It seems sometimes almost quaint to tag gossip and gossiping as a bad thing. We live in the age of gossip. The proliferation of gossip about celebrities, from sports figures to movie stars to politicians, has increased by a startling degree in the past few decades, and I believe that has loosened the restraint on people’s tongues in many areas of life. The state of Princess Diana and Prince Charles’ marriage and her death, the drunk driving arrest of Mel Gibson, the page problem of former Florida U.S. Congressman Mark Foley, etc., etc.) – all have sparked obsessive media coverage.
Before the 1970s, almost none of this gossip would have been known by the public at large, let alone have graced the pages of a mainstream newspaper or magazine. The National Enquirer, among others, has changed the standards of journalism. Today, not only are we hit with gossip everywhere from the supermarket check-out line to the nightly news, we can almost count on it when we open our email.
Just how quickly have things changed about our attitudes toward gossip? If you go back not too very long ago, to the administration of Franklin Roosevelt, one thing stands out – his personal life was not a primary subject for the media. For example, a number of his biographers have written extensively about his relationship with the “tall, blonde secretary,” a relationship which seemingly continued sporadically in one fashion or another over several decades. But although the affair was hardly unknown around Washington and reported on occasionally in the media, it certainly never became the pulsating, 24-hour, seven-day-a-week news phenomenon seen in the case of President Bill Clinton and White House intern Monica Lewinsky. That relationship, though it had little to do with the genuine issues of the day, quickly dominated media airtime and pages and spawned endless political analysis.
Prominent presidential historian Doris Kerns Goodwin, a Pulitzer Prize winner in history, put it eloquently in a keynote lecture at Kansas State University in 1997:
"Just imagine what the modern media would have made of the Roosevelt White House. The secretary in love with her boss, a woman reporter in love with Eleanor…Prime Minister (Winston Churchill) drinking much of the day. And yet, fortunately, because there was an unwritten rule that the private lives of our public figures were relevant only if they had a direct impact on their leadership, these unconventional relationships were allowed to flourish. How I wish we could return to that standard today, for I have no doubt that many of our best people are unwilling to enter public life for fear of the unnecessary intrusion into their private lives."
Does gossip hurt? How many of us, seeing how the private lives of political figures are subject to the most intense scrutiny and the most insidious interpretations, are willing to run for public office?
13.12.07
6.12.07
Ignore Gossip?
My primary interest in the study of gossip is focused on its impact on organizational effectiveness. More specifically, my primary research and writing interests are on what it takes to make work a great place to be (www.makingworkagreatplacetobe.com). The important question, then, relates to the impact of gossip on creating a workplace that attracts employees.
It is easy to consider gossip unworthy of serious attention. Or, one can see most gossip as benign and of having little impact on the affect of the workplace. After all, if it was that important, they would have given a course on it in business school, right? But, how does gossip, particularly its dark side, contribute to making a great workplace? It can't, and ignoring gossip allows it to take on a life of its own, consuming and inflaming office communications. If unchecked, it can and will overwhelm all other forms of interaction, and waste considerable employee time. I have seen it turn an atmosphere toxic almost overnight.
We know unchecked gossip decreases job satisfaction. No one ever puts on a job application that they seek to work in a poisonous atmosphere, obviously. A constant barrage of gossip makes people lose sight of their primary mission. It clearly can decrease productivity, impair morale and markedly effect relations between employees. It can lead excellent employees to seek new jobs, wasting their experience and the valuable training time invested in them. It is not out-of-the-question for it to lead to lawsuits. It fosters distrust and insecurity. It damages careers.
It is easy to consider gossip unworthy of serious attention. Or, one can see most gossip as benign and of having little impact on the affect of the workplace. After all, if it was that important, they would have given a course on it in business school, right? But, how does gossip, particularly its dark side, contribute to making a great workplace? It can't, and ignoring gossip allows it to take on a life of its own, consuming and inflaming office communications. If unchecked, it can and will overwhelm all other forms of interaction, and waste considerable employee time. I have seen it turn an atmosphere toxic almost overnight.
We know unchecked gossip decreases job satisfaction. No one ever puts on a job application that they seek to work in a poisonous atmosphere, obviously. A constant barrage of gossip makes people lose sight of their primary mission. It clearly can decrease productivity, impair morale and markedly effect relations between employees. It can lead excellent employees to seek new jobs, wasting their experience and the valuable training time invested in them. It is not out-of-the-question for it to lead to lawsuits. It fosters distrust and insecurity. It damages careers.
