Aberdeen-based human resources (HR) consultancy Hunter Adams has revealed a “considerable” rise in workplace grievance and disciplinary cases relating to intent vs perception issues.
Sarah Beaumont, director of HR at the company, which has offices in the Granite City, Edinburgh, Manchester and London, gave some background on the issue to The Press and Journal.
She said: “Intent refers to the purpose or objective behind an action or communication. It is the thought or motivation that drives a behaviour.
Different lenses, different perspectives
“Perception, on the other hand, is the way in which an individual interprets or understands an action or communication. It is the lens through which someone views a situation. Intent and perception can be wildly different.
“Hunter Adams is supporting clients with cases where the perception is very different to the intent, with defences such as ‘it was only banter’, or ‘that was not what I meant’ from leaders and colleagues who do not realise their words and actions are either no longer appropriate for the modern workplace, or employees reading more into comments than may be reasonable.”
There are some obvious cases where actions are wholly inappropriate, such as leaders sending texts, pictures and/or e-mails of a sexual nature to staff, Ms Beaumont said.
She added: “However, most grievances raised centre around the disparity between a leader’s intended actions and/or words, and what the employee heard or felt being on the receiving end.
“For example, a worker raised a grievance against their line manager for comments that were making them feel uncomfortable.
“Although the comments had gone unchallenged for many years, it was apparent to the employee these comments were unacceptable in today’s workplace. The line manager described them as just their sense of humour and ‘banter’.”
Ms Beaumont continued: “Leaders need to be aware their words and actions, however well intended, can be perceived as a ‘power dynamic’, where they are seen as more powerful than the employee.
“The danger here is that workers feel they cannot raise concerns or, as these might be small throwaway comments and behaviours, they go unchallenged and not raised by employees until they reach breaking point.
“Conversely, even when the intent was for the right reasons, for example, day-to-day management, we’re seeing a rise in cases where actions and/or words are not interpreted correctly, with workers perceiving the interactions are personal and the leader having ulterior motives.”
Many managers simply resort to familiar leadership styles
Many people in leadership positions have not received any form of management or leadership development, Hunter Adams’ HR director said.
This has led to them replicating the leadership style of previous managers or defaulting to a style they feel more comfortable with.
She added: “As a result, they are leading employees in a style that is outdated as the world around them continues to change. This can lead to confusion, frustration, and even resentment.
“To avoid situations like this from arising, it is crucial to be aware of the potential for misinterpretation or offence and take steps to minimise it.”
Ms Beaumont highlighted some best practice:
- Acknowledge differences – in today’s working environment there are multiple generations, experiences and cultures working together. It is, therefore, more important than ever to understand and appreciate the different perspectives and behaviours this brings, and take steps to make sure communication is appropriate, inclusive and respectful
- Be respectful – employees today bring with them wide-ranging values, beliefs and experiences. This diversity will enrich any workplace, but it is also important to respect each employee’s boundaries as these will be different, depending on traits such as upbringing or lived experience
- Try discussing and being open about preferred methods of communication. This will help to ensure any communication is clear. Avoid vague or ambiguous language that may be open to interpretation, so when asking an employee to do something be sure to explain the reason for the request and how it will benefit them.
- Active listening – to understand a worker’s perception, pay attention to what they are saying and ask clarifying questions to make sure their perspective is understood.
- Be open to feedback. It can be helpful to seek feedback from other colleagues or direct reports. Be open to receiving a fresh perspective as this can help identify potential issues, allowing you to adjust the approach accordingly.
- Above all else always remember that one person’s idea of banter is not the same as someone else’s. If in any doubt, avoid it completely.
Hunter Adams recommends all new people managers receive a basic level of management training, ideally encompassing an element of psychological safety awareness.
Ms Beaumont added: “Psychological safety is the belief that one will not be punished or humiliated for speaking up with ideas, questions, concerns or mistakes. In teams it refers to members believing they can take risks without being shamed by others.
“Creating a psychologically safe environment within a team is key for employee wellbeing and has been proven to improve performance.
“All employees deserve to feel heard, respected and valued in the workplace; and they are more engaged and productive for it.”
Fresh claims misogyny pervades all levels within Police Scotland ranks
Earlier this month, four women told BBC Newsnight about allegations of a “boys club” culture at all levels of Police Scotland.
The quartet, who include a former assistant chief constable, described a culture of misogyny that failed to properly address their concerns.
They said other women, still working in the force, were too frightened to come forward.
£1m compensation payout for victimised policewoman
Last May, Rhona Malone won nearly £1 million in compensation from Police Scotland after an employment tribunal found she was victimised when she raised concerns about sexism in the force.
Ms Malone had been a police officer for eight years when she decided to join the firearms unit in Edinburgh.
“It was a huge challenge for any police officer, not just for a woman,” she told Newsnight.
At first it was “great” and the training was “amazing”, she said, but then she started to see some “horrific behaviour”.
When she challenged that behaviour she was wrongly accused of throwing her utility belt with a loaded firearm.
The final straw was an e-mail in 2018 from her senior officer which said two female firearms officers should not be working together when there were male staff on duty.
It added: “Other than the obvious differences in physical capacity, it makes more sense from a search, balance-of-testosterone perspective.”
‘You have a target on your back’
Ms Malone said it was not easy for her to put in a grievance.
“The minute you do that you have a target on your back,” she said, adding: “It was like Russian roulette. Either put a grievance in and lose my career, or don’t put in the grievance and then I lose my career because I’m getting accused of throwing weapons, which didn’t happen.”
After a long, drawn-out process Ms Malone won her case and received substantial compensation which was mostly swallowed up in legal costs.
Summing up her experience, she said: “Ultimately, it didn’t just take my career, it took my mental health as well.
“I’m really sad about that because I loved my job.”
Conversation