Bullying: rules and values

Tags: Ethical Values, Harassment & bullying

Read the latest blog by Prof. Chris Cowton, IBE’s Associate Director.

It’s Anti-Bullying Week, so it’s worth taking a moment to think about tackling bullying in the workplace. 

In Anti-Bullying Week, much of the focus, quite understandably, is on young people, with attention paid to what happens in schools and on social media.  

However, bullying isn’t just something that happens when we’re young. Bullying and harassment have become recognised as issues to be addressed in the workplace too. This is backed up by IBE data, which over many years has shown bullying and harassment to be a significant concern amongst members of the British public when they are asked about business ethics. For example, in our Attitudes of the British Public 2022 survey, 15% of respondents selected it as one of their top three ethical concerns, with women (18%) more likely to choose it than men (12%). 

Our survey, like many corporate policies, brackets bullying and harassment together. They can both be described as behaviour that makes someone feel intimidated or offended, but they are different things in the eyes of the law, at least in the UK. Harassment is unlawful under the Equality Act 2010 and relates to protected characteristics. On the other hand, bullying is not against the law.2 Therefore, with bullying we’re purely in the arena of ethics rather than compliance with law. Of course, internally bullying can be turned into a compliance issue by means of corporate policies, but it is important not to lose sight of the ethical foundation for such policies. 

The foundation of anti-bullying policies and actions in ethical values reminds us that the best way to tackle bullying is not to rely solely on policies and procedures, but to build an open, ethical culture. The most obvious means is to develop a speak up culture, so that concerns about bullying and associated behaviours are raised early, hopefully nipping problems in the bud – to the benefit not only of the bullied, but everyone else too – even the bully, it could be argued. However, an open, ethical culture, with certain standards of behaviour well described and expected, is likely to reduce the incidence of bullying in the first place. Certain positive values will speak particularly clearly to how we behave towards each other. 

For example, one of our values at the IBE is ‘respectful’. The first part of the description of this value states our commitment as follows: ‘we respect the diversity of thought and perspectives offered by others’. This is something that wouldn’t characterise the bully. Many organisations espouse similar values and principles, some of which might express even more directly expected behaviours that would be the opposite of a bully’s. The more we positively promote and encourage such values, and celebrate their presence in the organisation, the more the actions of bullies will be conspicuous and regarded as unacceptable. 

However, one of the features of anti-bullying policies that sometimes flummoxes people accused of bullying is that it is often defined in corporate policies in a manner that is consistent with our earlier definition that referred to intimidation and offence – which means that it’s in the eye of the beholding victim.  

There’s an interesting connection here with the way in which some companies are now talking about ethics. A traditional formulation of ethics across societies and history is the Golden Rule. This can take various forms, but a common version is: treat others as you would like to be treated. This is still wise guidance for many situations. However, some organisations have revised the wording into what has sometimes been called the Platinum Rule. For example, the second part of the IBE’s own description of what its ‘respectful’ value means states that we treat others as they would want to be treated. This variation of the Golden Rule might bring some complications (which I won’t discuss here), so at the IBE, we add in parentheses, ‘consistent with ethical values’. However, the formulation certainly works well when it comes to bullying, where it resonates well with the idea of bullying being ‘in the eye of the beholder’. It immediately undercuts bullies’ attempts at excusing their behaviour such as ‘it was only a bit of banter’ or ‘this is how things have always been done at the firm’. The person doesn’t want to be treated like that! 

Perhaps your organisation hasn’t espoused the Platinum Rule, but assuming that you have expressed some values that you want to live by, some of them are likely to provide the basis for a powerful conversation with someone who’s been formally found to have bullied or is just at risk of being accused of it. Such a conversation, rather than focusing on the definition of bullying and arguing about whether it has taken place, can be along the lines of: ‘talk me through how your behaviour expressed our values’. It’s one thing to discipline a bully, but it’s another thing to help them really see the error of their ways and change their habits. 

After all, although bullies are quite reasonably portrayed as ‘the bad guys’ (male or female or non-binary), we know that unethical behaviour in general is not always deliberate or conscious. It is particularly worth recognising that bullies were often bullied themselves when younger. Therefore, while not minimising the seriousness of their behaviour, it might be worth applying the Golden Rule and consider how you would like to be treated if you’d been doing something out of ignorance, because of your background, more than from malevolence. After all, our fundamental aim as an ethical organisation is to bring about a culture that values and encourages ethical behaviour, in which case disciplinary action is simply a means to that end. Other means are available. 

Author

Return to listing