5.12.07
Male Gossip (continued)
In the blog posted yesterday, I began to look at the topic of male gossip. I argued that men are guilty of engaging in destructive gossip but frequently it involves subjects that we do not traditionally link to gossip; subject like business and religion. Of course, men are not immune to the pleasures of a juicy tidbit. It’s just that men frequently label it with by different words, giving it the aura of greater legitimacy.
Witness the sports page. Certainly, part of that section is devoted to a recitation of yesterday’s game, but a great deal of it is made up of endless speculation about who is in, who may be pitching, replacing the star, who will sign with what team, who might be injured, who is using steroids. Studies have shown that men are very interested in gossip that involves status; who is “in,” and who is “out,” who has authority, whether formal or informal. While celebrity driven-magazines aimed at women have exploded in recent years, so have specialized sporting magazines aimed at men that revel in insider information and “scoops.”
Two other related areas of great interest to men, one traditional and one cutting-edge, also traffic heavily in gossip: Politics and blogging, with its frequently accompanying medium, podcasting. And as any veteran of the Armed Services can attest to, the male-dominated military inspires endless speculation – i.e. gossip – about most everything.
And obviously, the financial industry on Wall Street thrives on gossip and rumor, from hints of lower-than-expected-earnings at a given company to what the Fed is planning to do with interest rates. In the business world, men like to call gossip by the oh-so-respectable sobriquet “networking.”
Witness the sports page. Certainly, part of that section is devoted to a recitation of yesterday’s game, but a great deal of it is made up of endless speculation about who is in, who may be pitching, replacing the star, who will sign with what team, who might be injured, who is using steroids. Studies have shown that men are very interested in gossip that involves status; who is “in,” and who is “out,” who has authority, whether formal or informal. While celebrity driven-magazines aimed at women have exploded in recent years, so have specialized sporting magazines aimed at men that revel in insider information and “scoops.”
Two other related areas of great interest to men, one traditional and one cutting-edge, also traffic heavily in gossip: Politics and blogging, with its frequently accompanying medium, podcasting. And as any veteran of the Armed Services can attest to, the male-dominated military inspires endless speculation – i.e. gossip – about most everything.
And obviously, the financial industry on Wall Street thrives on gossip and rumor, from hints of lower-than-expected-earnings at a given company to what the Fed is planning to do with interest rates. In the business world, men like to call gossip by the oh-so-respectable sobriquet “networking.”
4.12.07
Male Gossip
One of the misperceptions about gossip is that it is subject dependent. By that I mean that gossiping always involves a certain type of subject such as sex, infidelity, divorce and other salacious matters. There is, however, a growing body of feminist literature that would challenge this perspective.
Basically the argument is that for thousands of years what women typically talk about is seen as subjects for gossiping while what men usually talk about is not viewed as involving gossip (this is also divided by the connotation of good communication versus bad communication and you can guess where the connotations lie). Women discuss the details of the lives of family and friends. Men talk about politics, religion and business. Traditionally, chatting about family and friends is viewed as gossip. Talking about government or business is obviously not gossip but rather serious “male” interaction.
But, can not much of what is called male interaction also be classified as gossip? For example, a great deal has been written about conspiracy theorists. Are not most conspiracy interactions that occur over the Internet no more than gossip? Are not the main purveyors of this gossip male? And, does not this gossip have a substantially harmful effect on our society? I point you the reader to a recent article I read called, “Highway to Hell” http://www.newsweek.com/id/73372. Think about male gossip when you read this article.
Basically the argument is that for thousands of years what women typically talk about is seen as subjects for gossiping while what men usually talk about is not viewed as involving gossip (this is also divided by the connotation of good communication versus bad communication and you can guess where the connotations lie). Women discuss the details of the lives of family and friends. Men talk about politics, religion and business. Traditionally, chatting about family and friends is viewed as gossip. Talking about government or business is obviously not gossip but rather serious “male” interaction.
But, can not much of what is called male interaction also be classified as gossip? For example, a great deal has been written about conspiracy theorists. Are not most conspiracy interactions that occur over the Internet no more than gossip? Are not the main purveyors of this gossip male? And, does not this gossip have a substantially harmful effect on our society? I point you the reader to a recent article I read called, “Highway to Hell” http://www.newsweek.com/id/73372. Think about male gossip when you read this article.
