Assingment
vzjefvsc
CMNS333Week5Spring18-2.ppt
Conflict and Communication
*
Today - Group and Organizational Conflict continued
- Nanaimo Victim Assistance part II
- Your Conflict Styles and what that means
- Approaches to Organizational Conflict
Instrumental
Developmental
Political
- Ch. 5 Difficult Conversations
- Coming up
Journals - Submit in class Mon Feb 19
Case Study – Submit in class Mon Feb 26
*
Back to Nanaimo Victim Assistance…
- What would you recommend this group do to promote a constructive outcome to their conflict?
Leadership – accountability
Third party mediator
Informal relationships – friends
Support of workers in crisis
Recognize and utilize particular talents
Deal with issues as they come up
Recognize potential for spirals
Destructive and constructive
Making this a constructive spiral - opportunities to generate positive feelings about work and work relationships
– surround this women with support – including background to “identity “ and culture of organization with emphasis on how hard people work
3rd party mediator
Conversations
What happened – Diane faced the criticism – articulated rather than assumed/ feared/ not second hand
Feeling – shared their feelings and doubts
Identity –
Shared their various stories – acknowledged experiences as legit (“and“ stance)
Moved from blame to contribution “What level of support is required for people to work effectively in this difficult and draining setting”
Not a deficit (necessarily) with Diane – Org structure/ setting
constructive org change – address the “collective inertia”
need to give others support in difficult situations
acknowledge the need to balance this with time constraints (10 min debriefs – listen if not solve)
Ind. Relationships – Rhonda and Diane
empathy / helping and support but not totally caving in –
Was there a spiral here? Did they address it?
*
What Difficult Conversations offers…
Identifying the three conversations
Identifying the three assumptions that make the “What Happened?” conversation wrought with difficulty
Truth, intention, blame frame
Move from certainty to curiosity to explore the different stories that exist
Adopt the “and” stance…
Be open to exploring intentions and impact
Abandon blame… look for contributions
Express unexpressed feelings
Diane is impacted deeply by the murder and she may need a clearer understanding of the level of work that is expected of her..
Diane may not intend to do less work – she may be unclear what is required in that position and
*
Back to Nanaimo Victim Assistance…
- What was the constructive outcome to their conflict?
Third party mediator
Honest assessment of the situation from each employee
Acknowledgement of lack of support for new employees
Withdrawal of complaint – shifts discussion to support in general and workload
Assumptions/ schemas system one brain?
System for debrief
3rd party mediator
Conversations
What happened – Diane faced the criticism – articulated rather than assumed/ feared/ not second hand
Feeling – shared their feelings and doubts
Identity –
Shared their various stories – acknowledged experiences as legit (“and“ stance)
Moved from blame to contribution “What level of support is required for people to work effectively in this difficult and draining setting”
Not a deficit (necessarily) with Diane – Org structure/ setting
constructive org change – address the “collective inertia”
need to give others support in difficult situations
acknowledge the need to balance this with time constraints (10 min debriefs – listen if not solve)
Ind. Relationships – Rhonda and Diane
empathy / helping and support but not totally caving in –
Was there a spiral here? Did they address it?
*
Paradoxes and conundrums
We want contradictory things in relationships; freedom and closeness, openness and privacy; connection and control;
All understanding of work conflict are fraught with errors;
Work too hard at relationships and they “suffocate”; not hard enough and they “wither”
The greatest individual growth, and the greatest derailment of individual growth, comes from the hurt and disappointment of relationships that go wrong
Improving conflicts at work can be internal (personal change) or external (communication) but usually both
From “Communication Spirals, paradoxes and conundrums” by William W. Wilmot from Relational Communication, 4th Edition.
- Dialectics (Baxter) – can’t escape them; ability to negotiate them determines the success of the relationship
- We make errors – fundamental attribution error – tend to be easy on ourselves in explanations and tough on others (external and internal attributions)
*
Your Conflict Style
- Think of your last big conflict….
- How would you describe how you react in a conflict situation?
