanna-cherry/">Joanna Cherry</a> had a four-page statement ready to release on social media immediately after the verdict. She also called for an inquiry into the Scottish government’s handling of the issue and, significantly, the SNP too. The ex-justice secretary MP Kenny MacAskill <a href="https://www.heraldscotland.com/news/18327887.snp-mps-calls-resignations-party-inquiry-alex-salmond-acquitted/">called for unspecified resignations</a>.</p>
<p>Salmond’s allies within the SNP will be critical if he chooses at some point to raise the “information” he alluded to in his speech. There could also be many more that support him. As he begins his desired return to Scottish public life, Salmond will also have to rejoin the party as he resigned at the beginning of the judicial process.</p>
<p>There is another worrying element of the aftermath of the verdict for the current first minister Nicola Sturgeon. A parliamentary inquiry into her behaviour over the Salmond incidents by an independent standards committee was put on hold until the trial was finished. This was intended to look at a number of meetings she held with Salmond during the government investigation into his behaviour in 2018 – an action that looked to be forbidden under the ministerial complaints process.</p>
<p>Coronavirus aside, this committee can now report on these events. Coupled with a potential internal SNP battle which could expose the bitterness and bad blood simmering within the party, the long-term effects of the Salmond acquittal could be immense.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/134820/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nick McKerrell does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Coronavirus may be delaying Alex Salmond’s reckoning, but both the Scottish government and the SNP as a party have some difficult times ahead.Nick McKerrell, Senior Lecturer in Law, Glasgow Caledonian UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1298762020-01-28T13:10:40Z2020-01-28T13:10:40ZIs workplace rudeness on the rise?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/312096/original/file-20200127-81395-14agko1.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=15%2C70%2C5239%2C3427&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Talk to the hand.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">SoumenNath/Getty Images</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>You don’t have to look hard to see uncivil behavior these days, whether <a href="https://www-washingtonpost-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/americans-are-at-each-others-throats-heres-one-way-out/2019/12/20/c8de01ca-2292-11ea-a153-dce4b94e4249_story.html?outputType=amp">in political discourse</a>, <a href="https://www.insidehighered.com/advice/2016/10/04/identifying-and-understanding-classroom-incivility-essay">in college classrooms</a> or <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/travel/rude-united-airlines-passenger-slammed-after-complaining-about-middle-seat">on airplanes</a>. One study <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000037">found</a> that rudeness is even contagious, like the common cold. </p>
<p>The workplace, where my research is focused, is hardly immune from this so-called <a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/americas-epidemic-of-incivility_b_59ef342be4b0b8a51417bd1f">incivility epidemic</a>. <a href="https://hbr.org/2013/01/the-price-of-incivility">Past surveys suggest</a> virtually all workers experience rude or uncivil behavior, while over half report being treated badly at least once a week. And some researchers have claimed <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000016">it’s pervasive</a> and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.orgdyn.2009.10.006">getting worse</a>. </p>
<p>But is it really? <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=aPETJQMAAAAJ&hl=en&oi=ao">I’ve spent the past decade</a> studying workplace rudeness and other forms of mistreatment. While I do believe it’s a significant problem, it’s hardly an epidemic. </p>
<h2>The rise of rudeness?</h2>
<p>First let’s consider whether workplace incivility is on the rise. </p>
<p>That is, are employees actually more likely to be interrupted, made fun of, addressed unprofessionally, demeaned or excluded at work? </p>
<p>To answer this question, I examined data from the <a href="https://gss.norc.org/">General Social Survey</a>, which has been gathering data on hundreds of trends in American attitudes, behaviors and attributes since 1972. It’s administered by the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago. </p>
<p>I looked at an item that’s been included every four years since 2002: “I am treated with respect at work.” Participants answer on a scale of 1, or strongly agree, to 4, or strongly disagree. </p>
<p>In 2002, the average score was 1.69, meaning workers generally agreed they were treated with respect. In 2018, that rose to 1.76, meaning a few more people disagreed with this statement than in the past. A statistician would call that significant, but on a scale of 1 to 4 it’s a pretty tiny change. </p>
<p><iframe id="QaL9i" class="tc-infographic-datawrapper" src="https://datawrapper.dwcdn.net/QaL9i/1/" height="400px" width="100%" style="border: none" frameborder="0"></iframe></p>
<h2>Misleading statistics</h2>
<p>Now, let’s consider prevalence. Just how rampant is workplace rudeness? </p>
<p>A <a href="https://hbr.org/2013/01/the-price-of-incivility">frequently cited statistic</a> is that 98% of workers have experienced uncivil behavior. But this kind of data point misleads us into thinking that everyone is being rude to each other all the time. </p>
<p>In reality, when an employee reports experiencing high levels of incivility, it’s unlikely he or she is mistreated frequently by everyone in the office. The trouble with research investigating the incidence of workplace rudeness is that it doesn’t consider an employee’s interactions with every co-worker but instead her experiences of incivility in general.</p>
<p>Rudeness occurs between two people. It requires an offender and a victim, comprising what researchers refer to as a “dyad.” So to understand the prevalence of workplace incivility, we should consider not only an employee’s general tendency to be mistreated but also – and <a href="http://www.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.92.4.952">more importantly</a> – the relationships that employee has with each of his or her colleagues. </p>
<p>In 2018, three colleagues and I <a href="https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2018.10553abstract">conducted a study</a> to determine how widespread workplace incivility is when considered from the viewpoint of employee relationships. We gave workers at a chain of casual dining restaurants in the Southeastern U.S. a survey and asked them to report how frequently they experienced rudeness over the past 12 months on a scale from “never” to “very frequently.”</p>
<p>We found that 69% of employees reported experiencing some incivility in the previous year. But this happened only in 16% of their relationships with co-workers. In other words, while a majority of employees reported experiencing incivility, most indicated that these experiences came from just a few coworkers.</p>
<p>These findings show that while most people experience workplace rudeness at least once in a while, most of their relationships are not characterized by rude or discourteous behavior.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/11/how-be-kind/602488/">Concerns</a> about the deterioration of courtesy and professionalism in today’s workplace are understandable. Yes, there are jerks out there, but rudeness is <a href="https://www.history.org/almanack/life/manners/rules2.cfm">nothing new</a>. It may spread like the flu, but it is no epidemic.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/129876/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Shannon G. Taylor does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Growing alarms over a ‘rudeness epidemic’ make it seem like incivility in the workplace is on the rise. The data suggest otherwise.Shannon G. Taylor, Associate Professor of Management, University of Central FloridaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1136892019-06-28T11:57:48Z2019-06-28T11:57:48ZOpen-plan offices are not inherently bad – you’re probably just using them wrong<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/281455/original/file-20190626-76705-ynax1x.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C134%2C2013%2C998&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">An office open enough to bring you out in a cold sweat.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/k2space/14220262826">k2space</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>For decades the trend among workplaces has seen employees moving out of individual offices and into open plan spaces. This has not always been successful, with the open-plan approach <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-new-study-should-be-the-final-nail-for-open-plan-offices-99756">receiving significant criticism</a>. The key issues are <a href="https://theconversation.com/get-out-of-my-face-were-more-antisocial-in-a-shared-office-space-64734">distraction and noise</a>, which apparently leads to uncooperative behaviour, distrust and negative personal relationships, and the lack of privacy and sense of being universally observed – which are <a href="https://www.fastcompany.com/90170941/the-subtle-sexism-of-your-open-plan-office">particularly problematic for women</a>.</p>
<p>Now that the internet connectivity is available almost everywhere and thus allows much more <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/lbsbusinessstrategyreview/2019/02/12/five-insights-from-davos-on-the-future-of-work/amp/">flexible working</a>, the question arises: What might the set-up of an ideal workplace environment look like today?</p>
<p>One response to the problems of open-plan spaces is simply to stop using them, <a href="https://www.inc.com/geoffrey-james/ikea-just-killed-open-plan-office.html">as Ikea has done recently</a>, structuring new spaces using its own taste for furniture design. But to be honest, I don’t see much of a difference to traditional workplaces based on the office “cubicle” – <a href="https://www.fastcompany.com/90312321/heres-how-ikeas-innovation-lab-redesigned-its-own-open-plan-office">have a look and decide for yourself</a>. </p>
<p>A variety of approaches aimed at <a href="https://www.inc.com/geoffrey-james/5-smarter-alternatives-to-open-plan-offices.html">designing better open-plan spaces</a> include the following ideas: use private offices surrounding a hub of a common area, purchase movable barriers so people can create private space as needed, create larger offices with two or three work areas, install cubicles with cathedral ceilings, skylights and tall windows, or introduce a work-from-home policy – while renting space for group meetings as required.</p>
<p>We had the opportunity to experiment with creating better open-plan spaces at our public university in Denmark when a group of ten researchers moved offices, so we thought to try and put some of these ideas into practice.</p>
<h2>An experiment in open-plan design</h2>
<p>The open-plan design for the space we came up with looked like this:</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/281423/original/file-20190626-76726-okqymz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/281423/original/file-20190626-76726-okqymz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/281423/original/file-20190626-76726-okqymz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=1473&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/281423/original/file-20190626-76726-okqymz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=1473&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/281423/original/file-20190626-76726-okqymz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=1473&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/281423/original/file-20190626-76726-okqymz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1851&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/281423/original/file-20190626-76726-okqymz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1851&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/281423/original/file-20190626-76726-okqymz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1851&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The new and improved open plan space.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Alexander Brem</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The group’s response was fairly neutral, although some colleagues had doubts they could work in such an environment. We agreed to a six-month trial period, with the following prerequisites:</p>
<ul>
<li>office space for permanent staff, plus flexible work units for guests;</li>
<li>a combination of working and social (informal) environment; </li>
<li>opportunities for spontaneous discussions, but also quiet areas to do concentrated work, and</li>
<li>generating and maintaining high acceptance within the staff.</li>
</ul>
<p>We first defined different areas: an office space with desks, a social area containing kitchen and couches, enclosed meeting rooms for discussions, rooms to go and make calls, and silent corners for quiet reading.</p>
<p>This meant the group no longer had fixed telephone lines. Instead, everyone used a <a href="https://www.gradwell.com/a-guide-to-voip/">VOIP</a> smartphone app, Skype for Business, which meant it was possible to sit anywhere and still make and take calls over an internet connection.</p>