3.12.07
Jewish Teaching on Gossip
I have previously taken a quick peek at how Christians and Muslims view gossiping. The Jewish religion sets forth a similar prohibition against the act of gossiping. The word gossip in Hebrew is lashon hara. Its literal translation is the “evil tongue.” Jewish teaching holds that gossip is wrong even if it is true and spread with out malice. The Chefetz Chaim lists a whopping 31 commandments that may be violated when a person passes on or listens to gossip, including "You shall not go about as a talebearer among your people" (Leviticus 19:15-16). To live the faith takes the courage to say when confronted with gossip: “I can’t and I won’t listen to this.”
To passively listen to gossip is as bad a transgression in Jewish teachings as being the one who spreads the gossip. Rabbi Dr. Aher Meir, of the JCT Center for Business Ethics, says in an article for the Jewish Ethicist (online) that Jewish sages hold that gossip kills three: the teller, the listener and the subject. It doesn’t have to be a false or slanderous story; as long as the subject of the report would prefer not to have information known, it is gossip and not fit for further dissemination.
Meir concedes it can be difficult to avoid gossip in an office; doing so can damage someone’s position professional and socially – even leading to the extent he or she might actually be ostracized. But that is the price that must be paid, he says, quoting Rabbi Yisrael Meir HaCohen, the Chefetz Chaim, in a “classic work” on the topic: “Even if refraining from slander will cause a person to lose his job, he has no choice but to fulfill the Torah’s mandate.” It’s also possible, Meir said, that setting a good example can cause other workers “to draw inspiration and courage from your example and also limit their tale bearing.”
To passively listen to gossip is as bad a transgression in Jewish teachings as being the one who spreads the gossip. Rabbi Dr. Aher Meir, of the JCT Center for Business Ethics, says in an article for the Jewish Ethicist (online) that Jewish sages hold that gossip kills three: the teller, the listener and the subject. It doesn’t have to be a false or slanderous story; as long as the subject of the report would prefer not to have information known, it is gossip and not fit for further dissemination.
Meir concedes it can be difficult to avoid gossip in an office; doing so can damage someone’s position professional and socially – even leading to the extent he or she might actually be ostracized. But that is the price that must be paid, he says, quoting Rabbi Yisrael Meir HaCohen, the Chefetz Chaim, in a “classic work” on the topic: “Even if refraining from slander will cause a person to lose his job, he has no choice but to fulfill the Torah’s mandate.” It’s also possible, Meir said, that setting a good example can cause other workers “to draw inspiration and courage from your example and also limit their tale bearing.”
29.11.07
Share Examples
Some time ago and I created a web site www.makingworkabetterplacetobe.com. The purpose of the web site was to promote ideas that would make work a more attractive and productive place for employees. Part of my interest in creating and sustaining a blog around the topic of gossip reflects the corrosive impact of gossiping on the workplace; malicious gossip does not create an attractive workplace. In the recent past I have encountered a number of gossiping incidents in different workplaces that had a devastating effect on relationships and morale. Many times I’ve been asked the question, “How do you keep this from happening?” This blog is in part a response to that question.
I intend to continue to share my ideas related to gossip and its impact on the workplace through this blog. Increasingly I intend to provide suggestions on how to control the dark side of gossip and how to minimize the negative impact from gossiping behavior. As a reader of this blog, you can help. Please respond with personal examples of destructive gossip from where you work and any efforts, successful or not, that have been attempted to deal with the gosiip. Be clear as to how the gossip created harm either to employees, relationships or productivity. Since the point would be to share your examples with a broader audience, write the example in a fashion that keeps the place of work anonymous.
Thank you in advance for participating in this activity.
I intend to continue to share my ideas related to gossip and its impact on the workplace through this blog. Increasingly I intend to provide suggestions on how to control the dark side of gossip and how to minimize the negative impact from gossiping behavior. As a reader of this blog, you can help. Please respond with personal examples of destructive gossip from where you work and any efforts, successful or not, that have been attempted to deal with the gosiip. Be clear as to how the gossip created harm either to employees, relationships or productivity. Since the point would be to share your examples with a broader audience, write the example in a fashion that keeps the place of work anonymous.
Thank you in advance for participating in this activity.
28.11.07
Islam and Gossip
In the last blog I focused on Christianity and gossip. What about Islam? "Do not spy nor let some of you backbite others. Does one of you like to eat the flesh of his dead brother? As this verse from the Qur'an indicates (049.012), yet another major faith abhors gossiping, in the strongest possible terms. Central to the faith is the concept of universal brotherhood - you should treat every other man like your brother. So when you gossip about another, you are, in effect, defying those bonds of brotherhood.