- Does this style allow you to respond constructively to disagreements and conflicts? Why or why not?
- Where did this style come from?
Part of your emotional footprint – the bundle of assumptions/ reactions you carry with you in a conflict situation
*
Kraybill Conflict Style Inventory
- How you respond in calm and stormy conflict situations
- Your default reaction
- No right or wrong – useful in different scenarios
- Style can change with awareness
Kraybill Conflict Style Inventory
- Select and hold a person or a particular conflict in mind as you answer the questions that will be read
- Provide a score on a scale from 1 (rarely) to 7 (usually) and mark this on the tally sheet provided.
- Then follow the instructions to add up your score and identify your conflict style in both calm and stormy scenarios.
Review the five scores
The style you use the most - reflects your greatest gifts and your liabilities; likely to over-use this style
The style you use the least – could reflect the style you feel is the hardest for you to use; least skilled in and expanding your ability to use it will open new options
If your numbers are close you may be equally skilled in a number of styles; good for flexibility between conflict scenarios
Each style has its strength and weakness – getting good at all styles means you don’t over-use styles that don’t match the scenarios
Pay attention to your “Storm Shift” – is it one that will surprise, shock or hurt others?; if it’s a big shift (4 points or more) more likely to alarm others
*
Directing -
High focus on own agenda and low focus on relationships; uses persuation and control
- Benefits
Speed; decisiveness; gaining or protecting important things
Useful in an emergency when there is no time for negotiation; strong leadership
- Costs
inequality, resentment, low trust and cooperation
Reduces emotion and spiritual growth in the leader
*
Things to know about directors…
- Often task oriented, productive and want to get things done
- Let them know yu are committed to resolving the issue
- May need time to cool down; be specific about time you will resume
- May feel deeply responsible for others but may neglect feeling
- if this person hold power over you, usually asking for a chance to cool off and think is okay, as long as you state clearly your intention to return and work on things.
Cooperating –
High focus on own agenda and high focus on relationships; invites other views and welcomes differences
- Benefits
Trust and mutuality; high potential for creativity and personal growth; satisfaction, energy and joy when successfully used on meaningful issues
- Costs
Fatigue and time loss, distraction from more important tasks, analysis paralysis
If used for trivial issues, people weary of too much processing
Requires skill and time
Failure is likely; gives cooperation a bad name
*
Things to know about cooperators
- Respond when to efforts to structure conversations around listening. Hear them out and they will listen to you in return
- Share info because it is important to a good decison, not because you are criticizing or making demands
- Affirm work well done
- Keep cooperators will informed. Don’t withdrw without giving a clear explanation
Compromising –
medium focus on own agenda and medium focus on relationship; uses bargaining and meeting others halfway
- Benefits
Relatively fast; good way out of a stalemate
Lets you get on with business
Builds an atmosphere of cooperation
- Costs
Mediocrity and blandness
Possiblity of unprincipled agreements
Likelihood of patching symptoms and ignoring causes
Short-circuits needed in-depth discussion
*
Things to know about compromisers
- Compromisers have a strong sense of reciprocity. They will likely respond in kind if you back off a bit from your initial position
- They value fairness and moderation. Use terms that include “being fair” and “give and take”
- They value efficiency of time and energy. Talk about practical solutions
- They do not enjoy prolonged debate. You may convince them they are wrong but the victory will be hollow. Find concessions, even when you are sure your argument is stronger
Avoiding – Low focus on own agenda and low focus on relationships; delays, avoids, suppress emotions
- Benefits
Freedom from entanglement of trivial issues or insignificant relationships
Stability by preserving the status quo
Ability to block others without seeming negative
- Costs
Periodic explossions of pent-up anger
Slow death of relationships
Stagnation, dullness, declining interest and energy
Loss of engagement and accountability
*
What to know about avoiders
- They benefit more than any other style from an offer to give them time and space to think things through (with clear understanding of when discussions will resume)
- Take a two-step approach
Let them know – in thoughtful tones – what you want and that you’d like them to think about it
Then come back later to hear their response
- Stay low key; intense demands will not work
- The need data and info presented in a calm and methodical way
Harmonizing –
Low focus on own agenda and high focus on relationship; agrees, supports, grins and bears it…
- Benefits
Flexible and easy to work with
Wins approval and appreciation of others
Creates a pleasant atmosphere
Free of hassle (at least in the short term)
- Costs
Frustration for others who want the engagement of problem sloving
Resentment , depression and stunted growth of personal gifts of the harmonizer
Dependency on others
*
What to know about harmonizers
- They want to please and be pleased. Pay attention to niceties (kind note, comment, flowers)
- Use a two-step approach
Connect at a human level (eg. ask about a family member)
Then get down to business (hard for dirctors)
- Stay light; use humor, thank them sincerely
- Lighten up on a regular basis
What style works best when?