<p>Having passed legal and other requirements, the group were asked about their preferences, and a seating plan was drawn up. For example, it was decided that the course coordinators should remain in their own office, because they are generally involved in a lot of meetings and phone calls which would be difficult to incorporate into an open office space. </p>
<p>Consequently, the plan looked like this (the kitchen and restroom area are next to the small meeting room, and not shown).</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/281425/original/file-20190626-76717-17g7knb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/281425/original/file-20190626-76717-17g7knb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/281425/original/file-20190626-76717-17g7knb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=350&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/281425/original/file-20190626-76717-17g7knb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=350&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/281425/original/file-20190626-76717-17g7knb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=350&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/281425/original/file-20190626-76717-17g7knb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=440&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/281425/original/file-20190626-76717-17g7knb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=440&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/281425/original/file-20190626-76717-17g7knb.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=440&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The space was divided into areas for different uses.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Alexander Brem</span>, <span class="license">Author provided</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>What we learned</h2>
<p>The trial period of six months passed – this was in 2014, and the office is still in its initial form today. However, there have been problems during this time.</p>
<p>For example, it was not always clear in which situations one should move to another room. The solution was to ensure that each new employee had the rules explained to them. Sometimes people booked the communication or library rooms for all-day meetings, which meant they were out of use for others. This problem was solved by making it a requirement that regular meeting rooms were booked. Of course, sometimes discussions or phone calls in the open-plan area could become loud or lengthy enough to disturb others, necessitating a reminder that other rooms were available for that purpose.</p>
<p>In general, many positive aspects appeared to be true. To some extend, it improved team working, spontaneous collaboration, and cross-fertilisation of ideas in shared spaces. </p>
<p>What have we learned and what can we recommend to others? Well, an open office plan is not by default a good or bad thing. As always, you need to have a strategic approach behind it to make it work, as has been <a href="https://www.fastcompany.com/90285582/everyone-hates-open-plan-offices-heres-why-they-still-exist">highlighted by others</a>, and you need to consider that these designs can even have the opposite effect of <a href="https://journals.aom.org/doi/10.5465/amr.2016.0240">hurting relationships</a>.</p>
<p>First, you really need to consider what sort of work is suitable for different kinds of office set-ups. For instance, people who work in sales or customer support typically spend much of their time talking or receiving visitors, making it impossible not to disturb others (at least those not doing the same), so they need a different environment.</p>
<p>Second, the most difficult part is to ensure that the rules are followed consistently. Open-plan spaces can only work in the long run if all those working there stick to the rules and remind others of them. It’s very important that the top management lead from the front and aren’t hidden away in their own office, divorced from the experiences of their staff. Hence, it is key that group leaders not only share the same office space, but also do not necessarily get the “best desk” – the one with the most privacy, for example – it’s important to show that the rules have the support of the leadership, in theory and in practice. </p>
<p>Third, consider the working atmosphere such an office creates: it tends to lead to an open environment in which behaviour is visible from the time an employee arrives at work – to who people are talking with and, often, what they are talking about. This can be seen as positive, fostering a feeling of togetherness. For others such transparency can be uncomfortable.</p>
<p>Last, it is important to note that creative work depends upon many factors: <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/caim.12309">our research</a> published this year indicates that the impulsiveness of team members plays an important role in their productivity. So overall, it has never been just about the open-plan office itself (which everybody seems to hate) but about each individual who spends their time working there – and how they make the best of it.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/113689/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Alexander Brem does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Open plan offices can suck the life out of workplaces. But it doesn’t have to be this way.Alexander Brem, Professor and Chair of Technology Management, Friedrich-Alexander-University Erlangen-Nürnberg, Honorary Professor, University of Southern DenmarkLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1056742019-01-21T18:39:44Z2019-01-21T18:39:44ZAs work gets more ambiguous, younger generations may be less equipped for it<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/252967/original/file-20190109-32145-1x0ynl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Those aged 18 to 37 are twice as likely as older workers to have the most negative attitudes about ambiguity.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>We work in a world of increasing ambiguity. </p>
<p>Over the past few decades technological change and globalisation have fundamentally changed the nature of the “average” job. There is greater competition and higher expectations. We face more situations, projects, tasks or objectives that are new, different, unclear or inexact. </p>
<p>To investigate whether Australian workers are equipped to handle this growing ambiguity at work, we <a href="https://eprints.qut.edu.au/120614/1/Tolerance%20of%20Ambiguity_2018.pdf">studied</a> attitudes towards ambiguity in a sample of more than 800 people. </p>
<p>We found those with positive attitudes towards ambiguity were more creative, better leaders and better overall performers. They reported lower stress levels and higher incomes than those with negative attitudes towards ambiguity. </p>
<p>Our research also revealed something surprising. Younger workers show less capacity to cope with ambiguity than older workers. </p>
<p>It is possible this simply shows ambiguity gets easier with age. Older workers might be more comfortable with ambiguity because they have years of experience and <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/jopy.12286">life events</a> to draw from. Indeed, studies show people tend to become more <a href="http://psycnet.apa.org/record/2010-25700-001">conscientious and emotionally stable</a> as they age, which might improve their capacity to manage ambiguity. </p>
<p>But it is also possible that the ability of younger workers to cope with ambiguity won’t improve with age. Perhaps it is here to stay, a consequence of the progressive removal of ambiguity from personal lives. </p>
<h2>Studying attitudes</h2>
<p>To explore the consequences of people’s attitudes towards ambiguity, we surveyed 800 workers from a range of industries. Participants responded to a set of 45 statements such as “I get anxious taking on problems that don’t have a definite solution” and “I like engaging with complex work problems”. We asked all participants about their age, experience, income and professional competencies. A subset also rated their colleagues on leadership, creativity and teamwork. </p>
<p>The results showed substantial generational differences in attitudes: 70% of Generation Y respondents (those aged 24 to 37) scored below the average (mean) score on the questionnaire; Generations Z and Y (those aged 18 to 37) were twice as likely as older workers to score in the bottom 10% (those with the most negative attitudes), and about half as likely to score in the top 10% (the most positive attitudes).</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/young-people-are-not-after-an-easy-ride-just-job-security-64494">Young people are not after an easy ride, just job security</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Our research indicates three traits common to workers who cope well with ambiguity: </p>
<ul>
<li><p>they report remaining calm and composed in the face of ambiguity</p></li>
<li><p>they have a strong desire for challenging work, reporting a strong preference for novelty and risk over routine </p></li>
<li><p>they have skills that enable them to manage uncertainty, reporting being very good at planning, utilising resources and problem-solving. </p></li>
</ul>
<p>Among younger workers, our findings point to a paradox. Generations Y and Z express just as much desire for novel, challenging work as older workers. But they lack the skills and confidence required to manage uncertainty when it occurs, and are more likely to become anxious.</p>
<p>These results challenge a common stereotype about younger people: that being “<a href="http://www.marcprensky.com/writing/Prensky%20-%20Digital%20Natives,%20Digital%20Immigrants%20-%20Part1.pdf">digital natives</a>” means they are equipped with the skills required to adapt and innovate. Our study found strong evidence to the contrary. </p>
<h2>Explaining the differences</h2>
<p>One theory is that this generational shift relates to parenting styles. Jonathon Haidt and Greg Lukianhoff, authors of <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Coddling-American-Mind-Intentions-Generation/dp/0735224897">The coddling of the American mind: How good intentions and bad ideas are setting up a generation for failure</a>, argue that overprotective parenting became more prevalent in the 1980s. Just as shielding children from germs has arguably weakened their immune systems, it may be that efforts to shield children from unpredictable environments has resulted in them being less resilient adults. </p>
<p>Although Haidt and Lukianhoff are particularly focused on explaining increasing political correctness in university students who have grown up with social media, their theory raises a compelling possibility. Are younger adults less tolerant of ambiguity because of overly protected childhoods?</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/are-our-school-playgrounds-being-wrapped-in-cotton-wool-43541">Are our school playgrounds being wrapped in cotton wool?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>A second possibility relates to the integration of technology in our personal lives. It is often assumed that technology “disrupts” our life and increases our exposure to ambiguity. But perhaps technology is actually reducing our exposure to ambiguity.</p>
<p>No video game, for example, is purely random. With repetition you can learn its patterns to master the game; and if you make a mistake you can simply restart. </p>
<p>Google Maps, as another example, means we rarely get lost on the road. It eliminates ambiguity regarding fastest route and estimated arrival time. Siri provides us with answers to virtually any question at any time. <a href="https://www.shazam.com/">Shazam</a> allows us to discover the title of songs in seconds. There is even a “<a href="http://time.com/2938184/pizza-counter-app/">pizza counter</a>” app that can advise us on how much pizza to order for a specific number of people based on hunger levels. </p>
<p>It is possible, therefore, that by steadily reducing our exposure to “everyday” ambiguity, technology has compromised our ability to manage uncertainty when it arises.</p>
<h2>Training for tolerance</h2>
<p>Does this mean younger people are at a permanent disadvantage in increasingly competitive and ambiguous work environments? No. There is good evidence you can purposefully train yourself to better tolerate ambiguity. </p>
<p>One simple method is to increase your exposure to ambiguity. This might include regularly attending new events, meeting new and different people or even travelling abroad. Although travel is worthwhile for its own sake, <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19379035">research</a> shows that living in a foreign country boosts a person’s capacity to creatively navigate ambiguity. </p>
<p>You can also develop those habits and competencies that have been linked to tolerance of ambiguity. Our results indicated that emotional intelligence, assertiveness and creativity are particularly important. These attributes allow you to remain focused and confident when in new situations. Mindfulness and relaxation techniques can enhance <a href="http://psycnet.apa.org/record/2011-06123-001">emotional intelligence</a> and <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1871187116300281">creativity</a>, while a variety of different practices can help with <a href="https://psychcentral.com/blog/building-assertiveness-in-4-steps/">assertiveness</a>. </p>
