Just another Society for Advancement of Management Chapter Sites site
SAM ADVANCED MANAGEMENT JOURNAL
How Can Leaders And Coworkers Address Toxic Hotspots: A Case Study Approach
Binod Sundararajan and Malavika Sundararajan
DOI:
Citation: Sundararajan, B., & Sundararajan, M. (2022). How can leaders and coworkers address toxic hotspots: A case study approach SAM Advanced Management Journal, 87(4),59-73.
Abstract
In a precarious world of ever emerging uncertainties and contentious rhetoric, not being able to differentiate between moody coworker responses from toxic behaviors has become an increasing stressor for many. Such employee behaviors that harm other employees or the organization are known as counterproductive behaviors which include mild incivilities to aggressive bullying, and advertent to inadvertent microaggressions followed by gaslighting. A series of such repeated behaviors lead to the emergence of toxic hotspots in organizations that can completely disrupt employee productivity, destroy trust, and create an atmosphere of fear and intimidation leading to lowered morale and high turnover. We present a case study, based on real events, occurring in an organization that provides human resources training to various stakeholders. One of the trainers becomes a victim as well as a witness of incivility, gaslighting and microaggression by two coworkers. The scenario describes events that transpired over a period of several months, till the protagonist (victim) decides to take matters to the organizational leaders. How the leaders respond to the situation and how the victim proceeds to process and deal with the situation is a study in overcoming toxic hotspots in the organization. Names, genders, titles, and organizational identities have been changed to protect people involved.
References
Avery, G., & Bergsteiner, H. (2010). Honeybees & locusts: The business case for sustainable leadership. Sydney: Allen & Unwin.
Bartlett, J. E., & Bartlett, M. E. (2011). Workplace bullying: An integrative literature review. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 13(1), 69–84. https://doi.org/10.1177/1523422311410651
Farr, D. K., & Deraspe, R. L. (2021). Five ways to reduce rudeness in the remote workplace. Retrieved from Harvard Business Review website: https://hbr.org/2021/08/5-ways-to-reduce-rudeness-in-the-remote-workplace
Frost, P. J. (2003). Toxic emotions at work: How compassionate managers handle pain and conflict. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Johnson, V. E., Nadal, K. L., Sissoko, D. R. G., & King, R. (2021). It’s not in your head: Gaslighting, ‘splaining, victim blaming, and other harmful reactions to microaggressions. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16(5), 1024–1036. https://doi.org/10.1177/17456916211011963
Kasalak, G. (2019). Toxic behaviors in workplace: Examining the effects of the demographic factors on faculty members’ perceptions of organizational toxicity. International Journal of Research in Education and Science, 5(1), 272–282.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development (2nd ed.). New Jersey: Pearson.
Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853–886.
Morphy, T. (2008). Stakeholder Analysis, Project Management, templates, and advice: Stakeholder salience. Retrieved from Stakeholder Map website: https://www.stakeholdermap.com/stakeholder-analysis/stakeholder-salience.html
Prieto, L. C., Norman, M. V., Phipps, S. T. A., & Chenault, E. B. S. (2016). Tackling micro-aggressions in organizations: A broken windows approach. Journal of Leadership, Accountability and Ethics, 13(3).
Schilpzand, P., De Pater, I. E., & Erez, A. (2014). Workplace incivility: A review of the literature and agenda for future research. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 37(1), S57–S88. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.1976