- An emergency looms
- Long-term ability to work together is important
- When you don’t really care about the issue
- You have little power to openly resist an opponent but you don’t want to actively go along with their wishes
- When settling on some solution, even if less than ideal, is better than a complete stalemate
- When efforts to cooperate will be misunderstood as directing
- When you are sure you’re right and being right matters more than preserving relationships
- When time and energy are available for discussion
Directing
Cooperating
Harmonizing
Avoiding
Compromising
Directing
Cooperating
*
Class objectives
- Case Study – Combatting AIDs with a sense of humour or cultural insensitivity?
- Understand the complex nature of org. conflict
- Identify an understand levels of analysis of organizational conflict
Instrumental, Developmental, Political
- Role of Facilitation
What does a facilitator do?
- Is there such a thing as a “toxic” environment?
Management of destructive conflict (workplace bullies)
*
Today
- Debrief
Kraysbill Conflict Style Inventory
- Research on the impact of conflict in interpersonal conflict
3-2-1 and share
- Three approaches to organizational conflict
Instrumental, Developmental and Political
Tools to know about…
Research on Interpersonal Conflict
- Discuss the questions from Moodle
Describe the three most important aspects (concepts, issues, factual information, etc.) of the reading;
Identify two aspects of the reading you don’t understand, and make a couple of notes why
Pose a question to the text’s author.
What does this study tell us about managing conflict?
Be ready to report back to class on key findings
*
Def’n of Organizational Conflict
- Expressed struggle or disagreement between and among people who work together to achieve common goals
- Process of people organizing toward a common goal, during which individuals and entities engage in conflict as they coordinate work patterns, policies and practices (Deetz, 2001)
Examples – goals of the organization are being challenged
Start by reading a short case study
-demonstrate the two approaches to organizational confllct – Political and Instrumental/ Developmental
Deetz S. (2001). Conceptual foundations. In F.M. Jablin & L.L. Putnam (Eds.), The new handbook of organizational communication: Advances in theory, research, and methods (pp. 3-46). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
*
The complex nature of group/ org conflict
- While the overall trend in violence decreases , environmental and labour conflict increases…
Knowledge of rights, science, rights, social justice
History of corruption
Distrust in experts
Economic self interest
Advocacy, public participation, PR
Linked with social trends, values, other aspects of people’s lives
*
- Hobbesian environment at the company, in which workers are sometimes pitted against one another and where a blind eye is turned to infractions from top performers.
- One Uber manager groped female co-workers’ breasts at a company retreat in Las Vegas. A director shouted a homophobic slur at a subordinate during a heated confrontation in a meeting. Another manager threatened to beat an underperforming employee’s head in with a baseball bat.
- Susan Fowler detailed a history of discrimination and sexual harassment by her managers, which she said was shrugged off by Uber’s human resources department. Ms. Fowler said the culture was stoked — and even fostered — by those at the top of the company.
- The company’s chief executive, Travis Kalanick, has opened an internal investigation into the accusations and has brought in the board member Arianna Huffington and the former attorney general Eric H. Holder Jr. to look into harassment issues and the human resources department.
- Mr. Kalanick also held a 90-minute all-hands meeting on Tuesday, during which he and other executives were besieged with dozens of questions and pleas from employees who were aghast at — or strongly identified with — Ms. Fowler’s story and demanded change.