<p>Our research has highlighted that greater tolerance of ambiguity leads to greater work satisfaction. So if you want a happier working life, look for ways to see ambiguity as an opportunity.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/105674/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Peter O'Connor received funding for this research from the Australian Government and Change2020 under the Innovation Connections Scheme. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Karen Becker received funding for this research from the Australian Government and Change2020 under the Innovation Connections Scheme.</span></em></p>Generations Y and Z want interesting and novel work, but they lack the skills and confidence required to manage uncertainty when it occurs.Peter O'Connor, Associate Professor, Business and Management, Queensland University of TechnologyKaren Becker, Professor of Management, University of the Sunshine CoastLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/996612018-07-11T00:04:24Z2018-07-11T00:04:24ZWhen is #MeToo coming to my workplace? Eight things you can do now<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/227008/original/file-20180710-70057-djx0e6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">In this Nov. 12, 2017 file photo, participants march against sexual assault and harassment at the #MeToo March in the Hollywood section of Los Angeles. Lawmakers are expected to take up bills to crack down on sexual harassment when they return from their summer recess in August 2018. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">(AP Photo/Damian Dovarganes,file)</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>As a sociologist who studies feminist activism, I often get asked when and how the #MeToo movement is going to trickle down. This is a fair question, and not one easy to answer. </p>
<p>We know social movement ideas often become part of the <a href="https://press.princeton.edu/titles/6309.html">cultural fabric of the everyday</a>, but how they get there, and how long they percolate as they make their way, varies. The <a href="https://theconversation.com/metoo-campaign-brings-conversation-of-rape-to-the-mainstream-85875">#MeToo movement has rocked many workplaces</a>: Actors, artists, journalists, politicians, chefs, corporate executives have all been felled for poor behaviour. </p>
<p>Women globally have experienced vicarious justice learning about the courage of the women who have come forward, and the innovativeness of Tarana Burke, the New York community organizer who coined the term #MeToo. </p>
<p>Each month, new revelations roll out, almost timed, featuring another high-profile man with abusive tendencies. These revelations are often based on expensive and expert reporting, and can be deeply educational and cathartic. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/metoo-campaign-brings-conversation-of-rape-to-the-mainstream-85875">#MeToo campaign brings conversation of rape to the mainstream</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>But it’s eerie for many women to continue in their familiar work-a-day capacities, <a href="http://angusreid.org/me-too/">where the justice has not yet trickled sideways, or down</a>. Many have worked at their organizations for decades and have witnessed casual and concerted sexual harassment, and in some cases assault. </p>
<p>Others have been subject to less direct aggression, but still must contend with a toxic workplace of sexual insult and innuendo, riven with bad feelings.</p>
<h2>Covert resistance</h2>
<p>Most women are not heartened by the idea of trickle-down justice, and they feel, rightly, that it is not going to come to them. They are the sociologists of their own lives, recounting for me in unionized and non-unionized settings, that speaking out against harassment doesn’t serve a victim well. These have been informal admissions made to me as a public feminist. </p>
<p>From these informal stories, I understand everyday people to be master strategists, opting for schedule shifts that enable them to steer clear of known harassers, trying not to be in the elevator or alone with or next to the same, keeping their heads down and not making eye contact, knowing when to be direct and when to say nothing, laughing insults off, holding their breaths when leering, expectant men walk by their offices, pulling out file drawers to prevent harassers from coming into their personal space, eating lunch at their desks, never going for drinks on Thursdays with the rest of the crew, exiting the building to a back alley to avoid a co-worker waiting at the front door to walk with them to the subway. </p>
<p>I believe women share these tactics with me because #MeToo has made them conscious and proud of their own survival skills. I admire these strategies and through listening to them, have realized that for many women, work is often video game-like, as they tiptoe, run, duck and hide, to avoid harm. </p>
<h2>Fear reprisals</h2>
<p>The #MeToo movement has changed the air in some places of work, but led to recourse in far fewer. Most women workers cannot afford a trial, and don’t want a soul-killing mandatory training module on sexual harassment in their divisions.</p>
<p>Many have confessed to me that a meeting with higher-ups would ensure that within days HR would be coming with a box and a five-minute timer to evacuate the complaint-maker from her desk. </p>
<p>How do the great majority of working women reckon with #MeToo when there will be no confrontation, revelation or watershed moment for them? </p>
<p>Academics, journalists, teachers, social workers and psychologists have experienced a notable outpouring of questions and concerns, but this is not a professional moment, this is a people’s moment to decide what is no longer OK, partly because it’s illegal, partly because it violates workplace policy and mostly because harassment is soul-killing. </p>
<p>While researchers have shown formal reporting mechanisms to be often disappointing, other scholars show that <a href="http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1163/156916307X210973">everyday referencing of social movements, and allying with them, makes women feel stronger and more capable of refusing sexism</a></p>
<p>The #MeToo movement won’t make a tsunami level wave in every place of work. But with small gestures, we can remove the sandbags from the thresholds of our doors, open the windows and invite something of the force of that water to trickle in. Inviting the water in while small may feel more energizing than wondering whether, and when, it might come.</p>
<h2>Eight things you can do about a toxic work environment</h2>
<p>We have to commit to ending this toxic culture. Here are eight suggestions for how to do it.</p>
<ol>
<li><p>If you have sexually harassed or belittled people you work with, meditate on what you have done or are doing, and stop. If you can’t control your own toxic impulses, get professional help or quit.</p></li>
<li><p>Everyone should search on the Internet: “What is professional workplace behaviour?” Read the top 10 sites that come up. Other helpful sites will pop up including, “<a href="https://www.thebalancecareers.com/top-things-you-should-never-do-at-work-4016248">Top ten things not to do at work.</a>” Print them out. Follow them.</p></li>
<li><p>Read <a href="http://www.parl.ca/DocumentViewer/en/42-1/bill/C-65/first-reading">federal law</a> on harassment and safety in the workplace.</p></li>
<li><p>Read your employer’s guidelines on harassment and safety in the workplace.</p></li>
<li><p>If you see harassment, <a href="https://moneyish.com/ish/heres-how-to-help-if-you-witness-sexual-harassment-at-work/">intervene</a>.</p></li>
<li><p>If you are experiencing harassment, do your research. Educate yourself <a href="https://globalnews.ca/news/3798481/workplace-sexual-harassment/">on the help you can access</a>: Non-profit, governmental, private sector and popular advice is available, which will give you options and make you feel less alone. </p></li>
<li><p>Ask management for an <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/ryanwestwood/2018/02/23/why-equality-matters-and-4-ways-to-develop-an-authentic-workplace/">equality audit of your workplace</a>. Questions to ask include: How are we doing with homophobia, racism and sexism as these relate to mentoring, advancement, leadership and decision-making? </p></li>
<li><p>Gather together colleagues you trust to write a concise letter stating that in your place of work, harassment has happened, and that you’d like everyone to commit to a new awareness of gender dynamics in the workplace. You can circulate the letter, tack it to the bulletin board, leave it in the mailroom. This is subversive, and there might be blowback, so folks have to think about whether they want to be so direct and deal with the consequences. On the other hand, colleagues may be grateful for your leadership. </p></li>
</ol>
<p>Let’s assume going forward that those among us who have been toxic want to let that go. Those among us who are easy targets are going to start reading up on rights and recording bad behaviour. </p>
<p>The rest of us are going to try our best to create a new normal and pay attention so we don’t look like we have better things to do when people get hurt, other than to help them. It might be awkward while some people adjust. Awkward is a small price.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/99661/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Judith Taylor does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>While the #MeToo movement has been revolutionary, some workplaces will be slow to change. Here are seven things we can all do to help stop toxic work environments.Judith Taylor, Professor of Sociology, University of TorontoLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/968202018-05-27T19:51:23Z2018-05-27T19:51:23ZAt work, be spiritual but definitely not religious!<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/219424/original/file-20180517-26281-4regwl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C5%2C1200%2C731&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/fr/image-photo/cropped-image-beautiful-business-team-holding-518939170?src=HbxmL4F3SZ5v635BIZVHkA-1-7">Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Employees forming reflection groups on the meaning of work, managers inviting to practice a minute of introspection before the beginning of a meeting, meditation training… For several years already, the tools supposed to help develop the spiritual dimension of work and professional involvement have been spreading in Western companies.</p>
<p>A simple search on the Internet leads to an impressive number of links to websites of consultants and trainers, as well as a host of press articles praising the merits of the spiritualization of management and workplaces. Yet, at the same time, conflicts related to religious practice at work are multiplying. But then, what spirituality are we talking about?</p>
<h2>Spirituality versus religion?</h2>
<p>The star these days seems to be <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mindfulness">mindfulness meditation</a>. This tool of introspection of Buddhist origin would be the absolute solution to the stress and meaninglessness of today’s organizations. It is a tool, it must be specified, emptied of its religious substance (a point underlined almost systematically in the advertising arguments of its promoters), “laicized” to be put at the service of the populations of a necessarily secularized Western world. Spirituality in the workplace is therefore in fashion. It would even have become a <a href="https://hts.org.za/index.php/hts/article/view/3294/7716">management tool</a>.</p>
<p>Yet, at the same time, religion in Europe and North America continues to see practitioners and their employers coming before the courts. The balance between the religious freedom of employees and the power to coerce of employers seems to be difficult to find on a subject as sensitive as the expression of religiosity at work. On the one hand spirituality is invited to enter offices and workshops. On the other hand, religiosity, if it is not completely taboo, often poses problems.</p>
<p>Spirituality is not an easy concept to define. Most <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10551-009-0251-5">scientific articles</a> point out that there are almost as many approaches of this notion as there were research studies interested in it. However, we can identify four elements common to all the many definitions proposed in the scientific literature on this subject: the search for the meaning of life and human activity, the relationship to transcendence, the relationship to others and the quest for happiness.</p>
<h2>Spirituality to respond to changes in work?</h2>
<p>In the <a href="https://search.proquest.com/openview/282d7c69c6fcfd59a7553d144d6c22b6/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=26142">context of professional activity</a>, spirituality would correspond for each person to the contribution of work experience in the construction of the meaning of life.</p>
<p>How can this renewed interest in the spiritual dimension of work be explained? Three reasons are given.</p>
<p>The first would be the loss of credibility of companies’ discourse on their projects and their values. This phenomenon is well illustrated by the reactions to the recent <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facebook%E2%80%93Cambridge_Analytica_data_scandal">Facebook-Cambridge Analytica scandal</a>.</p>
<p>Companies previously identified by their trade would have become project receptacles whose primary purpose would no longer be to produce goods and services, but to implement business flows to generate value creation. Moreover, the discourse of companies on their values and their commitment to social and societal responsibility would have been damaged by the succession of scandals such as <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enron_scandal">Enron</a>, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parmalat#Financial_fraud">Parmalat</a> or, more recently, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_emissions_scandal">Volkswagen</a>. In this context, people would be pushed to seek by themselves the meaning of their professional activity, in particular by investing their spirituality in the realization of their work.</p>
