Why definitions are important
Bullying and harassment are high octane words. They set off alarm bells…, or they should, unless people use them so indiscriminately that they become meaningless.
This is what tends to happen in organisations that have no policy and do not educate their staff about what bullying or harassment is and what these things are not.
In this environment two things happen: Firstly, people decide for themselves what bullying is, and this can be very different depending on who you are talking to.
Secondly, genuine bullying and harassment become protected under a hazy shadow of ignorance and indifference, and people get away with it because managers lack the conviction and courage to try and deal with it. Ignorance is not bliss.
This is why a good definition is important. It helps to differentiate what and what is not bullying or harassment and clarifies what is acceptable and unacceptable.
However, not all definitions are useful. In my experience as a bullying and harassment consultant over 25 years, I find people mostly do not understand how to define bullying or harassment. I hear them say:
“If someone says they feel bullied or harassed then they must be right.”
I disagree. Feeling bullied is not actually a thing. A person might feel hurt, anxious, angry, terrified, or sad, but ‘bullied’ is not a feeling. It is a judgement or assessment a person makes. They can be mistaken. This is why a technical definition is important.
Some definitions are technical and some are descriptive. What’s the difference?
A descriptive definition is one that provides some information but is woefully deficient at creating a standard by which an investigator can differentiate between bullying and not bullying. Here is a common descriptive definition that has been used in the past. “Bullying is the repetitive, intentional hurting of one person or group by another person or group, where the relationship involves an imbalance of power.”
This definition describes some aspects of bullying but is useless to an investigator who is investigating a complaint of bullying. Why? How can you determine that someone was intending to hurt someone else?
Many bullies are not consciously aware they are hurting someone when they act out. Many don’t at all consider the pain they inflict. That’s exactly how they keep going on and doing it. In my experience, bullies and harassers are more focused on taking control and maintaining their own sense of entitlement. This statement also enables bullies and harassers to avoid being accountable because they can claim that they never intended to be hurtful, therefore the definition doesn’t apply to them. That’s a convenient escape hatch.
Also, the notion that bullying is about a relationship that involves an imbalance of power? What does that even mean? What is meant by power? Does this mean that a person can only be bullied by someone above them in the authority chain of an organisation? What about people who bully upwards or horizontally?
So, in my view, this definition is poor. These types of definitions are confusing and may mean one thing to one person and another thing to someone else. They are not helpful in clarifying what is and isn’t bullying.
Here’s a technical definition:
“Workplace bullying is repeated and unreasonable behaviour directed towards an employee, or a group of employees that can cause physical or mental harm.”
An investigator can work with this because it has some clear elements that defines bullying:
Bullying involves repeated behaviour not a single incident
Bullying involves unreasonable behaviour not reasonable management actions
Bullying is behaviour directed toward an employee or group of employees not a feeling or a nebulous, generalised notion
Bullying is behaviour serious enough that can cause physical or mental harm rather than something minor or superficial
This is the New Zealand and Australian WORKSAFE definition and it is useful for managers, investigators and those who have responsibility to maintain a safe working environment.
Clarifying the difference between “bullying” and “not bullying” is important. Rudeness might and might not be bullying. Incivility might and might not be bullying. Putting pressure on people to perform might not be bullying if it is reasonable management action. Single incidents of unreasonable behaviour do not amount to bullying.
Definitions are important. Accuracy is important. People in organisations need to be trained to understand what bullying/harassment is and isn’t. This clarity helps everyone draw the same line and reach a common understanding. This enables people to apply a check on behaviour.
Hadyn Olsen. WAVE. www.wave.org.nz