- Liane Hornsey, Uber’s chief human resources officer, said in a statement, “We are totally committed to healing wounds of the past and building a better workplace culture for everyone.”
*
Case Study – Unrestrained Workplace behaviour at Uber
- Read the NYT article on organizational conflict at Uber
- What are the key disagreements between and among employees and management that block their common goals?
- What process or steps might they use in trying to coordinate workplace practices and values?
Three approaches to the study of organizational conflict
- Instrumental – Looks at what activities are involved to achieve our goals and manage conflict
- Developmental – challenges that arise through the key phases in the group’s development
- Political- dominant and subordinate groups and how they interact to create or mitigate change.
Garner, Johny T. and Poole, Marshall Scott (2013) Perspectives on Workgroup Conflict and Communication. In The Sage handbook of Conflict Communication. 2nd Ed. Edited by John G. Oetzel and Stella Ting-Toomey
*
Instrumental Approaches to Org. Conflict
- Role of conflict itself
How can this debate make us stronger, help our focus, address other issues?
- Reaffirming purpose and values?
What constructive role do they play?
What are we doing right? (appreciative inquiry)
- Research Focus?
Group performance, outcomes, satisfaction, group viability
Instrumental – Looks at what activities are involved to achieve our goals and manage conflict
What questions might we ask/ tools we might use to measure what’s going on and if it’s where we want to be headed?
- What does success look like? How do we measure this? (Surveys/ focus groups/ statistics?)
Task and process conflict held the highest potential for moving the group forward – positive outcome
Link between conflict and creativity, role of trust – mediated by openness, even if intensity and duration of the conflict was high
Link back to case study – How can this case study be understood with an instrumental approach?
- how can we make this work? What does the conflict teach us about how to how to make a better decision?
- What are the relationships between generations, cultures, generations
- How do we accomplish the work that needed to be done – promoting condom use in this particular setting?
- How were the decisions made about the process – who decides what approach based on what information?
*
Instrumental Approaches to Org. Conflict
- What activities are involved to achieve our goals and manage conflict?
Identifying the source of conflict
Where is it coming from?
Part of the process; necessary and positive
Relationships
power struggles; attitudes
Task – What is the nature of the work to be accomplished?
Process – how the work is accomplished
How decisions are made
Internal structure
Group norms
Instrumental – Looks at what activities are involved to achieve our goals and manage conflict
Developmental – challenges that arise through the key phases in the group’s development
Political- dominant and subordinate groups and how they interact to create or mitigate change.
What are the challenges to accomplishing seeking out answers to these questions??
*
Instrumental approach to org. conflict
- Role of facilitation in work groups
How can we effectively manage the inevitable conflict to get a positive outcome?
Diversity of those involved
Range of options
Assumptions holding back new solutions
What do we know about facilitation/ facilitators?
Diversity common source of conflict (observable characteristics like gender, age, race but also beliefs, perspectives, values, profession and experiences
-some team members exhibited higher ”group level organizational citizenship behaviour” (GOCB) – recognize differences in constructive ways and act accordingly
- mostly negative outcomes – the more diverse, the more problems
Studies looking at how to manage diversity
- many conflicts associated with cultural differences – recognition of differences necessary
- resolving conflicts also associated with the ability to talk about differences and focus on the problem not the people
- resolving these problems are culturally divers – some cultures not so comfortable with talking about differences, talk can be replaced with shared activities to address problems
- The ultimate effects of diversity on performance is determined by how the group deals with it – productive or constructive
What would this look like in our case study?
-acknowledging cultural differences
-acknowledging role of long distance communication and decision making
*
What do facilitators do?
- “To make easy" or "ease a process"
- Plan, guide and manage a group event to ensure that the group's objectives are met effectively, with clear thinking, good participation and full buy-in from everyone who is involved.
- Take a neutral stance and focus on the group process.
manage discussions, get the best from all members, and bring the event through to a successful conclusion.