<p>The second reason would be linked to the transformation of the ways in which people are involved and work is carried out. The activity has evolved towards a functioning centered on teams, situations and reaction to events. Working no longer means simply getting involved in well-defined processes as a <a href="http://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?pid=S2305-08532014000100014&script=sci_arttext&tlng=pt">body or brain</a>, but often necessitates being creative and reactive, mobilizing emotions, imagination, sociability, responsiveness, etc. Work leads individuals to become involved as a <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10551-006-0014-5">whole person</a> in constantly evolving situations that involve constant interactions with colleagues, customers, suppliers, etc. As spirituality is part of the person, it finds there an entrance door into the workplace. At the same time, it would be a way for employees to cope with increasingly stressful and uncertain work and employment situations.</p>
<p>The third reason is the space that <a href="http://heinonline.org/hol-cgi-bin/get_pdf.cgi?handle=hein.journals/intlr135&section=63">work has taken</a> in people’s lives. The places in which individuals could traditionally seek and find meaning in their lives have changed. The family has evolved from the extended model to the nuclear model. Religious practices have become more personal and less communal. Urbanization has distended neighborhood relations. Many people now spend more time in the company with their colleagues than at home with their families. The actual <a href="http://www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/pdf/10.1108/13527601011016899">daily working time </a>of full-time employees in Western countries is just over eight hours, while 75% of people see their children for only two hours a day and one quarter for no more than one hour. The <a href="http://amr.aom.org/content/10/1/76.short">workplace</a> would gradually have become the main place of socialization and action, and work would have become the preferred means of seeking meaning in life and contributing to the functioning of the world.</p>
<h2>Spirituality, performance and management</h2>
<p>While some <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1048984302001248">authors</a> have proposed to use this affirmation of the spiritual dimension of work as a basis for rethinking the ways in which organizations function, the <a href="http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1056492609339017">majority of approaches</a> to spirituality at work have focused on the articulation of two ideas:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>The spiritual investment of employees improves their behavior and their work and produces performance;</p></li>
<li><p>The company and its management must encourage employees to invest their spirituality in their professional activity.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>According to the most widespread discourse, it is through work that each employee must seek the meaning of his existence and must try to participate, with his colleagues in projects that transcend his action and situation.</p>
<h2>Be spiritual rather than religious</h2>
<p>Management must create a working situation that is favorable to this investment. But we see three paradoxes in these approaches to spirituality at work.</p>
<p>Indeed, if people are thus invited to invest their spirituality in work, it is however often on <a href="http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1350508403010002011">condition</a> that the latter does not follow the ways of religion. Religion is frequently associated in the scientific <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10551-007-9369-5">literature</a> with dogmatism, rigidity or proselytism.</p>
<p>In fact, <a href="https://www.shrm.org/hr-today/trends-and-forecasting/research-and-surveys/documents/08-0625religionsr_updtfinal.pdf">religious behavior</a> is more often illustrated by the wearing of clothing or an object than by proselytism or radical behavior. Yet according to many <a href="http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1350508403010002011">scientific articles</a> (which are also real pleas for spirituality in the workplace), these behaviors are undesirable within the walls of the company.</p>
<p>The individual would thus be invited to invest himself as a whole person and to mobilize his spirituality… Unless the latter is religious. The case of this one company from Paris visited during one of my researches clearly shows this posture. It provides its employees with a meditation room, but prohibits the practice of prayer. Moreover, its manager recognizes without problem that he systematically tries to discourage any expression of the religiosity of his employees.</p>
<h2>The employee, responsible for everything</h2>
<p>Starting from the observation that contemporary organizations would be marked both by a loss of sense of work and of the projects to which it contributes, it would be up to people to cure these ills by getting even more involved, and more personally, in their work. To fill the lack of meaning of the activities would thus no longer be the responsibility of the company, but that of the employee. Yet, even if it is legitimate and necessary, profit does not summarize the <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-8683.2005.00467.x/full">liberal enterprise</a>’s project. The latter is above all to carry out an activity that contributes to the progress of the world by involving employees.</p>
<p>The spiritual dimension of work is linked to the individual’s quest for the meaning of his existence, but it can only be achieved if the company integrates the involvement of its employees in the realization of a project. It is then his responsibility to give this project a meaning and purpose connected to the common good.</p>
<h2>Formatting and individualism</h2>
<p>Finally, mobilizing the spirituality of individuals may produce more <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Marjolein_Lips-Wiersma2/publication/247737514_Theorizing_the_Dark_Side_of_the_Workplace_Spirituality_Movement/links/58f889ea0f7e9bfcf93d7d5a/Theorizing-the-Dark-Side-of-the-Workplace-Spirituality-Movement.pdf">normalization</a> than personalization of behaviors.</p>
<p>The injunction to spiritual investment in work outlines a new standard of involvement, both more personal and binding. The person is called to invest his spirituality in his professional activity, but not his religiosity. The tools (meditation, reflection groups on meaning, etc.) and managerial practices that encourage it define the time and form of this investment. Employees are encouraged to seek the meaning of their work, but without questioning the functioning of the company.</p>
<p>The risk here is to come to define what a good or bad spiritual investment is and to constrain the expressions of personalities rather than rethink the work from their diversity. Spirituality is a personal process. Its expression should reveal the diversity of the employee population.</p>
<p>The spiritual dimension of work that the French philosopher <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VL_QEulh8_U">Simone Weil</a> had so well highlighted is not a management tool. It is above all a way of defining work as an activity carried out by a person interacting with others to contribute to the functioning and progress of the world.</p>
<p>More than a resource that can be mobilized by management in search of performance, spirituality is an invitation to rethink work and its organization, with the singularity of the human person as a starting point and key concept.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/96820/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Lionel Honoré received funding for his research from the Observatoire du Fait Religieux en Entreprise. </span></em></p>Many companies now encourage certain spiritual practices to improve well-being and productivity, yet religion at work is a growing source of conflict. A paradox?Lionel Honoré, Professeur des Universités, Université de la Polynésie FrançaiseLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/864442018-01-03T11:18:12Z2018-01-03T11:18:12ZThe gig economy may strengthen the ‘invisible advantage’ men have at work<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/200637/original/file-20180102-26139-bmb33k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Do women freelancers suffer the effects of 'male privilege'?</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/150712825@N03/35247838510/in/photolist-VGJonC-9yrq6b-ysqox-9sa2eX-VGJpyf-V4pSxD-QUtS7Y-5BLiYj-SrvyC3-9sd1LL-oi65AD-VGJoML-92zXyN-9tVq3b-RJZ6uR-dsyjEm-5HtMo2-f6Yn9Y-W33f7b-4MSpYs-9sd173-pBr9Rq-V4pQSe-4SaLWa-VGJoPu-a7SiPJ-9sgfe9-8N9wb-RZ84wT-56Q9Bz-88kaBr-bzVnCa-9sa22z-VGKCJS-mSy83h-a3dkiw-V4pTmn-VGJoT7-hqRM1s-RJZ5bt-d3AfwN-nRwxbi-4za4m2-9sdfhX-9sa2pR-pUTaZT-cYZqJb-9sgf6f-6ve2WH-nog1Zz">Ryan Morse</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Martin Schneider often got things done faster than a female colleague, Nicole Hallberg, who worked at the same small employment services agency. He figured this was because of his extra experience.</p>
<p>One day, however, a client suddenly began acting “impossible,” “rude” and “dismissive,” as Schneider recalled in a <a href="https://twitter.com/schneidremarks/status/839910253680553988?lang=en">series of tweets</a>. </p>
<p>He soon realized why. Schneider had inadvertently used Hallberg’s email signature in his messages to the client. (They used a shared inbox.) When he told the client he was actually Martin and not Nicole, there was “immediate improvement” in the exchange.</p>
<p>Intrigued, Schneider and Hallberg agreed to do an experiment in which they switched email signatures for two weeks. What happened? Hallberg had the “most productive week of her career.” Meanwhile, Schneider was in “hell” as clients condescended and questioned everything he suggested. </p>
<p>Summing up the lesson, Schneider tweeted: “I wasn’t any better at the job than she was, I just had this invisible advantage.”</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"839910253680553988"}"></div></p>
<h2>Sexism in the workplace</h2>
<p>In many ways, the result of their experiment should not come as a surprise. </p>
<p>Sexism in the workplace <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2016/aug/10/half-of-women-uk-have-been-sexually-harassed-at-work-tuc-study-everyday-sexism">is well documented in surveys</a> and in <a href="https://scholar.harvard.edu/goldin/publications/pollution-theory-discrimination-male-and-female-differences-occupations-and">academic literature</a>. Recent reports of overt harassment in the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/topic/person/harvey-weinstein">private</a> and <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/11/the-uks-sexual-harassment-scandal/545066/">public</a> sectors confirm that it is alive and well. Further, the <a href="http://www.nber.org/papers/w21913">data show</a> persistent gender gaps in pay, hiring and promotions across occupations and skill levels.</p>
<p><a href="http://annenberg.usc.edu/faculty/communication/hernan-galperin">My own research</a> looks at how the burgeoning gig economy – in which jobs are short-term or freelance rather than permanent – affects gender and other forms of labor discrimination. A study we recently conducted with colleagues at the <a href="http://cedlas.econo.unlp.edu.ar/">Center for Distributive, Labor and Social Studies</a> in Argentina suggests an increasingly freelance workforce may make the problem of male privilege even worse.</p>
<h2>Maria and José</h2>
<p>Discrimination in the labor market is notoriously difficult to study. </p>
<p>For <a href="http://www.nber.org/papers/w22022">decades</a>, social scientists have tried to disentangle differences in ability, career preferences, attitudes towards risk and negotiation and other worker characteristics from true discrimination by employers. However, as economic transactions increasingly migrate to peer-to-peer platforms, this perspective misses an important piece of the discrimination puzzle: that of the interactions between gender of the employer and gender of the job seeker.</p>
<p>For example: Do gender stereotypes also put women at a disadvantage when they’re the ones doing the hiring? Are women less likely to negotiate salaries and promotions with a male employer?</p>
<p>To answer these questions, we designed the following experiment: We randomly selected and invited 2,800 freelancers on <a href="https://www.freelancer.es/nubelo">Nubelo</a>, a large online platform for short-term job contracts based in Spain that’s now part of Freelancer.com, to apply for a job to transcribe and edit an hourlong marketing video. </p>
<p>Each invitation came from the same employer, a fictitious marketing services agency. Half of the freelancers (randomly selected) received the email from “Maria,” while the rest learned about the job opportunity from “José.” In addition, half of the invitations asked freelancers to name their price for the job, while the other half offered a flat pay of €250 (US$301).</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/198997/original/file-20171213-27588-8e3sh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/198997/original/file-20171213-27588-8e3sh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/198997/original/file-20171213-27588-8e3sh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/198997/original/file-20171213-27588-8e3sh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/198997/original/file-20171213-27588-8e3sh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/198997/original/file-20171213-27588-8e3sh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/198997/original/file-20171213-27588-8e3sh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Women have often found it hard to break into the ‘boy’s clubs’ in the office.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">iofoto/Shutterstock.com</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Male privilege at work</h2>
