A startling piece entitled Workers at War by Richard Guilliatt appeared in The Australian's weekend magazine late last year on the rise of workplace bullying - or rather, the rise of internal grievances and workplace bullying claims lodged with state compensation bodies, many of which do not represent true incidences of bullying. (If you're wondering what might be deemed genuine bullying, the article cites the case of a young apprentice who was set on fire not once, but twice, but co-workers.)
Described by one interviewee as 'the new RSI', it seems claims of psychological damage are being lodged left, right and centre but that the majority of these are found to hold little water, particularly where disputes arise between personnel who hold equal sway within an organisation. Here the article refers to a recent incident between the CEO of beyondblue, a high profile, national nonprofit, and the organisation's Chair.
The dispute reportedly arose after a disagreement over the CEO's plans for the organisation. A barrister called in to investigate found the claims were unsubstantiated and that "robust discussion between people at similar levels of an organisation did not constitute bullying". The CEO resigned.
In my travels in nonprofit-land I hear about these sorts of disputes frequently, and many of the difficulties I encounter do seem to involve CEOs and Chairs/board members, and often to damaging ends. Where the disputes are progressed, be it through legal, official or internal channels, both parties are left ragged by the experience and the organisation at an all time low.
Equally, some CEOs have told me about struggles with staff who have accused them of bullying, with some cases progressing through to IR courts and resulting in stress leave for the CEO as well as the claimant. Grievances progressed to this level naturally involve the board which, staffed by busy people with little time to spare, can be slow to respond - adding additional layers of difficulty to such occurrences.
I found it interesting that Guilliat's article cited examples drawn primarily from the public service and nonprofit sectors, though it does not surprise me: I feel there are some things about the nonprofit environment (it's harder for me to comment on the public sector) that engenders or encourages these kinds of incidents. Legal structure being one of these - I'm not convinced the sector as a whole deals with the incorporated association form very well at all and I’m not sure that the majority of humanity is yet at a place where working together, as a group in harmony, is possible.
There can often be a desire amongst staff and board members too for a flat (as in non-hierarchical) management or governance structure in which staff and often clients or members have a say in how things are run. Again, I don’t believe we’re quite ready for this as a whole and ironically, in the best examples I’ve seen of a flatter style in action, the organisation simultaneously has benefitted from the direction of a confident leader.
I’ve also found the nonprofit environment to often be more overtly driven by ‘passion’ (read emotion), often fueled by ideals and beliefs in ‘the cause’, or by an intense personal interest in it, such as in organisations formed by parents of children requiring services, of which P&C committees are one example, or organisations formed by opportunists more interested in personal gain than the provision of genuine human services.
Then there are those drawn to management, committees and boards who seem to enjoy wielding power, however small their particular patch may seem.
There seems also to be a preponderance of unprofessional (read bad) behavior. It’s certainly the case in many small-to-medium enterprises that some service delivery staff find themselves promoted to roles beyond their capabilities and for which they have received little or no support, preparation or training.
More disturbingly, one CEO I’ve spoken to in recent times - who has now left the sector after a protracted dispute with a staff member and difficulties with many others - believes community service organisations attract people with an increased likelihood of mental health issues.
Whether or not this is the case, it is possible the sector is perceived by some as a safe(r) haven for those who find the private sector challenging and or lack insight into their own behaviours and their causes (private sector readers may wish to dispute this!).
At any rate, I certainly see and hear about a lot of dysfunctionality and distress, a situation at odds with the aims of the sector overall.
If you, or someone you know, is going through hard times as a result of their involvement in a nonprofit organisation, get in touch - Nonprofit Assist is now offering individualised support to nonprofit people in times of crisis, change and growth - to employees, volunteers, managers and board members alike.
And if you're having difficulties accessing the article, let me know.
Subscribe via email
Subscribe via RSS
Connect on Linked In