When we see wrongdoing at work, the temptation to look away is strong. To report wrongdoing can entail risk of retaliation, risk to relationships, risk of termination, and even risk to life and limb. But these are only the most evident risks. Less evident are the risks of looking the other away, which vary with the nature of the wrongdoing. Here are some of those risks.
- Discrimination
- Unfair treatment based on race, religion, sex, age, sexual orientation, or ethnicity implies two things. First, it weakens the organization, which is deprived of contributions it pays for. Second, since you yourself have a race, a religion, a sex, and so on, you could be next.
- Cronyism
- The risks of looking away
can be just as serious as
the risks of taking action - Although rarely formal, cronyism is a form of tribalism. When people make decisions based on tribalism, rather than on the merits, decision quality suffers. And because those in the excluded tribes feel frozen out, they're more likely to move on — possibly to a competitor.
- Bullying
- Bullies use coercion to control the behavior of both targets and bystanders, which inevitably deprives the organization of contributions that would otherwise be available. Bullying might even drive some out of the organization. When bystanders are decision makers, bullies can affect the course of the enterprise.
- Theft and goldbricking
Theft from the company, or its cousin, goldbricking, hurts the company economically. Damage arises both from the actual losses and from the security measures that are deployed to control those losses. Theft and goldbricking can jeopardize the company's financial health, and thus the job security of the employees.
- Sexual, political, or religious harassment
- Harassment intended to procure favors, contributions, or espousal of belief can also distort organizational posture. When we make decisions on the basis of personal beliefs, biases, or proclivities, we enhance the likelihood of acting contrary to the interests of the organization and its stakeholders.
When we look the other way, there's a good chance that we're acting unethically, but deciding that question can get pretty sticky. It's usually much easier to decide whether inaction ultimately leads to harm to the organization or to ourselves. When patterns of wrongdoing become entrenched, the organization risks eclipse by a healthier one, and it risks forcible transformation by regulatory authorities or stakeholders.
Still, taking individual direct action might not be a smart course, because the offenders can retaliate. A bully or harasser might turn on you, or if management is involved, reporting the problem could be career suicide. But looking away can create ethical problems, and hanging around could be a kind of career suicide that just takes longer. If you have no option that leads to effective change, consider moving on. The sooner the better. Top
Next Issue
The article you've been reading is an archived issue of Point Lookout, my weekly newsletter. I've been publishing it since January, 2001, free to all subscribers, over the Web, and via RSS. You can help keep it free by donating either as an individual or as an organization. You'll receive in return my sincere thanks — and the comfort of knowing that you've helped to propagate insights and perspectives that can help make our workplaces a little more human-friendly. More
For information about fairness issues in the workplace, check out WorkplaceFairness.org.
Your comments are welcome
Would you like to see your comments posted here? rbrendPtoGuFOkTSMQOzxner@ChacEgGqaylUnkmwIkkwoCanyon.comSend me your comments by email, or by Web form.About Point Lookout
Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and
found it useful, and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.
This article in its entirety was written by a human being. No machine intelligence was involved in any way.
Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive of past issues. Subscribe for free.
Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout, as an individual or as an organization.
Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in, anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.
Related articles
More articles on Workplace Bullying:
Hurtful Clichés: I
- Much of our day-to-day conversation consists of harmless clichés: "How goes it?" or
"Nice to meet you." Some other clichés aren't harmless, but they're so common that
we use them without thinking. Maybe it's time for some thought.
Responding to Threats: III
- Workplace threats come in a variety of flavors. One class of threats is indirect. Threateners who use
the indirect threats aim to evoke fear of consequences brought about not by the threatener, but by other
parties. Indirect threats are indeed warnings, but not in the way you might think.
When the Chair Is a Bully: III
- When the chair of the meeting is so dominant that attendees withhold comments or slant contributions
to please the chair, meeting output is at risk of corruption. Because chairs usually can retaliate against
attendees who aren't "cooperative," this problem is difficult to address. Here's Part III
of our exploration of the problem of bully chairs.
Power Mobbing at Work
- Mobbing is a form of group bullying of an individual — the target. Power mobbing occurs when a
politically powerful person orchestrates the mobbing. It's a form of bullying that's especially harmful
to the target and the organization.
Online Ethics
- The array of media for exchanging our thoughts in text has created new opportunities for acting unethically.
Cyberbullying is one well-known example. But sending text is just one way to cross the line ethically.
Here are some examples of alternatives.
See also Workplace Bullying and Ethics at Work for more related articles.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
Coming July 3: Additive bias…or Not: II
- Additive bias is a cognitive bias that many believe contributes to bloat of commercial products. When we change products to make them more capable, additive bias might not play a role, because economic considerations sometimes favor additive approaches. Available here and by RSS on July 3.
And on July 10: On Delegating Accountability: I
- As the saying goes, "You can't delegate your own accountability." Despite wide knowledge of this aphorism, people try it from time to time, especially when overcome by the temptation of a high-risk decision. What can you delegate, and how can you do it? Available here and by RSS on July 10.
Coaching services
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrendPtoGuFOkTSMQOzxner@ChacEgGqaylUnkmwIkkwoCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.
Get the ebook!
Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:
- Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, )
- Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, )
- Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, )
- Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, )
- Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, )
- Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, )
Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline? Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500-1000 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info
Follow Rick
![Send email or subscribe to one of my newsletters](../images/social-icons/email-32.png)
![Follow me at LinkedIn](../images/social-icons/linkedin-reg-32.png)
![Follow me at X, or share a post](../images/social-icons/x-32.png)
![Subscribe to RSS feeds](../images/social-icons/feed-icon-32.png)
![Subscribe to RSS feeds](../images/social-icons/facebook-icon-32.png)
Recommend this issue to a friend
Send an email message to a friend
rbrendPtoGuFOkTSMQOzxner@ChacEgGqaylUnkmwIkkwoCanyon.comSend a message to Rick
A Tip A Day feed
Point Lookout weekly feed
![Technical Debt for Policymakers Blog](../images/logos/techdebtpolicy-logo-sm-1.png)