Those wings... I want them too.
АнглийскийRecently I've encountered announcement about series of webinars on Tech Ladies and decided to buy access to one of them, devoted to working in toxic environment. It was interesting and relevant for me, so I'm going to continue with some of upcoming online classes. I'm not sure that subjects of next webinars will be worth retelling, but I think the content of the first was. There are numerous toxic social ambiences here, in Russia, as I can see.
Well, the spokeswoman told that the toxic workplace can be can be characterized by:
According to this, I think, most of the people who have been learning in russian schools are able to imagine what toxic environment may look like
It occurred to my mind, that work or education in toxic social ambience can be metaphorically compared to being in poisoned atmosphere. There's nothing visible to complain about, but the virtal energy runs out and abilities decrease.
Some time ago I've read an article about the «Dark Triad», the individuals who lack empathy and cause interpersonal issues. It seems to me that these phenomena are connected, and companies' cultures degrades through expansion of toxic workplaces. Possibly, the most important thing here is not that such person appears in the social group, but that he/she got highly appreciated, promoted and his/her behaviour starts to be imitated.
In my point of view, it is hard to fight such problems, because that individual gets favorable attitude and forgiveness from the higher leadership, as he/she appears to them as superior to the others. And it is not too hard to be superior to others if you are allowed to to treat them dishonestly. Get the best opportunities and resources, dump your problems and difficulties at someone else, blame others for your mistakes - and voila! - you are the bright star among grey, lazy, demotivated and depressed mass.
The author of the webinar also states that it's hardly possible to correct the situation and to persuade the leadership while being an ordinary member of the team, until the "critical mass" is reached and the leadership starts to muse that something is going wrong by themselves.
The spokeswoman also mentioned that such environmens are tend to be hyper-masculine, and I think that such hyper-masculine collectives as russian army and male prison can indirectly confirm that this assumption. They are really toxic, and they are not so effective (the purpose of prison is not to break down human destinies). Maybe the «Lord of the Flies» book by William Golding can serve as one more illustration to such tendencies (I haven't read it, to be honest, only saw the plot at wikipedia).
According to the webinar, the values that are appreciated and overestimated in such workplaces are:
And though them often lead to success, I think, they have significant drawbacks as well. Aggression is useful against your enemy, but not toward people you are creating something together. Aggression causes stress, fear, "fight or flight" reactions that does not favor effective mental work. Aggression and cruelty was effective when the humanity was fighting for survival against other species. But in modern world, we almost haven't natural enemies, while the intraspecific struggle can destroy the whole civilization along with the whole planet.
For sure, a competition motivates, force you to tense up, to lay yourself out, to do your best. But it works only in a short term on a narrow task. Constant competition exhausts, increases stress level and does not look so useful in the long term when applied to a diverse team for a wide range of tasks requiring wide range of skills. And the other disadvantage of competition is the desire to win at all cost. Including destroying something, and making harm to someone else, even when they have no relation to the happening. Like a superhero who is chasing his villainous enemy through the city streets with chaotic firing, exploding buildings and turning cars over.
And the risk as a risk. You can win and you can lose. And nobody can know in advance is it better to risk now or not to risk.
On the other hand, states the author, the femininity in such circumstances is considered as something unimportant. Women are percepted as weak, too emotional and incapable of serious accomplishments. The strengths that are undervalued in toxic hyper-masculine environments (and that are usually considered as feminine qualities) listed in the webinar were:
My own expirience confirms that's bad when such characteristics are ignored; and I think it's worth noting that there is no highly-developed country in the world that does not care about women rights and consider women opinions and interests. And there is no lagging county that does.
So, what does the author suggest if you find yourself in a toxic workplace? The first she recommend is to honestly answer the question «Why are you there?». There is always fear of unknown and fear of failure, and fear to trade bad for worse, and the fear of not deserving something better. There may be objective reasons to endure such surroundings, and may be some psychological barriers. She offers to get familiarized with her materials Tackling Limiting Beliefs. (I didn't, so can't say anything about them).
Another thing, that she repeats several time directly or indirectly is about not blaming yourself for inability to react quickly and immediately, for the need to ponder everything in a quiet surroundings and to discuss it once again. And I think that just the understanding that the environment is toxic helps to dissuade yourself that all the problems are in you.
Next, she advices to use the construction «If you want to get the best work from me, that's not how to do it». That is said to return the situation from personal dimension to the work. In addition, when you form phrases on the «If ... then ...» principle, you don't command your counterpart what to do (people in authority do not like this), but rather state the rules. «If you behave this way, I react this way. And there's nothing that disallows me to».
Also, it can be useful to "separate the intent from the impact". Asking, for example, the question «What do you mean by that?». And when the answer is «Oh, I was just kidding!» the possible reply is «But that was not funny».
When you are a bystander of inappropriate behavior toward somebody, one of the ways to interrupt it is to distract attention by asking for help, or for clarification of something, etc. Again, returning the situation from the personal dimension back to the work, as everyone came here to work first of all.
