An Introduction to Workplace Ostracism

Perhaps the most common form of workplace ostracism is the isolation tactic used by some bullies against their targets. To employ the tactic, bullies induce their allies to systematically avoid interacting with their targets. The bullies demand that their allies withhold information from their targets, preventing them from attending or even knowing about meetings or upcoming deadlines or opportunities. The goal is to harm the targets emotionally, causing them to withdraw socially, or even better, to strike out against the bullies' allies, which then enhances the targets' social isolation. It's a painful experience for all.

But workplace ostracism has many forms. In terms of the enterprise mission, most of these forms are unhelpful. Understanding ostracism and recognizing it in all its forms can enhance social harmony and make the enterprise more productive.

Not all incidents of excluding or ignoring an individual from an activity constitute ostracism. Two attributes distinguish malignant ostracism from benign exclusion or ignoring.

Expectation of inclusion

There must be a general expectation that the excluded individual would otherwise be included in the activity. Such an expectation on the part of any individual is not enough. For example, we would not characterize as ostracized any individual who expected to be included, but was not, unless such expectation was reasonable and widespread among the larger group.

Intentional exclusion

The exclusion or ignoring of the individual must have occurred as a result of a deliberate and conscious choice to exclude the individual so as to make a statement about the individual's rights, abilities, or worth. An accidental omission from an invitation list to join a task force would not be sufficient evidence of ostracism.

But intention Understanding ostracism
and recognizing it in all its
forms can enhance social
harmony and make the
enterprise more productiveto exclude is not sufficient to confirm ostracism. The intention must be such as to cause harm to the target. For example, at times, in some over-constrained situations, we cannot devise a schedule that enables everyone to participate in a given event or series of events. We might then intentionally schedule an event knowing that the schedule will cause a certain individual to be excluded. But because we did not intend harm to that individual, the exclusion is not ostracism.

Understanding these two attributes is helpful in noticing what is (and what is not) ostracism and in devising responses to those observations.

As the excluded individual

If you perceive or suspect that you're being ostracized, take an inventory of the evidence. What data do you have that supports the idea that you were excluded intentionally, and excluded so as to harm you? Are you certain that the exclusion isn't the result of a simple error? Are you certain that the exclusion was unavoidable? Feeling excluded is painful. You can ease the pain somewhat, or even completely, if you can find convincing evidence that the exclusion was benign.

As one of the group excluding an individual

Mistakes happen and scheduling can be difficult. But when someone is excluded by accident or constraint, pain is avoidable. Act preemptively to reduce the risk that the excluded people might feel ostracized. Explain what happened and ask for permission to apologize for the exclusion. And make certain that the slight is not repeated.

When the exclusion is ostracism, the temptation to lie about it — to falsely deny it — can be overwhelming for the people who ostracized someone. Claiming that the exclusion was a mistake, or that it was unavoidable, when in fact it was neither, risks compounding the offense by implying that the person ostracized is also naïve enough to accept such transparently false excuses. Work out whatever problems led to the incident. It's hard work. But failing to do that work only makes the situation more difficult.

Because human society is so complex and rich, workplace ostracism appears in many forms, and can arise in many ways. Watch for it. Watch even more closely for innocent situations that seem to involve ostracizing someone, but which are nothing of the kind.  Top    Next Issue

Is every other day a tense, anxious, angry misery as you watch people around you, who couldn't even think their way through a game of Jacks, win at workplace politics and steal the credit and glory for just about everyone's best work including yours? Read 303 Secrets of Workplace Politics, filled with tips and techniques for succeeding in workplace politics. More info

Your comments are welcome

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 Project Management:

Personnel-Sensitive Risks: I

Some risks and the plans for managing them are personnel-sensitive in the sense that disclosure can harm the enterprise or its people. Since most risk management plans are available to a broad internal audience, personnel-sensitive risks cannot be managed in the customary way. Why not?

Scope Creep and Confirmation Bias

As we've seen, some cognitive biases can contribute to the incidence of scope creep in projects and other efforts. Confirmation bias, which causes us to prefer evidence that bolsters our preconceptions, is one of these.

Ten Approaches to Managing Project Risks: III

Project risk management strategies are numerous, but these ten strategies are among the most common. Here are the last three of the ten strategies in this little catalog.

Wishful Thinking and Perception: II

Continuing our exploration of causes of wishful thinking and what we can do about it, here's Part II of a little catalog of ways our preferences and wishes affect our perceptions.

How We Waste Time: I

Time is the one workplace resource that's evenly distributed. Everyone gets exactly the same share, but some use it more wisely than others. Here's Part I of a little catalog of ways we waste time.

See also Project Management and Project Management for more related articles.

Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout

Coming February 26: Devious Political Tactics: Bad Decisions

When workplace politics influences the exchanges that lead to important organizational decisions, we sometimes make decisions for reasons other than the best interests of the organization. Recognizing these tactics can limit the risk of bad decisions. Available here and by RSS on February 26.

And on March 5: On Begging the Question

Some of our most expensive wrong decisions have come about because we've tricked ourselves as we debated our options. The tricks sometimes arise from rhetorical fallacies that tangle our thinking. One of the trickiest is called Begging the Question. Available here and by RSS on March 5.

Coaching services

I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrenjTnUayrCbSnnEcYfner@ChacdcYpBKAaMJgMalFXoCanyon.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