- Your key responsibility as a facilitator is to create this group process and an environment in which it can flourish, and so help the group reach a successful decision, solution or conclusion.
VIDEO – What do faciiitators do?
Is there a facilitated process to the “Positively Positive” case study?
-cultural differences – power hierarchy
Nanaimo Victim Services?
Is their role to avoid conflict?
*
Dynamics of Group Decision Making
Kaner, S. (2007) Facilitator’s Guide to Participatory Decision-Making. San Francisco, CA John Wiley & Sons.
Developmental Study of organizational conflict – phases and stages
Use case study -
Groan Zone – shifting from expressing their own opinions to understanding the opinions of others, particularly when there are a lot of different opinions
People get overloaded, disoriented, annoyed, impatient.
They can feel misunderstood and keep repeating themselves, or push for closure
Struggle in the service of integration – struggle to see new and different ways of understanding the problem
You can imagine how simple things would be if someone would just make the decision on behalf of everyone… problems
-Model reminds us the “groaning” is part of the process
-misunderstanding and miscommunication is part of what must be done to lay the foundation for sustainable agreements
-how do we tap into the potential for positive result of this groaning
*
Benefits of Participatory Values
Gather people who have a “stake” in the issue with divergent positions – not “stacking” the deck for any one position
Set up a process by which the main issue and possible solutions are identified
Kaner, S. (2007) Facilitator’s Guide to Participatory Decision-Making. San Francisco, CA John Wiley & Sons
Other approaches – less disagreement
- Rely on authority – one person assumes responsibility for decision making
- Leave it up to chance – person with idea runs with it – sabotage
- Participatory - Facilitator there to help build a foundation of mutual understanding and anticipate and deal with the inevitability of misunderstanding and disagreement
If you want to go fast, go alone
If you want to go far, go together
*
What do group members need?
- Core Concerns
Appreciation, Affiliation, Autonomy, Status, Role
- Group member needs
Values respected – beliefs
Power & influence - influence
Economic – secure scarce resources
Interpersonal – goals and styles
Organizational – equity and recognition
Environmental – experience and setting
Instrumental – Looks at what activities are involved to achieve our goals and manage conflict
Feeling and Identity components (DC)
*
Developmental Approaches to Org. Conflict
- Tuckman’s (1965)Stages of Team Dev’t
Tuckman’s (1965) model
Developmental – challenges that arise through the key phases in the group’s development
Each stage presents the group and its members with problems they must resolve:
*
Wheelan’s (2005) update
- Stage 1 – Dependency and inclusion
How to deal with the dependence on other
- Stage 2 – Counter dependency and fight
What degree of independence of member action is allowed
- Stage 3 – Trust and Structure
The purpose and direction of the group
Control and power issues
- Stage 4 – Work
Organizing the group for effective work
Maintaining an effective an creative work process
- Stage 5 – Termination
Meeting members individual needs and coming to terms with the end of an important experience
Wheelan, S.A. (2005). Group processes I developmental perspectives (2nd ed.) Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon
- How to deal with the dependence on others
- What degree of independence of member action is allowed
- The purpose and direction of the group
- Control and power issues
- Organizing the group for effective work
- Maintaining an effective an creative work process
- Meeting members individual needs and coming to terms with the end of an important experience
Work team in Nigeria – how does this look?
*
Group Dialectics
- Belonging
Group membership vs. individuality
- Engaging
Sharing vs. not disclosing
- Speaking
Authority vs dependency and disagreement
Paradoxes that exist in relationships – source of conflict
Impacts
1. commitment levels of the group
2. how activities emerge
3. inclusion vs. exclusion of members
4. norms for acceptable vs. unacceptable behaviour
*
Political Approaches to Org. Conflict
- Regards org. or work groups as “contested terrain” in which individuals and subgroups vie for control of the group
- Looks at how group processes are influenced by power and the struggle for power
Political- dominant and subordinate groups and how they interact to create or mitigate change.