I don't think that I've exactly outlined all the ideas of the webinar, and unfortunatelly its recording is not available for public access, but the speaker seemed to be an interesting women. Her name is Kristen Knepper, here is her site: Kristen Knepper Consulting. May be it turns out to be useful to someone
Well, the spokeswoman told that the toxic workplace can be can be characterized by:
- hostile behavior
- gaslighting
- bullying
- personal attacks
- inconsistent rules (double standards)
According to this, I think, most of the people who have been learning in russian schools are able to imagine what toxic environment may look like
It occurred to my mind, that work or education in toxic social ambience can be metaphorically compared to being in poisoned atmosphere. There's nothing visible to complain about, but the virtal energy runs out and abilities decrease.
Some time ago I've read an article about the «Dark Triad», the individuals who lack empathy and cause interpersonal issues. It seems to me that these phenomena are connected, and companies' cultures degrades through expansion of toxic workplaces. Possibly, the most important thing here is not that such person appears in the social group, but that he/she got highly appreciated, promoted and his/her behaviour starts to be imitated.
In my point of view, it is hard to fight such problems, because that individual gets favorable attitude and forgiveness from the higher leadership, as he/she appears to them as superior to the others. And it is not too hard to be superior to others if you are allowed to to treat them dishonestly. Get the best opportunities and resources, dump your problems and difficulties at someone else, blame others for your mistakes - and voila! - you are the bright star among grey, lazy, demotivated and depressed mass.
The author of the webinar also states that it's hardly possible to correct the situation and to persuade the leadership while being an ordinary member of the team, until the "critical mass" is reached and the leadership starts to muse that something is going wrong by themselves.
The spokeswoman also mentioned that such environmens are tend to be hyper-masculine, and I think that such hyper-masculine collectives as russian army and male prison can indirectly confirm that this assumption. They are really toxic, and they are not so effective (the purpose of prison is not to break down human destinies). Maybe the «Lord of the Flies» book by William Golding can serve as one more illustration to such tendencies (I haven't read it, to be honest, only saw the plot at wikipedia).
According to the webinar, the values that are appreciated and overestimated in such workplaces are:
- aggression
- competition
- winning at all costs
- risk
And though them often lead to success, I think, they have significant drawbacks as well. Aggression is useful against your enemy, but not toward people you are creating something together. Aggression causes stress, fear, "fight or flight" reactions that does not favor effective mental work. Aggression and cruelty was effective when the humanity was fighting for survival against other species. But in modern world, we almost haven't natural enemies, while the intraspecific struggle can destroy the whole civilization along with the whole planet.
For sure, a competition motivates, force you to tense up, to lay yourself out, to do your best. But it works only in a short term on a narrow task. Constant competition exhausts, increases stress level and does not look so useful in the long term when applied to a diverse team for a wide range of tasks requiring wide range of skills. And the other disadvantage of competition is the desire to win at all cost. Including destroying something, and making harm to someone else, even when they have no relation to the happening. Like a superhero who is chasing his villainous enemy through the city streets with chaotic firing, exploding buildings and turning cars over.
And the risk as a risk. You can win and you can lose. And nobody can know in advance is it better to risk now or not to risk.
On the other hand, states the author, the femininity in such circumstances is considered as something unimportant. Women are percepted as weak, too emotional and incapable of serious accomplishments. The strengths that are undervalued in toxic hyper-masculine environments (and that are usually considered as feminine qualities) listed in the webinar were:
- emotional intelligence
- ability to estimate and appreciate opportunities and aspirations of others
- collaboration
- creativity
My own expirience confirms that's bad when such characteristics are ignored; and I think it's worth noting that there is no highly-developed country in the world that does not care about women rights and consider women opinions and interests. And there is no lagging county that does.
So, what does the author suggest if you find yourself in a toxic workplace? The first she recommend is to honestly answer the question «Why are you there?». There is always fear of unknown and fear of failure, and fear to trade bad for worse, and the fear of not deserving something better. There may be objective reasons to endure such surroundings, and may be some psychological barriers. She offers to get familiarized with her materials Tackling Limiting Beliefs. (I didn't, so can't say anything about them).
Another thing, that she repeats several time directly or indirectly is about not blaming yourself for inability to react quickly and immediately, for the need to ponder everything in a quiet surroundings and to discuss it once again. And I think that just the understanding that the environment is toxic helps to dissuade yourself that all the problems are in you.
Next, she advices to use the construction «If you want to get the best work from me, that's not how to do it». That is said to return the situation from personal dimension to the work. In addition, when you form phrases on the «If ... then ...» principle, you don't command your counterpart what to do (people in authority do not like this), but rather state the rules. «If you behave this way, I react this way. And there's nothing that disallows me to».
Also, it can be useful to "separate the intent from the impact". Asking, for example, the question «What do you mean by that?». And when the answer is «Oh, I was just kidding!» the possible reply is «But that was not funny».
When you are a bystander of inappropriate behavior toward somebody, one of the ways to interrupt it is to distract attention by asking for help, or for clarification of something, etc. Again, returning the situation from the personal dimension back to the work, as everyone came here to work first of all.
I don't think that I've exactly outlined all the ideas of the webinar, and unfortunatelly its recording is not available for public access, but the speaker seemed to be an interesting women. Her name is Kristen Knepper, here is her site: Kristen Knepper Consulting. May be it turns out to be useful to someone
@темы: Люблю филосовствовать, english writing skills, Жизненное
-
-
07.09.2018 в 19:17-
-
07.09.2018 в 22:21