This week is anti bullying week and while the media has focused on the plight of children who are bullied at school, the unfortunate fact is that bullying behaviour doesn't stop after GCSEs.
Unison estimate up to five million workers are bullied at work each year and developments in technology have meant that 'cyber bullying' is on the increase. A survey of over 1000 employees found that one in five had been bullied by e-mail, and one in twenty by text message.
From a psychological view point this isn't surprising. Research shows that people are more likely to lie, be rude and aggressive when they are on the phone versus being face to face - there is more distance and greater anonymity. In cyber space the distance and anonymity is increased further; bullies can't see or hear the distress of their victims, nor gauge the impact of their actions.
In addition, the technology involved in cyber bullying means that the impact on the victim can be much greater than more traditional forms of bullying:
The speed and ease with which we can communicate with a large number of people means that the bully's message can be delivered to devastating effect. For example, in one company a revealing photograph of a worker was circulated to all its staff via e-mail; this just simply wouldn't have been possible in most organisations 25 years ago.
The blurry lines between home and work created by social networking sites, phones and blackberries mean that people can easily be reached when not physically at work.
However, technology also presents an opportunity to the victims of bullying for increased control; e-mails, texts and web posts can all be saved and documented, as evidence in cases of bullying. On social networking sites such as Facebook, there are options to report abuse, delete inappropriate comments and block individual's access.
We need to ensure that these technological advancements are working for victims of bullying, rather than against them. For business, this means understanding cyber bullying, having a clear plan for addressing it and being willing to take action. This won't necessarily be easy; with the blurred boundaries of home and work, this will involve some difficult conversations about where organisational involvement should start and end. But if we don't take action bullying will continue to plague peoples' lives.
There's a subtle but important difference between trying to reduce stress, and trying to promote well-being.
Click here to read the original blog in full on the Management Today website - Psychology at Work Blog, a blog page about the psychology of business, management and leadership written by Pearn Kandola.
Click here to read the original blog in full on the Management Today website - Psychology at Work Blog, a blog page about the psychology of business, management and leadership written by Pearn Kandola.
The most remarkable lines in Barak Obama's inauguration speech were those addressed to Islamic nations: 'We seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect' and, he went on, 'we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.'
The words were conciliatory, the imagery powerful and the approach a complete contrast to his predecessor.
Last year during the election campaign my colleague Polly Howard De La Mare and I carried out a psychological analysis of the then presidential candidate and those few lines demonstrated many of his strengths: clear vision, the ability to see the others' perspective and values driven. These are qualities that he shares with his role model, Abraham Lincoln, arguably the greatest American president. Some may think that by asking us to compare him with the Civil War leader is hugely arrogant. However it also shows a real sense of how he wants his presidency to be conducted and possibly how he wants to be remembered. It gives him a standard to measure himself against and, being self critical, clarity about where he needs to improve.
Our analysis also showed that under pressure he can be judgmental, slow to make decisions and has a tendency to withdraw. There have been times, particularly in the first few months, where these traits have been revealed and he could learn much from Lincoln in this regard who showed a remarkably openness of sprit when confronted with criticism.
Lincoln famously worked to create a cabinet which contained many principle rivals. An analysis we carried out of Obama's Cabinet and his closest advisors shows that whilst they may differ in their political views, their personality profiles are very similar. They appear to be calm, rational, even tempered. The most notable exceptions to this are Rahm Emmuanuel, the White House Chief of Staff and Joe Biden, the Vice President. Both men operate at a more emotional level than the others and as a result could provide the degree of tension and constructive conflict that is necessary, although at the time it may appear extremely unhelpful, for any time to become truly high performing. The big question remains over this team and consequently for the President himself, can they deliver what they have promised?
In April 2000, Nick Griffin shared his vision with a group of white nationalists in the US: “perhaps one day, by being rather more subtle, we’ll get ourselves into a position where we control the British broadcasting media”. Tonight, Griffin is due to appear as a panellist on BBC’s Question Time. So, has he achieved his vision?
There is no doubt that since his conviction for inciting racial hatred in 1998, Griffin’s tactics have changed. He talks about using “saleable” words to win British votes, such as “security” and “identity” rather than “racial purity”. He takes every opportunity to insist that the BNP is not a racist party. But Griffin’s insistence that the party is not racist does not make it so. Even on its own website there is an ongoing debate amongst BNP members about whether they are members of a racist party of not. One member comments “I don't like what Muslims (sic) believe in, practice or preach. I don't want them in our country and I certainly don't want them as a neighbour.” Another states “What is of interest to us, though, is whether THE BNP is racist - and it would help if this website, above all, was able to answer the question honestly. I think the answer must be yes…. I mean, if we're racist, we're racist. And I don't mean this in an unfriendly way at all...”
I prefer this level of honesty and would rather have a debate with someone who is willing to be open about what they believe in, rather than Griffin’s spun comments around racial purity, when in his own words, he is looking for British people to “change their mind and say ‘every last one of them must go’”.
What this level of honesty makes clear, though, is that whilst Griffin might be becoming more politically canny, the remainders of the BNP are still many steps behind him and it is no surprise that Griffin is the only spokesperson that the BNP is willing to put forward in front of the media.
So is it an atrocity for Griffin to be being a panel member on Question Time? No. Whilst he may be more polished in his spin of BNP values, at the heart of it, Griffin still represents a party of hatred, not a party of governance, as even a cursory look through their manifesto makes clear. I do believe in the freedom of speech, even for odious people like Griffin. I also believe that people need to hear what Griffin and his party stand for so that they fully appreciate just how racist the BNP actually is and whether they really want these people to take decisions on their behalf. After all, who knows which groups of society they could focus on next?
Feed
This week is anti bullying week and while the media has focused on the plight of children who are bullied at school, the unfortunate fact is that bullying behaviour doesn't stop after GCSEs. 