<p>The <a href="https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3056508">results</a> confirmed our intuition: Male privilege not only hurts women when they’re looking for work, it also puts them at a disadvantage when they’re the ones doing the hiring. </p>
<p>In our study, José was able to solicit significantly lower rates from prospective job candidates than Maria, even though the work was identical. Candidates offered to do the job for an average of €124 when José sent the invitation, while they demanded €158 from Maria (or about 27 percent more for the same exact job). </p>
<p>When we control for differences in the characteristics of the job seekers, such as experience and reputation on the site, the female employer penalty remains essentially unchanged. More interestingly, this result obtained for both male and female job seekers.</p>
<p>Were women less willing to negotiate with José or Maria? Not in our study. In fact we found no statistically significant differences in negotiation preferences across our four employer-freelancer combinations. Female freelancers were just as likely as men to respond to our email when it invited them to name their price, and it made no difference whether the email came from Maria or José. </p>
<p>In other words, as long as the rules of the game are clearly laid out (that freelancers should name their price), female job applicants were willing to bargain as much as male applicants, and the gender of the other party (the employer) did not seem to affect this result.</p>
<h2>Rise of the gig economy</h2>
<p>An increasing number of people make a living in the gig economy. In a 2016 <a href="http://www.pewinternet.org/2016/11/17/gig-work-online-selling-and-home-sharing/">poll</a>, 24 percent of Americans reported earning money from gig economy platforms, and the majority said that this income is important or essential to make ends meet. In this context, what are the implications of our findings?</p>
<p><a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2017/04/04/women-gig-work-equal-pay-day-side-gigs-uber/99878986/">Some</a> claim the rise of “alternative work” arrangements could offer opportunities for women to close the remaining labor market gaps. Our results suggest a more uncertain future. On the one hand, they indicate that women may gain from workplace environments in which the rules of bargaining are unambiguous, as <a href="http://www.nber.org/papers/w18511">studies</a> show that men often have the upper hand when the rules are less clear.</p>
<p>On the other, our results suggest that the gig economy could potentially exacerbate gender discrimination. In the hypercompetitive, fast-paced world of online labor, hiring and wages are determined on the basis of little verifiable information about each individual worker. These conditions favor the activation of stereotypes about “appropriate” jobs for women, their productivity and their willingness to bargain. Further, as traditional worker-employer relations are replaced by peer-to-peer transactions on a global scale, the application of anti-discrimination labor law becomes challenging.</p>
<p>As we look at the impact of technology on the future of work, there are some reasons for optimism but plenty for concern. The truth is, while technology extends our capabilities as human beings, it can not, unfortunately, eliminate our biases and prejudices.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/86444/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>This research project has received funding from the International Development Research Centre (IDRC).</span></em></p>Sexism has long been an unfortunate feature of the workplace, but is male privilege still a problem when the gig economy makes most of our office interactions virtual?Hernán Galperin, Research Associate Professor of Communication, USC Annenberg School for Communication and JournalismLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/879252017-11-30T02:39:20Z2017-11-30T02:39:20ZGot a boss who denies reality? A behavioral scientist’s guide to tactful truth telling<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/197030/original/file-20171129-12032-q8alr9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">'He said what?'</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">fizkes/Shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>‘Tis the season for holiday parties at the office. </p>
<p>While they’re great for building workplace camaraderie and team spirit, when was the last time a colleague - perhaps fueled by too much alcohol - said something so ridiculous that it made your jaw drop? Perhaps a desk mate went into something political, claiming that <a href="http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/bush-did-9-11">George Bush is behind 9/11</a> or that Barack Obama is a <a href="https://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/muslim.asp">Muslim from Kenya</a>? Or maybe your boss voiced <a href="https://www.skepticalscience.com/5-characteristics-of-scientific-denialism.html">science denialism</a>, arguing that the <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/speaking-of-science/wp/2017/11/27/a-flat-earthers-plan-to-launch-himself-in-a-homemade-rocket-has-been-postponed-again/?utm_term=.23a67dd49daf">Earth is flat</a> or the Apollo moon landing <a href="http://www.newsweek.com/fake-apollo-moon-landing-photo-claims-show-proof-mission-was-hoax-716221">was faked</a>?</p>
<p>Just as disconcerting as the conspiracy theorist in your midst is hearing a boss or colleague blatantly deny a business reality, such as evidence that a favored product flopped or a decision was absolutely the wrong one. </p>
<p>So what do you do when someone you work with – even the CEO of the company – tells you something that’s demonstrably false? </p>
<p>Dealing with truth denialism - in business, politics and other life areas - is one of my areas of <a href="http://glebtsipursky.com/about/">research</a>, and I <a href="http://glebtsipursky.com/the-truth-seekers-handbook-a-science-based-guide/">recently published a book</a> on the topic. Here are some tips to navigate that Christmas office party or one-on-one with a boss in denial. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/197024/original/file-20171129-12035-cemqml.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/197024/original/file-20171129-12035-cemqml.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/197024/original/file-20171129-12035-cemqml.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/197024/original/file-20171129-12035-cemqml.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/197024/original/file-20171129-12035-cemqml.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/197024/original/file-20171129-12035-cemqml.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/197024/original/file-20171129-12035-cemqml.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">To reality deniers, facts and photos won’t change minds.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AP Photo/NASA/Neil A. Armstrong</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>It begins at the top</h2>
<p>The worst-case scenario is when your chief executive is the one in denial. </p>
<p>A <a href="http://www.prweb.com/releases/2005/06/prweb253465.htm">four-year study</a> by LeadershipIQ.com, which provides online leadership seminars, interviewed 1,087 board members from 286 organizations of all sorts that forced out their chief executive officers. It found that almost one quarter of CEOs – 23 percent – got fired for denying reality, meaning refusing to recognize negative facts about the organization’s performance. </p>
<p><a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10869-009-9109-1">Other research</a> strongly suggests that the behaviors expressed by CEOs “are felt throughout the organization by impacting the norms that sanction or discourage member behavior and decision making, and the patterns of behavior and interaction among members.” </p>
<p>Together, these findings suggest that organizations where CEOs deny negative facts will have a culture of denying reality throughout the hierarchy. Of course, even when the boss lives in the real world, others in the organization may hold false beliefs. </p>
<p>Professionals at all levels <a href="https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/304215/denial-by-richard-s-tedlow/9781591843917/">can suffer from</a> the tendency to deny uncomfortable facts in business settings. <a href="https://wayback.archive.org/web/20160316225228/http:/www.cmu.edu/dietrich/sds/docs/loewenstein/OstrichEffect.pdf">Scholars term</a> this thinking error the ostrich effect, named after the (mythical) notion that ostriches stick their heads into the sand when they see threats.</p>
<h2>Forget facts and logic</h2>
<p>Our intuition is to confront colleagues suffering from the ostrich effect with the facts. </p>
<p>But research - and common sense, if the colleague is your supervisor - suggests that’s usually the wrong thing to do. That’s because when someone believes something we know to be false, some kind of emotional block is probably at play. A number of factors explain why this happens. </p>
<p>For example, <a href="http://psycnet.apa.org/record/1998-02489-003">research on</a> confirmation bias shows that we tend to look for and interpret information in ways that conforms to our beliefs. So even if sales are far below expectations, a CEO might reject that information in projecting good financial forecasts on the belief that his actions should lead the company to do well. </p>
<p>In another example at a company where I <a href="http://glebtsipursky.com/coaching/">consulted</a>, a manager refused to acknowledge that a person hired directly by her was a bad fit, despite everyone else in the department telling me that the employee was holding back the team. The manager’s behavior likely resulted from what <a href="https://search.proquest.com/openview/20b67ff3fea8044d3ed5ca2f55bc58b1/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=696407">scholars term</a> the sunk cost fallacy, a tendency to double down on past decisions even when an objective assessment shows the decision to be problematic.</p>
<p>In both cases, facing facts would cause the CEO or the manager to feel bad. We often prefer to stick our heads into the sand rather than acknowledge our fault because of our reluctance to experience negative emotions. </p>
<p><a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/0163853X.2015.1136507">Research on</a> a phenomenon called the backfire effect shows we tend to dig in our heels when we are presented with facts that cause us to feel bad about our identity, self-worth, worldview or group belonging. In some cases, presenting the facts <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11109-010-9112-2">actually backfires</a>, causing people to develop a stronger attachment to incorrect beliefs. Moreover, we express anger at the person bringing us the message, a phenomenon <a href="http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/abstract/document/589908/">researchers term</a> “shoot the messenger.”</p>
<p>There are <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6486.00157">many other</a> mental errors that inhibit business professionals from seeing reality clearly and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.4250050204">making good decisions</a>.</p>
<h2>Modeling emotions and values</h2>
<p>This isn’t to say that emotions are the problem. They are not. </p>
<p>Emotions are fundamentally important to the human experience, and we need both <a href="http://intentionalinsights.org/autopilot-vs-intentional-system-the-rider-and-the-elephant/">reason and emotion</a> to <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-1834-0_8">make good decisions</a>.</p>
<p>So rather than offering facts, your goal should be to show <a href="http://intentionalinsights.org/what-true-leaders-know-about-emotional-intelligence/">emotional leadership</a> and try to figure out what are the emotional blocks inhibiting your colleague from seeing reality clearly. To do so, use curiosity and subtle questioning to figure out their values and goals and how they shape their perception of self-identity. And focus on deploying the emotional intelligence skill of <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289696900112">empathy</a>.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, despite <a href="https://doi.org/10.1108/01437730010325040">extensive research</a> about the importance of emotional intelligence in <a href="http://livkom.dk/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Complete-thesis-NVC.pdf">professional settings</a>, too many organizations still fail to <a href="http://go.galegroup.com/ps/anonymous?id=GALE%7CA20251750&sid=googleScholar&v=2.1&it=r&linkaccess=fulltext&issn=10559760&p=AONE&sw=w&authCount=1&isAnonymousEntry=true">provide such training</a>.</p>
<h2>Building trust</h2>
<p>Once you understand your colleague’s goals and values, try to show you share them. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378720608000888">Research shows</a> doing so is crucial to conveying knowledge effectively in professional environments.