Assumes that power is rooted in social groups with different interests and different social power bases, such as labour an management, male and female, experienced and newcomers
-Played out through negotiation and alliance building among individuals and subgroups
- Often avoids or lack of conflict as a common response to conflict of interests – conflict is suppressed or avoided by defining conflicts of interest as off-limits or by instilling assumptions/ rules/premises in group members that prevent conflicts or interests
- These are often understood as consistent with dominant interests
- This perspective sees open conflict as a failure of the dominant individual or subgroup – assumes power structures that normally suppress conflict have broken down
*
Types of control resulting in conflict…
- Vertical Control
top down; traditional
- Concertive Control or Horizontal
Self-managed teams & quality improvement teams internalize traditional org norms and rules
Resistance is met with “You agreed to this…”
*
Types of Control
- Pluralistic Approaches
Informal groups, cliques or alliances
More fluid, groups and conflicts come and go
Balance of constructive and disruptive
Concerns expressed covertly and overtly; long and short term goals
Differences in power and status within health care teams (Dr. vs. Nurses)
Labour, environmental movement, - moving targets and long and short term goals.
*
Conflict Climate
- Environmental or psychological threats of violence, embarrassment, imbalance of power, competition, distrust vs. collaboration, safety, nurturing, openness, acceptance
- What makes a work or organization’s climate feel one way or another?
History, body language, language used, volume, use of humor, patience, trust, oppositional (agonism – war like stance)
What might be some physical or environmental considerations to create a positive work environment?
Competition, tension, deadlines
*
Workplace Bullying
- Unique form of conflict
- Distinguished by four specific features
Intensity
Repetition
Duration
Power Disparity
*
Workplace Bullying
- Meant to control through insults, gossip, criticism, ridicule and other verbally aggressive behaviour
- Average duration is 18-20 months
- Creates anxiety, physical pain, panic attacks, sleeplessness, self medication, PTSD, under/over eating
*
Characteristics of the Bully
- High need to control, dominate, abuse others
- Lack of self control, history of aggression, acceptibility of seeking revenge
- Discrimatory behaviour based on culture, ethnic groups different from their own
- More bullying in male dominated orgs.
Strandmark, M & Hallbey, Lillemor R. (2007). The origins of Workplace Bullying: Experience of the Perseptions of Bully victims in the Public Service Sector,” Journal of Nursing Management, 15, 332-341
*
Targets
- Anyone can be a target vs.
- Provocative, submissive and rigidly conscientious (confrontational behaviour?)
*
Harassment vs. Conflict
- Usually power imbalance vs. equal power
- Attempt to take power/control vs both actively engaged in disagreement
- Not interested in solving the issue vs attempting to created change
- Repeated and premeditated vs not premeditated; usually issue based
- No remorse vs. one or both parties take responsibility
- Targeted person is harmed or upset vs both upset but no long term damage
- Involves a threat of emotional/ physical harm vs no threat
Test Cases
- Read the following scenarios
- Decide if the situation involves harassment or just unprofessionalism
- Apply the following conditions…
Would a reasonable person in the complainants position perceive the conduct or comment as harassment?-
Did the accused parties intend to harass?
A high school teacher had issues with the way two colleagues acted at work and gossiped about another teacher. On more than one occasion, the teacher had arguments with them, including one where one of his colleagues shouted at him.
- Harassment or unprofessionalism?
Ontario Labour Relations Board dismissed a high school teacher’s harassment complaint after the teacher had issues with the way two colleagues acted at work and gossiped about another teacher. The board found none of the colleagues’ behaviour was directed specifically at him and just because their unprofessionalism offended the teacher, it didn’t qualify as harassment.
*
An employee piled boxes on a Mr. Smith’s desk during a move. Later Mr. Smith’s car was towed from the employee parking lot. The conflict that ensued involved loud voices and the message that he was “one step closer to the door.” Mr. Smith claimed this constituted intimidation and was inappropriately shared with other co-workers. He presented medical evidence supporting anxiety attacks caused by workplace interactions.
Mr. Smith and his doctors said that his anxiety might be alleviated if he were moved away from his immediate supervisor or given another position within the organization.
