Damian Stoupe’s afternoon workshop provided no space for a post-lunch slump as we were encouraged to look at our own shadow side and consider our own experiences as bullies/displaying bullying behaviour or how we’d feel if accused of being bully. Uncomfortable stuff, but important too to recognise the ways in which the terminology surrounding bullying in workplace policies, online and in the mainstream media, has a tendency to demonise bullies when, in fact, much of the time they could be you or I. Damian highlighted how the bully within us does not n go away – but our awareness of it is what helps to change things – primarily our behaviour, thus demonstrating the important role of interventions such as counselling, coaching or mediation.
Showing grotesque imaging of bullying caricatures Damian further illustrated how frequently messages are communicated that the bully is ‘other’ to ourselves – barely human in some depictions. Focussing on the language we use when talking about bullying, Damian proposed that a rethinking of terminology is needed – from bully to ‘the accused’, from victim to ‘the recipient’. Wherever we are in the organisation, when working with the accused, the problem is not the person it’s the behaviour that is the problem and that is where the focus needs to be.
Drawing on the work of Australian clinical psychologies Keryl Egan, he offered three categories instantly more recognisable in my experience of workplace bullying:
- 'Accidental' bullies, who bully under stress
- 'Narcissistic' bullies, who lash out when their self esteem is challenged
- 'Psychopathic' bullies, who set out to destroy anyone who gets in their way.
Some discussion followed about how the accidental bully appeared to be the most present in the workplace, generally unaware of his/her behaviour and its impact, keen to get the job done and capable of responding to coaching/counselling intervention. It was also a point of discussion within the group that some individuals in the workplace may work their way through the categories of ‘bully’ as their career progresses.
Budget cuts, lack of resources, a target driven ethos and a competitive environment can all foster an organisational culture that colludes with bullying and sees it as a legitimised form of ‘robust management’. Damian pointed out how some individuals, uncomfortable with their developing self, may hit a point of inner conflict where they have to make a choice about how they behave/continue to behave which is asking ‘Am I going this way or that?’ and deciding which ‘self’ is going to dominate, both inside and outside the workplace.
In this workshop and elsewhere on the day, there were references to television/reality shows all of which depict bullying behaviour for the sake of entertainment – from The Apprentice and Dragon’s Den to Hell’s Kitchen. The perpetual question was ‘Do we endorse bullying behaviour by watching these programmes?’ I’m not going to attempt to answer that here, but the conference was certainly a space where a wide range of views was voiced and there was a sense of some unease among delegates about this pattern.
From Sarah Prince: Counselling at Work Winter 2008 Pg16-17 :ACW Conference 2007: Delegate Feedback 2
Damian Stoupe challenged us to visit and revisit some of our beliefs and thoughts about ‘bullies’ and ‘victims’ and to explore the stereotypes and traditional ways of dealing with each. Research has shown that removing emotive words from policy documents and working practices allows incidents to be managed without such pejorative terms. For example for ‘victim’ use ‘recipient’, for ‘bully’ use ‘the accused’.
Damian skilfully encouraged participants of this workshop to explore their own feelings around bullying, being bullied and working with bullies and in a way turned the tables on the received wisdom of current practice. He pointed out for example, that an employer’s duty of care extends equally to the bully, yet most interventions focus on the recipient. A simple but effective approach, Damian suggested, was to focus on the problem not the personalities, and support and engage both parties. Not forgetting that organisations can become ‘systemic’ bullies and while acknowledging culture is difficult to change, more positive language would be helpful along with further research.