How does the elephant in the living room end up on the couch, confident of its right not only to be there, but also its access and acquisition to all the best snacks. The answer is easy. It’s because it had a printed invitation otherwise known as an employment application or a request for proposals.
As a consultant in the nonprofit sector for over 30 years, I’ve seen lots of elephants. I have wondered why many organizations continue to ignore those elephants despite the overwhelming smell of peanut breath. It’s not just nonprofit organizations. The business and political sectors are vulnerable as well, and it can be destructive and limiting.
Unfortunately, the social norms in much of the world have developed a frightening trend of appeasing toxic and unreasonable people. I guess it makes sense. Crossing someone not bound by integrity and honesty frequently ensures that those who dare question the elephant are punished or made to look guilty. There is a reasonable fear factor. An ignored truth is that an individual or group who causes fear are the very ones that must be faced and addressed before a toxic tumor threatens the organization’s very existence.
Some toxic situations develop innocently because of conflict of personality types, misunderstandings, individuals with unresolved issues, or external pressures. These require leadership to make honest assessments and seek effective solutions.
A sure sign of a toxic element within an organization or group is a constant revolving door of quality employees or contractors who arrive enthusiastic and dedicated to the stated mission of the organization or business. They don’t stay long in a toxic environment. Healthy and productive people are drawn to healthy and productive environments. When quality and talented individuals find themselves in a bad environment, they start looking for a better work life.
If leadership suspects dominant toxicity within their business, they might check if any of the following scenarios sound familiar.
- Your organization regularly recruits good people, but they arrive enthused and leave disgusted in a relatively short time causing an ongoing “revolving door.”
- Territoriality becomes more important than team support of the mission.
- Criticism is a constant in your organization, frequently originating from people who will not allow any criticism of themselves.
- When researched one sees conflict between individuals which originates from a third party, and that third party is almost always ancillary to every interpersonal conflict.
Creating and maintaining a healthy workplace requires sensitivity to the human element. Too often managers, directors, and owners are ready and willing to respond quickly to equipment or facility malfunctions, but some assume that the human element should simply function effectively no matter the social and emotional environment of the workplace. Being a successful business is not only about bottom line and sales statistics. Yes, caring about employees is the “right” thing to do, also it’s a critical component of a successful and sustainable business.
What may one ask, is a “toxic” person. There is a trend in understanding narcissism, a drastic form of toxicity, but there is a broad spectrum of personality traits that may affect the level of toxicity within an organization.
In The World of Psychology Margarita Tartakovsky, MS writes, “Often the person is deeply wounded and for whatever reason, they are not yet able to take responsibility for their wounding, their feelings, their needs and their subsequent problems in life.”
Be aware that almost everyone has committed toxic behaviors at some time or another. Determining if there is a systemic problem in the workplace involves identification not just of specific behaviors and individual problems. Long-range toxicity involves established patterns over time. While working with diversity programs with the Association of Fundraising Professionals International, our committee sometimes reviewed the psychologically recognized roles played by members of dysfunctional families. Our assumption was that the traits and practices within a family likely also applies to the “family” of workers, volunteers, and people served by the nonprofit sector. Typical roles and behaviors include:
- The Good Child – Also known as the Hero
- The Problem Child or Rebel (Scapegoat) – Blamed for everything
- The Caretaker – Takes emotional responsibility for family
- The Lost Child – Ignored or hidden
- The Mascot – Uses humor to distract from dysfunction
- The Mastermind – Opportunist usually appeased by authority
Within a toxic environment, I have observed there is frequently a sense of injustice. In some cases, there may be an individual who subtly encourages conflicts between others. While I can’t tell specifics, over the years I have been called to help organizations where, when the situation was reviewed and analyzed, an individual was doing questionable acts, but managed to direct attention to other conflicts. In doing so, it was easier to hide their own misdeeds.
If a manager or owner suspects that toxicity damages their business, there are some important things to remember. It may be wise to bring in a professional who can see the situation with fresh eyes and can be better suited to “say the hard stuff.” Although it is critical to face and deal with problems, including individual behaviors, the reality is there may be legal ramifications. If a business doesn’t have a set policy about dealing with destructive behaviors, it’s wise to develop one including procedures for documenting and counseling employee behaviors.
In closing, I offer a piece of wisdom that has helped me deal with difficult decisions throughout life. While the human tendency is to identify who to blame and who should be vindicated. It is far easier to create effective change, if the situation is viewed as cause and effect rather than blame and vindication. If a toxic individual is repeatedly held accountable for provable damaging behavior, in time they will either change or leave. Problem solved.