- Harassment or unprofessionalism?
Arbitrator McKeigan assessed each allegation and found no employer harassment or intimidation. In relation to the changed work hours and moving a chair to permit people to attend meetings, the arbitrator found that these were things done in the usual course of business. The boxes piled on Mr. Thistle’s desk, which he refused to move not because of the nature or quantity of them but ‘on principle’ because he did not put the clutter there in the first place – Mr. Thistle was not required to clean the desk. As for Mr. Thistle’s car being towed, it was Thistle himself who stated that he knowingly parked in a place that blocked other vehicles. While it was not his intention to block the cars he did park knowing that it would be difficult for his supervisor to move his vehicle. Finally, when the Manager spoke loudly so that Mr. Thistle heard him say that `he was one step closer to the door’, while not appropriate for others to hear, McKeigan found this was not intended as intimidation and did not constitute harassment.
It conducted an investigation and concluded that management had not engaged in harassment or intimidation. Further, moving him would not resolve the workplace conflict. Mr. Thistle refused to participate in the return to work plan and wouldn’t accept any accommodation other than being moved to another department or division. On October 17th, 2012, the employer terminated Thistle’s employment as a result of his failure to return to work.
*
Meg is a new Housekeeping staff that started 2 weeks ago. She is often given the cold shoulder by the other staff members, who refuse to help her with any questions she asks; therefore, she is having a hard time “learning the ropes”.
Other staff members also isolate and ignore her during breaks and lunch.
- Harassment or unprofessionalism?
Non-Sexual Harassment in the Workplace
- Making negative comments about an employee's personal religious beliefs, or trying to convert them to a certain religious ideology
- Using racist slang, phrases, or nicknames
- Making remarks about an individual's skin color or other ethnic traits
- Displaying racist drawings, or posters that might be offensive to a particular group
- Making offensive gestures
- Making offensive reference to an individual's mental or physical disability
- Sharing inappropriate images, videos, e-mails, letters, or notes in an offensive nature
- Offensively talking about negative racial, ethnic, or religious stereotypes
- Making derogatory age-related comments
- Wearing clothing that could be offensive to a particular ethnic group
Making negative comments about an employee's personal religious beliefs, or trying to convert them to a certain religious ideology
Using racist slang, phrases, or nicknames
Making remarks about an individual's skin color or other ethnic traits
Displaying racist drawings, or posters that might be offensive to a particular group
Making offensive gestures
Making offensive reference to an individual's mental or physical disability
Sharing inappropriate images, videos, e-mails, letters, or notes in an offensive nature
Offensively talking about negative racial, ethnic, or religious stereotypes
Making derogatory age-related comments
Wearing clothing that could be offensive to a particular ethnic group
*
Sexual Harassment in the Workplace
- Sharing sexually inappropriate images or videos, such as pornography, with co-workers
- Sending suggestive letters, notes, or e-mails
- Displaying inappropriate sexual images or posters in the workplace
- Telling lewd jokes, or sharing sexual anecdotes
- Making inappropriate sexual gestures
- Staring in a sexually suggestive or offensive manner, or whistling
- Making sexual comments about appearance, clothing, or body parts
- Inappropriate touching, including pinching, patting, rubbing, or purposefully brushing up against another person
- Asking sexual questions, such as questions about someone's sexual history or their sexual orientation
- Making offensive comments about someone's sexual orientation or gender identity
Sharing sexually inappropriate images or videos, such as pornography, with co-workers
Sending suggestive letters, notes, or e-mails
Displaying inappropriate sexual images or posters in the workplace
Telling lewd jokes, or sharing sexual anecdotes
Making inappropriate sexual gestures
Staring in a sexually suggestive or offensive manner, or whistling
Making sexual comments about appearance, clothing, or body parts
Inappropriate touching, including pinching, patting, rubbing, or purposefully brushing up against another person
Asking sexual questions, such as questions about someone's sexual history or their sexual orientation
Making offensive comments about someone's sexual orientation or gender identity
*