Practice mirroring, or rephrasing in your own words the points made by the other person, which <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/10696679.2005.11658547">demonstrates</a> you understand how they feel and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/10517120802484551">helps build trust</a>.</p>
<p>With a CEO, you might talk about how both of you share a desire for the executive to be a truly strong leader. Try to connect the traits and emotions identified by the CEO to specific examples of his behavior. </p>
<p>And regarding the manager with the problematic employee, I had a conversation about how she saw her current and potential future employees playing a role in the long-term future of the department she ran. I echoed her anxiety about the company’s financial performance and concerns about getting funding for future hires, which gave me an additional clue into why she might be protecting the incompetent employee.</p>
<h2>Unclogging emotional blocks</h2>
<p>After placing yourself on the same side, building up trust and establishing an emotional connection, move on to the problem at hand: their emotional block. </p>
<p>The key here is to show them, without arousing a defensive or aggressive response, how their current truth denialism undermines their own goals in the long term. It can help to cite a prominent example of a business leader accepting difficult facts to move forward, such as how former Ford CEO Alan Mulally <a href="http://crownpublishing.com/archives/news/american-icon-alan-mulally-and-the-fight-to-save-ford-motor-company-by-bryce-g-hoffman#.Wh7tR0qnFPZ">helped save</a> the company through repeated course corrections. <a href="https://search.proquest.com/openview/d5559eedfa932bfc49e882f25b9ea91e/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=38767">Research shows</a> that offering positive reinforcement, without condescension, can be effective with colleagues and bosses alike. </p>
<p>So when you’re at your next office party and encounter a truth-denying colleague, remember these tips and perhaps you won’t have to spend the evening with your face buried in your hands.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/87925/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Gleb Tsipursky does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Dealing with a co-worker or manager who says demonstrably false things can be a challenge, particularly at holiday office parties. Here’s a guide to handle a colleague in denial.Gleb Tsipursky, Assistant Professor of History of Behavioral Science, The Ohio State UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/799262017-07-26T20:15:43Z2017-07-26T20:15:43ZA focus on goals rather than behaviour is creating workplace monsters<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/179762/original/file-20170726-3011-1lg8g8s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Our research highlights that destructive leaders lack self-control especially when anxious and the difficulty of tasks is high</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">www.shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Rather than putting the time and effort into promoting self-control, many organisations continue to favour focusing on goals, irrespective of how they are achieved. The general obsession by some organisations with outputs, reports, and metrics, signals to employees that performance is paramount, whatever the cost.</p>
<p>This has led to some spectacular failures in organisations. For example in the ride-sharing business Uber, <a href="https://theconversation.com/uber-gets-a-backseat-driver-as-kalanick-exits-top-job-79854">poor leadership modelled and encouraged poor self-control</a> within the business. <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/volkswagen-emissions-scandal-20831">Volkswagen’s 2015 emission scandal</a> offers another sobering example of what can happen when there is insufficient scrutiny on how performance targets are met.</p>
<p>Many of us are guilty of having momentary lapses in self-control. This can be anything from procrastinating on facebook instead of finishing a client report or losing our cool with a frustrating colleague. <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0092656610001595?via%3Dihub">Research</a> shows that poor self-control more generally leads to dysfunctional outcomes.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1048984315000417?via%3Dihub">Our research</a> highlights that destructive leaders lack self-control especially when anxious and the difficulty of tasks is high. Constructive leaders, on the other hand, have much more self-control and are much less easily overwhelmed.</p>
<h2>How to turn the focus from goals to self-control</h2>
<p>Self-control, our ability to regulate our emotional and behavioural responses, is widely recognised as essential for success in <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19534590">modern organisations</a>. The origins of self-control are thought to be, at least partially, <a href="http://psycnet.apa.org/search/display?id=37888341-ac95-2732-f0f9-f8b9a564381a&recordId=1&tab=PA&page=1&display=25&sort=PublicationYearMSSort%20desc%2CAuthorSort%20asc&sr=1">biologically based</a> . So while self-control can be taught, training employees to control their behaviour in the workplace is not always easy.</p>
<p>The usual way businesses gauge employee performance is epitomised by <a href="http://www.hbs.edu/faculty/Pages/item.aspx?num=9161">Norton and Kaplan’s</a> Balanced Scorecard. The Balanced Score Card sets a range of balanced objectives that employees and teams need to meet and which cascade up through the organisation so that they are easily monitored.</p>
<p>The reliance on these tools like this can fail to identify, and even encourage poor self-control. It can create an environment of low accountability which paves the way for individuals with low self-control to reach senior leadership positions. <a href="https://www.ted.com/talks/carol_dweck_the_power_of_believing_that_you_can_improve">Research shows a focus on performance also reduces</a> the learning and development of staff, whereas a focus on effort and good process puts an organisation on a far better footing.</p>
<p>There are multiple ways to encourage self-control among employees and minimise the effect of self-control failures. </p>
<p>One is by developing a culture of participation among staff. In meetings, proper discussion can lead to successful innovation, if everyone is involved in decision making. That’s right, brain storming actually works! This is because the emphasis is on sharing ownership of problems and solutions by encouraging contribution from a diverse group of people who feel empowered to speak. </p>
<p>Mindfulness training is also widely employed to promote self control and emerging evidence suggests that it can improve <a href="http://psycnet.apa.org/record/2012-34922-001">well-being</a>. The best mindfulness training focuses on good process, reflection and questioning morality, as opposed to simply learning to be more relaxed while following the rules.</p>
<p>Effective organisations encourage self-control, good process, proper discussion and are more driven by growth mindsets than unrealistic performance metrics. The crux of the issue is that whilst performance is important, it shouldn’t come at the expense of process. Promoting and encouraging self-control amongst employees is one way to safeguard good process.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/79926/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Effective organisations encourage self-control, good process, proper discussion and are more driven by growth mindsets than unrealistic performance metrics.Chris Jackson, Professor of Business Psychology, UNSW SydneyBenjamin Walker, Postdoctoral Research Fellow in Management, UNSW SydneyElliroma Gardiner, Lecturer in Organisational Psychology, Griffith UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/808812017-07-13T20:16:20Z2017-07-13T20:16:20ZBusiness Briefing: are our standards dropping in the workplace?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/178031/original/file-20170713-11517-1mnqoqt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">How should you signal that you don't want to be disturbed?</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">www.shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Our workplaces are becoming less formal as the decor resembles what we have at home, companies relax dress codes, and technology makes it possible to work from anywhere. </p>
<p>But the old formality had some advantages, says Libby Sander from Bond University. For example, closed doors used to signal that you didn’t want to be disturbed, and suits are an easy way to look professional. </p>
<p>As Sander points out, new forms of office etiquette, such as not disturbing someone wearing headphones, are filling this void. </p>
<p>To know how to behave in this new relaxed environment, context matters, says Nicole Gillespie, an associate professor of management at the University of Queensland. This means reading the relationships you have with your co-workers and the wider culture in the office, and being aware of the effect you own actions are having.</p>
<p>Never is this more important than in cases of office profanity. It’s not uncommon to hear a bit of swearing in some workplaces, but it could get you fired in certain circumstances. As part of <a href="https://www.fwc.gov.au/documents/decisionssigned/html/2016fwc145.htm">one Fair Work Commission ruling</a>, the difference comes down to swearing in conversation, versus directly at someone.</p>
<p>“There’s a big difference between that coarse kind of conversation and aggression in someone’s tone of voice, so you’ve got to ask what the intention is,” says Simon Burgess, from the University of New England.</p>
<p>Burgess says it’s up to each of us to hone our communication skills and perhaps improve our office etiquette a bit.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/80881/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
Our workplaces are becoming less formal. But there were some advantages to the old formality.Jenni Henderson, Section Editor: Business + EconomyJosh Nicholas, Deputy Editor: Business + Economy, The ConversationNadia Isa, Editor, University of South AustraliaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/700742016-12-19T21:23:19Z2016-12-19T21:23:19ZShould we bring back the office in 2017?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/150839/original/image-20161219-24263-tp4syn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Research suggests messier desks promote better ideas and creativity. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Image sourced from Shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>It’s been quite a year. This in fact may be the understatement of the decade. As you returned to work in January, wondering what surprises lay ahead, there’s a fair chance you wouldn’t have picked many of the changes that have happened in some particularly key offices around the globe.</p>
<p>Fast forward to December, surrounded by piles of paper, empty coffee cups, tangled cords and Christmas cards as you wait desperately for 23 December to roll around, you would be forgiven if your thoughts haven’t turned to how this might help you in 2017. </p>
<p>Is there a correlation between your workspace and your career progress? What does your desk say about you? Is it time to make some changes and land that big promotion in 2017?</p>
<p>Firstly, there is a pretty good chance you don’t have your own office. If you have missed the research on the open plan epidemic and its effects, then it’s fair to say your office is a cave in Tibet. If this is the case, it’s probably very quiet with a nice view of greenery. In fact, this may sound preferable to the tinsel cascading onto your desk from your cubicle neighbour’s over zealous Christmas decorating.</p>