One recent book, “Gossip & Its Adverse Effects on the Muslim Community,” covers the topic. The book examines what its publisher calls “Ghibah” in its excellent preface. “Ghibah” isn’t an easy term to translate- there is no single equivalent word in English, although “gossip” comes closest initially. Ghibah is an interesting, all encompassing word that gives a clue to feeling of Islam on the concept - it also includes back-biting, slandering and scandal-mongering.
As the book’s publisher says: “Whichever word we chose, we cannot escape from the fact that Ghibah affects us all. We have all been victims and - we must be honest - we have all been guilty of this sin. But it is not a matter to be taken lightly - gossip can wreck lives and shatter communities. If we seek to unite as Muslims, we must combat Ghibah. Islam is a practical faith which recognizes the human conditions and offers achievable remedies to the problems that beset us. Every human society faces the problem of gossip, and Islam shows us how to tackle it in a sensible and humane manner. (Interestingly enough, it is not assumed to be solely a female preserve, as popular notions would have us believe!)”
One recent book, “Gossip & Its Adverse Effects on the Muslim Community,” covers the topic. The book examines what its publisher calls “Ghibah” in its excellent preface. “Ghibah” isn’t an easy term to translate- there is no single equivalent word in English, although “gossip” comes closest initially. Ghibah is an interesting, all encompassing word that gives a clue to feeling of Islam on the concept - it also includes back-biting, slandering and scandal-mongering.
As the book’s publisher says: “Whichever word we chose, we cannot escape from the fact that Ghibah affects us all. We have all been victims and - we must be honest - we have all been guilty of this sin. But it is not a matter to be taken lightly - gossip can wreck lives and shatter communities. If we seek to unite as Muslims, we must combat Ghibah. Islam is a practical faith which recognizes the human conditions and offers achievable remedies to the problems that beset us. Every human society faces the problem of gossip, and Islam shows us how to tackle it in a sensible and humane manner. (Interestingly enough, it is not assumed to be solely a female preserve, as popular notions would have us believe!)”
27.11.07
Religion and Gossip
Part of my research into the subject of gossip includes a review of what the great religions have said about the act of gossiping. Gossiping is generally associated with slander and back-biting and universally condemned by all religions.
Christianity is a good example with prohibitions against gossip go back millennia in the faith. These prohibitions are interwoven into the teachings of many of the great Christian thinkers. In the Apostle Paul’s writing, gossiping is sin, akin to other misdeeds as grave as greed, murder and slander. In his famous letter to the Romans, he writes “They are gossips…they know God’s decree, that those who practice such things deserve to die.” Whew – that’s perhaps a bit heavier a punishment than we might prescribe, though it does neatly illustrate the passion Paul felt toward the transgression.
Elsewhere, the Bible has several references to gossip, perhaps the most on-point being: “You shall not go about as a slanderer." (Lev. 19-16), “This is the sort of gossip which tarnishes reputations, divulges secrets,” (Proverbs 20:19), “reignites quarrels” (26:20-26), and “leaves friendships in ruins.” (16:27-28).
What is particularly important to emphasize is that the great religions see gossiping as a transgression on the same level as other serious wrong doing. Thus, while gossiping tends to focus on the sins of the others, the act of doing gossip is viewed as a deadly sin similar to what is being talked about.
Christianity is a good example with prohibitions against gossip go back millennia in the faith. These prohibitions are interwoven into the teachings of many of the great Christian thinkers. In the Apostle Paul’s writing, gossiping is sin, akin to other misdeeds as grave as greed, murder and slander. In his famous letter to the Romans, he writes “They are gossips…they know God’s decree, that those who practice such things deserve to die.” Whew – that’s perhaps a bit heavier a punishment than we might prescribe, though it does neatly illustrate the passion Paul felt toward the transgression.
Elsewhere, the Bible has several references to gossip, perhaps the most on-point being: “You shall not go about as a slanderer." (Lev. 19-16), “This is the sort of gossip which tarnishes reputations, divulges secrets,” (Proverbs 20:19), “reignites quarrels” (26:20-26), and “leaves friendships in ruins.” (16:27-28).
What is particularly important to emphasize is that the great religions see gossiping as a transgression on the same level as other serious wrong doing. Thus, while gossiping tends to focus on the sins of the others, the act of doing gossip is viewed as a deadly sin similar to what is being talked about.