<p>While Sheryl Sandberg and Mark Zuckerberg have their desks right next to each other in open plan, many employees are less enthusiastic and inpsired about their workspace colleagues, with the impact of noise and loss of privacy now well <a href="https://escholarship.org/uc/item/2gq017pb">documented</a>.</p>
<p>As Donald Trump’s prepares to take over the one of the most photographed offices in the world, his own office in Trump Towers in New York has been the focus on increased interest. A recent <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com.au/items-in-donald-trumps-office-2016-11?r=US&IR=T#/#last-year-the-president-elect-broke-down-his-daily-routine-for-the-wall-street-journals-monica-langley-after-four-hours-of-sleep-he-wakes-up-at-5-am-reads-and-watches-the-news-and-heads-to-the-office-for-business-and-political-work-around-8-am-i-come-in-and-do-work-like-everyone-else-he-told-langley-1">article</a> on Trump’s office notes that the President Elect sleeps only four hours a night, wakes at 5am and heads into the office at 8am.</p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.wsj.com/video/donald-trump-tour-of-his-manhattan-office/C210A4F0-B509-4056-9EE8-0422D5F153F0.html">Wall Street Journal </a>highlighted that Trump’s desk is cluttered, piled high with papers and stacks of magazines that feature him on the cover. The walls are adorned with framed photos of more magazine covers, photos with presidents, and sporting memorabilia. In August 2015, Trump <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com.au/video-donald-trump-bald-eagle-time-magazine-2015-12?r=US&IR=T">posed for a photo</a> in his office with an enormous bald eagle named Uncle Sam.</p>
<p>Whether it be desk gnomes, signed sporting photos or photos with presidents, decorative symbols have long been used to convey an employee’s <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/job.233/full">identity in the workplace</a> and to establish status and distinctiveness. A bald eagle might be a bit much, however you may want to consider if the 12 mouldy coffee cups and empty donut boxes are conveying the image you want. A <a href="http://www.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304747404579447331212245004">study</a> found that 57% of employees admit to judging their coworkers on the state of their desks.</p>
<p>Some research even suggests that the state of your desk may influence your demeanour, with <a href="http://www.psychologicalscience.org/news/releases/tidy-desk-or-messy-desk-each-has-its-benefits.html#.WFhH6LZ94UE">research</a> finding that a clean desk promotes healthy eating, generosity and conventionality. It seems there is a balance to be had however, with messier desks promoting better ideas and creativity. </p>
<p>While Trump is unlikely to forgo a desk altogether and embrace hotdesking to save costs, if the focus is on productivity, he may wish to adopt a <a href="http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/newslocal/news/sitstand-desks-improves-health-and-productivity-sydney-university-study-reveals/news-story/fa79882b5e25fff3d83954cea6ddf183">stand-up desk</a> to increase activity and energy.</p>
<p>As you prepare to head out the door for a well earned break, without access to magazine covers of yourself or bald eagles, you may be wondering what you can do to make your desk more aligned with your career aspirations in 2017. It remains to be seen what 2017 will bring for the workplace, however clearing the coffee cups and replacing them with a <a href="http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/xap/16/2/158/">simple plant</a> or some art will at least reduce your stress.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/70074/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<h4 class="border">Disclosure</h4><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Libby Sander does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond the academic appointment above.</span></em></p>Some research suggests the state of your desk may influence your demeanour, but there’s more to office politics than that.Libby (Elizabeth) Sander, Lecturer, Bond UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/663882016-10-13T19:12:29Z2016-10-13T19:12:29ZUnhappy workplaces look a lot like unhappy marriages, new research shows<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/141168/original/image-20161011-3903-btah6v.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Employees who have a mutually loyal relationship with their employers and a balance of positive and negative emotions at work are less likely to quit.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/proimos/4045973322/">Alex Proimos/Flickr</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/">CC BY-NC</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Not all negativity in the workplace is a bad sign. Common sense says employees who describe their workplace in negative terms are the ones that are more likely to leave it, but <a href="https://scholar.google.com.au/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=89GvMqEAAAAJ&citation_for_view=89GvMqEAAAAJ:c59VksA5Vz4C">new research shows</a> this isn’t the case.</p>
<p>The study identified some forms of negativity are benign and can be tolerated, whereas others are loud and clear warning signs in terms of employee retention. Study participants were asked to describe their past experiences with the organisations they had worked for, both good and bad. </p>
<p>Three forms of negativity predicted that employees will have a greater intention to leave an organisation one year later: disappointment, strong negativity (such as anger or ridicule) and indirect negativity (like focusing on the negatives in a positive story). Other forms of negativity, like complaints, entitlement and even despair, did not.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://scholar.google.com.au/citations?view_op=view_citation&hl=en&user=89GvMqEAAAAJ&citation_for_view=89GvMqEAAAAJ:Ic1VZgkJnDsC">method used in this study</a> was adapted from a method that successfully predicts divorce. Reports on this method show that it predicts divorce with over 80%, and sometimes over 90% accuracy. Anyone who ever tried to systematically predict human behaviour knows this kind of success is very rare. </p>
<p>After more than three decades of research, the divorce prediction method is so refined, that its developer says that he can predict a divorce of a couple based on listening to the <a href="https://www.gottman.com/blog/the-research-predicting-divorce-among-newlyweds-from-the-first-three-minutes-of-a-marital-conflict-discussion/">first three minutes of an argument</a>.</p>
<p>Participants in this turnover study were first interviewed, and their their attitudes (like job satisfaction, commitment, intentions to quit, engagement, and burnout) were measured. A year later, their attitudes were measured again, and another year after that, the study looked at who left and who stayed. </p>
<p>The study found that employees who left their jobs didn’t use the following coping mechanisms: they didn’t balance the good with the bad, they didn’t genuinely accept that bad things are just part of life, they didn’t avoid lengthy discussions of the negatives and they didn’t express hope. </p>
<h2>Employment and marriage: similarities</h2>
<p>Employment and marriage are not exactly the same (for most people anyway), but they are <a href="ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1643&context=buspapers">not that different</a> either. In both cases, the parties establish mutually loyal and trusting relationships over time, based on the <a href="http://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007%2F978-1-4614-4175-5_6">exchange of resources</a>. These resources can be material (like money or goods) or social (like love, status, or information). </p>
<p>Both relationships operate based on a balance between the attractiveness of the relationship (with the <a href="http://jom.sagepub.com/content/31/6/874.short">job</a> or <a href="http://tinyurl.com/zojc7fs">spouse</a>), the attractiveness of alternatives, and barriers for leaving. Barriers can be legal, cultural, financial, or practical – either in a marriage or a job.</p>
<p>The predictions of employees who leave organisations in this research are very similar to predictors of divorce. <a href="http://bit.ly/2dKFC4D">Past research</a> has shown that when there are forms of negativity in a marriage, like disappointment, withdrawal, hostility, or contempt, you know the couple is at a high risk of divorce. Couples who not only accept their struggles but <a href="http://tinyurl.com/zs9k3jq">even celebrate them</a> remain happily married, and so do couples who <a href="http://samples.sainsburysebooks.co.uk/9781136175664_sample_720717.pdf">successfully avoid conflict</a>. </p>
<p>Research on divorce also demonstrated another way to know if a marriage is in trouble - looking at the emotions the couple displays when they fight. Couples stay happily married if they show at least five times more positive emotions than they show negative ones when they fight. </p>
<p>There was similar evidence in the study on employees, but with a lower ratio: employees who showed at least two-to-one positive to negative emotions when they talked about their past in the organisation generally had better attitudes towards their work and their organisation. </p>
<p>One major difference between the way things work in marriage and with employment is empathy. When couples express empathy for one another, that is generally a good sign, but when employees use empathy to cope with things they do not like at their work, this actually predicts worse job outcomes. </p>
<p>Employees who empathise to cope with negative feelings about their jobs were less satisfied with their job and less committed to it a year later. This could be because employees’ empathy means that they have accepted that this problem will not change, and they are willing to move on – but not out of anger.</p>
<h2>How to reduce employee turnover</h2>
<p>This research basically shows that employment and marriage work in similar ways. What this means for employers is that they can use the same tools that save a marriage to increase their employee retention rates. Basically, the research shows that for a relationship to survive, there needs to be a balance of positive and negative emotions. </p>
<p>If you want to keep your employees, you need to either reduce the negative emotions, or increase positive emotions they experience at work. What creates positive or negative emotions varies from one employee to another, so it’s important to know what works for yours.</p>
<p>Knowing this, one thing to do is to avoid destructive negative behaviours, like contempt, hostility and withdrawal. This can be pretty hard to do and impossible to enforce. </p>
<p>Positive psychology, however, teaches us that the best way to fight dark emotions is by increasing the light. In the same way, relationships research found an effective way for increasing positive emotions: gratitude. </p>
<p>People who expressed gratitude towards others felt that their relationship with the others were <a href="http://pss.sagepub.com/content/early/2010/03/01/0956797610364003.full">stronger</a>. When people actually felt this gratitude, and not only expressed it, their spouses echo this gratitude with <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886910005088">greater satisfaction</a>. </p>
<p>So a good step forward to increasing employee retention is to start saying “thank you,” and mean it.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/66388/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Irit Alony receives funding from The University of Wollongong and CSIRO.
</span></em></p>New research used a method that predicts divorce to pick up the signs that an employee will stay or leave their job.Irit Alony, Relationships at work, University of WollongongLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/624082016-08-17T01:38:19Z2016-08-17T01:38:19ZHere’s what coworkers think when you suck up to your boss<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/132604/original/image-20160801-17037-13uca9b.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Do you really?</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Boss mug via www.shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Few employees would deny that ingratiation is ubiquitous in the workplace. </p>
<p>This behavior goes by many names – kissing up, sucking up, brown-nosing and ass-kissing. Indeed, the fact that there are so many names that describe this behavior suggests that it’s <a href="http://www.annualreviews.org/doi/abs/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-041015-062337">something that goes on all the time</a> at work.</p>
<p>Ingratiation is <a href="http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/apl/94/6/1394/">defined</a> as the use of certain positive behaviors such as flattery, doing favors or conforming to another’s opinions <a href="http://orm.sagepub.com/content/2/2/187.short">to get someone else to like you</a>. This behavior is especially common when employees interact with a supervisor <a href="http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1994-98598-000">because of the latter’s status</a> and <a href="http://amj.aom.org/content/58/6/1637.short">control over important work resources</a>, including job assignments, responsibilities, pay and <a href="http://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/26015119/media-f7b-97-randd-leaders-business-yukl.pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAJ56TQJRTWSMTNPEA&Expires=1469825619&Signature=wH2Cwrigzxzw%2FnO7dnOGkTYRbwA%3D&response-content-disposition=inline%3B%20filename%3DLeadership_in_organizations.pdf">promotions</a>.</p>
<p>So we all know that this goes on all the time, but what do we really understand about how these behaviors operate at work?</p>
<p>While social influence behaviors like ingratiation are typically thought of as a dyadic phenomenon (that is, involving two people – the ingratiator and the ingratiated), these behaviors are actually embedded in a much more complex and dynamic work environment, which includes many other people. </p>
<p>To get a clearer picture of how these behaviors operate, my colleague and I <a href="http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/2016-37460-001/">examined how they work from a third party’s point of view</a> – that is, how do observers of sucking up to a boss process it? </p>
<h2>Ass-kissing works</h2>
<p>We do know a few things about how ingratiation works in the workplace. </p>
<p>First of all, we know that <a href="http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/apl/75/5/487/">these behaviors are effective</a>. That is, targets of ingratiation tend to like to be sucked up to, and they tend to form more positive opinions of those doing the sucking up. </p>
<p>So is it all positive news for the ingratiator? No, not really. </p>
<p>We also know that <a href="http://search.proquest.com/openview/b156319506b03760ecb0a7947dec3756/1?pq-origsite=gscholar">observers of this behavior</a> <a href="http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/psp/70/6/1164/">tend to dislike</a> the <a href="http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/psp/74/4/849/">ingratiator</a>. That is, when we see a coworker kissing up to a supervisor, we tend to dislike that colleague and view him or her less favorably. </p>
<p>What is not clear, and what we set out to explore in this project, was how observers of ingratiation felt about the target. In other words, if we see someone sucking up to our supervisor at work, does that affect our opinion of that supervisor? </p>
<h2>Ingratiation: Social or unsavory?</h2>
<p>Ingratiation represents a challenging phenomenon from a social influence perspective, because the cues it sends are technically positive, but unsavory and negative aspects accompany the activity. </p>
<p>That is, when a coworker sucks up to a supervisor, he or she is saying positive things about that person and sending positive signals about him or her. </p>
<p>“I really like your tie,” “Wow, that was a really great idea” and “That’s exactly how I would have done it, great job, boss” are all examples of ingratiation that send others positive signals about the supervisor. </p>
<p>However, there are also aspects of ingratiation that suggest that observers wouldn’t infer positive things about the supervisor because of these signals. Most notably, <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/s15324834basp2004_1">when we know </a>a behavior is false or feigned, <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022103104001192">we tend to discount it</a>. Since ingratiation is specifically performed to earn another’s liking, it isn’t genuine. </p>
<p>That means we have a challenging phenomenon for observers - they are getting positive signals about the boss but in a way that suggests these signals may not be real. </p>
<p>So how will other employees interpret these signals?</p>
<h2>Newcomers are more susceptible</h2>
<p>What we find in this study is that it depends on the employee. </p>
<p>Specifically, we find that newcomers are in a unique position when it comes to observing ingratiation, and they are much more likely to interpret it as a positive signal about the supervisor. Newcomers, who know very little about the supervisor, <a href="http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/psp/80/6/931">are motivated to learn</a> about the boss any way they can. And thus they are more likely to disregard the aspects of ingratiation that suggest that it’s fake and interpret it as being a positive signal about the boss. </p>
<p>In a series of studies, we found that when participants were in the role of newcomers, they regularly formed more positive impressions of supervisors whom they saw being ingratiated. Even when these participants knew a little bit about the supervisor before observing the ingratiation, they still formed more positive impressions. </p>
<p>However, when participants took the role of contractors who had no need to learn about the supervisor because he had no control over their work outcomes this effect disappeared. Observing ingratiation had no effect on non-newcomers’ impressions of the supervisor.</p>
<h2>Lessons for supervisors</h2>
<p>In another study, we examined what role supervisor behavior could play in this phenomenon. </p>
<p>In this study, some participants (“newcomers” to the job) saw an interaction in which a supervisor was kissed up to by an employee and some witnessed the same interaction minus the ingratiation. Then some participants saw a supervisor react by behaving positively toward the ingratiating employee, and others saw the supervisor react in a neutral way. </p>
<p>What we found was that when the supervisor behaved positively by calling the coworker a “good guy” and suggesting that they worked well together, the influence of the ingratiation had almost no effect on observers’ impressions. In other words, when the supervisor signaled that he or she had good qualities by acting in ways suggesting he or she genuinely liked the coworker, onlookers automatically felt positively about him or her, and the observed ingratiation had no influence. The impact of the ingratiation was overridden by the supervisor’s own genuinely positive behaviors. </p>
<p>This suggests that newcomers prefer direct information from the supervisor when forming opinions about the supervisor, but in the absence of this information they will use observed ingratiation as a substitute for direct information.</p>
<h2>Putting it all together</h2>
<p>The results of our study mean a few things. </p>
<p>They suggest that impression management behaviors are actually much more complicated than we realize. We typically think of these behaviors as being episodes between two people (the ingratiator and the target). But what we found here is that these behaviors have more complex effects and actually influence the opinions of those who observe them. </p>
<p>Ingratiation is typically thought of as a behavior that actors use to get others to like them. But what we show here is that this can actually be used as a strategy to get others to like others, as in this case a coworker is able to make someone new form a favorable impression of the boss. </p>
<p>So if a supervisor wants a new employee to like him or her, a realistic strategy may be for him to have another employee kiss up in front of the newcomer. This strategy should be used with caution, however, because of the known damage this behavior can have to the ingratiator (remember – we don’t like ingratiators).</p>
<p>This study also shows both the preference for direct information when forming impressions of others and what we’ll do in the absence of direct information. When supervisors displayed genuinely positive behaviors, participants preferred to use that information to form their impressions, and they discounted the indirect information obtained from the ingratiation episode, showing that we prefer direct information. </p>
<p>However, absent that information, we’ll take what we can get. And even though ingratiation isn’t perfect, and even though we know it’s fake, if we don’t have anything better and we want to form an impression of the supervisor, we’ll use this imperfect information in the same way we would have used direct signals from the supervisor.</p>
<p>
<section class="inline-content">
<img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/275743/original/file-20190521-23817-1fnbziu.png?w=128&h=128">
<div>
<header></header>
<p><a href="http://aom.org/">Trevor Foulk is a member of the Academy of Management</a></p>
<footer>The academy is a funding partner of The Conversation US.</footer>
</div>
</section>
</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/62408/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Trevor Foulk is an Academy of Management scholar.</span></em></p>What happens when you ‘brown-nose’ your boss is more complicated than you think – and can change how she’s perceived by colleagues.Trevor Foulk, Doctoral Student, University of FloridaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/589942016-05-18T01:21:00Z2016-05-18T01:21:00ZMillennials at work don’t see themselves as millennials<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/122442/original/image-20160513-18962-sywgcm.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Millennials at work just want to be treated as professionals.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Rowan Farrell/ITU/Flickr</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Reading the headlines on <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/23/fashion/an-online-generation-redefines-mourning.html?hpw&rref=fashion&_r=1">Gen Y</a>, <a href="http://fortune.com/2015/04/22/as-a-millennial-how-do-i-understand-and-work-with-a-gen-x-er/">Gen X</a> and <a href="http://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2016/05/11/millennials-place-worklife-balance-before-career-progression-infographic/#21d68dca1aa1">millennials</a> it’s clear many people believe distinct generational categories exist, that there are very real differences between them, and that organisations must manage these differences. Others <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/04/why-are-the-baby-boomers-desperate-to-make-us-millennials-hate-ourselves">write articles</a> claiming there is <a href="https://theconversation.com/millennials-v-baby-boomers-a-battle-we-could-have-done-without-57305">battle</a> raging between one generation and another. </p>
<p>But there is very little empirical evidence to substantiate most claims about generational differences. In fact, an increasing amount of work published in recent years has begun to question the <a href="http://oss.sagepub.com/content/35/11/1569.abstract">veracity of generational research</a>. </p>
<p>Young professionals are often expected to start first, work through lunch, leave last, and yet get paid the least. Despite this, critique of youth is a recurring pattern throughout Western history. While many people born before 1980 seem ready to bemoan the apparent shortcomings of millennials, or those “bloody Gen Ys”, they seem to forget that people said the same thing about them when they were growing up. </p>
<p>So it becomes important to ask, when people are talking about “kids these days”, are they really talking about the kids, or are they taking part in a millennia-old tradition of criticising youth? And amid all the chatter, why is it that the one group of people who are (somewhat ironically) not asked to figure out what it means to be young at work, is the young at work?</p>
<h2>What young people think</h2>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/122443/original/image-20160513-18937-119662s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/122443/original/image-20160513-18937-119662s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/122443/original/image-20160513-18937-119662s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/122443/original/image-20160513-18937-119662s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/122443/original/image-20160513-18937-119662s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/122443/original/image-20160513-18937-119662s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/122443/original/image-20160513-18937-119662s.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Too harsh?</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Mark & Andrea Busse/Flickr</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/">CC BY-NC-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Last year I spent three months interviewing young professionals in the advertising industry in Sydney about what age and generations meant to them at work. </p>
<p>Interviews were framed as a discussion about their experiences and perspectives of being young in the industry. In the later stages of the interview, I would ask participants if they were familiar with the term “generations” and asked them what it meant to them. </p>
<p>I found that while young professionals knew that people categorised them as millennials, or Gen Ys, and they knew that these were categories they fell into, they did not see themselves as millennials or Gen Ys. This was the case for many participants. One was Kathryn, who when asked if she had heard the term generation and what it meant to her replied:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>“That term annoys me because I am supposed to be Gen Y and if you read everything that is about Gen Y then it’s not really how I see myself, and I don’t like the fact that you have the boxes you have to fit in.”</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Kathryn’s response was similar to many participants who saw generational categories, such as Gen Y or millennials as a quite negative stereotype. Participants who said they were familiar with generational archetypes were asked whether they associated or identified themselves with a generation. Participants such as Christine explained how in the context of work, the most important thing was attitude, personality, and how you treat others. </p>
<blockquote>
<p>“No, I think more important than generation is or, I guess, more important than an age, or being defined by your age is your behaviour and I mean, and I think whether you are coming into a new job at 20, or 30 or 50, I think it’s more about the way you present yourself and your attitudes towards the job more that, that has more impact on anyone than age, personally, that’s my personal opinion. And I mean, that is always the way that I have always tried to sort of portray myself, I don’t portray myself as this young, 20 year old that has no idea what I want to do, you know I, I work hard to prove myself, and you know, and I think people look more favourably at that.”</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Interestingly, participants like Christine alluded to the concern about being labelled as young, which could undermine their credibility. Because of this, many actively worked to avoid portraying themselves as such. </p>
<p>Almost all of participants expressed similar sentiment, that while they knew other people considered them a Gen Y, this was not who they felt they were – they just wanted to work hard, prove themselves, and be a part of a team. While this study was only small, the data would suggest that, at the very least, not all millennials are millennials as we think we know them.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/58994/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Steven David Hitchcock does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>There is very little empirical evidence to substantiate most claims about generational differences.Steven David Hitchcock, Tutor in Work and Organizational Studies, University of SydneyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.