26.11.07
Women and Gossip
Let’s face it: our culture isn’t filled with stories about how much men gossip. All the phrases or sayings in our language reflect the image of women as gossipers. The words are so easy to call up - cat, tattler, prattler. Obviously, none of the images attached to the notion of women as gossips are particularly flattering or admiring. Quite the opposite, in fact. These stereotypes, which are deeply rooted in our culture, are always pejorative or negative. “She’s a gossip” is an epithet that’s been hurled at women for time immemorial, and a misapprehension that continues on to this day.
A top level manager was recently over heard to say that it bothered him to see two females walking down a hallway and talking together, because he was so convinced they invariably were engaged in some form of gossip. (Of course, he didn’t have the slightest clue what they might be talking about.) And it’s no secret that in more rigidly patriarchal societies, those in authority, the men, have an even greater tendency to label much of the communication that occurs between women as mere “gossip.” This downplays and even denigrates the significance of what women say to one another, reinforcing the superiority of male communication (women talk about people and relationships while men talk about politics, work and sports). This, naturally, can encourage women themselves to downplay their interactions and communication.
Since my interests focus on the destructive side of gossip, the fact that women may spend more time than men talking about every day occurrences and relationships is not particularly significant. I have found no research evidence that shows women to be guiltier of malicious gossip then men. More importantly, there is no indication that I have found that indicates malicious gossip from a woman to be more destructive than malicious gossip from a man.
A top level manager was recently over heard to say that it bothered him to see two females walking down a hallway and talking together, because he was so convinced they invariably were engaged in some form of gossip. (Of course, he didn’t have the slightest clue what they might be talking about.) And it’s no secret that in more rigidly patriarchal societies, those in authority, the men, have an even greater tendency to label much of the communication that occurs between women as mere “gossip.” This downplays and even denigrates the significance of what women say to one another, reinforcing the superiority of male communication (women talk about people and relationships while men talk about politics, work and sports). This, naturally, can encourage women themselves to downplay their interactions and communication.
Since my interests focus on the destructive side of gossip, the fact that women may spend more time than men talking about every day occurrences and relationships is not particularly significant. I have found no research evidence that shows women to be guiltier of malicious gossip then men. More importantly, there is no indication that I have found that indicates malicious gossip from a woman to be more destructive than malicious gossip from a man.
22.11.07
Stopping Gossip
To the extent gossiping is a learned behavior, just like any other behavior, it can be changed. For starters, what must be understood is that there are different levels of gossip. Strangers can certainly gossip together – who hasn’t swapped stories with an airplane seatmate about a nutty co-worker or an accounting unit that just can’t seem to get it together? This kind of gossip causes less harm than other forms of the problem, because it’s on a much less intimate basis then, say, a team of co-workers who have worked together for five year. When people who work closely together gossip, and when that gossip turns ugly, the harm and pain it causes can be extreme.
The truth is its part of the human condition, as much as kindness and hatred. We are, after all, social beings where human contact is a necessary ingredient to our well being. We don’t, and will never, have the capacity to completely stop gossip. What we can do is teach people how to deal with gossip – particularly the maliciousness of it. Workable strategies do exist, which can stem the toxic tide without plunging a workplace into totalitarianism. It’s a mistake to say “We’re going to act bigger than it and simply ignore it.” Rather, the critical question concerns what we are going to substitute for malicious gossip. That is a question that I will continue to explore on this blog.
The truth is its part of the human condition, as much as kindness and hatred. We are, after all, social beings where human contact is a necessary ingredient to our well being. We don’t, and will never, have the capacity to completely stop gossip. What we can do is teach people how to deal with gossip – particularly the maliciousness of it. Workable strategies do exist, which can stem the toxic tide without plunging a workplace into totalitarianism. It’s a mistake to say “We’re going to act bigger than it and simply ignore it.” Rather, the critical question concerns what we are going to substitute for malicious gossip. That is a question that I will continue to explore on this blog.
20.11.07
Revisiting Gossip v. Rumor
This blog draws a distinction between rumor and gossip. While each can contain elements of the other, gossip is defined here as the sharing of potentially harmful, strictly personal news between two or more individuals about a third. A rumor is the transmission of information, such as a guess that a company may be sold or that a new CEO is coming on board. The study of rumor typically focuses on the accuracy or inaccuracy of the information that is being transmitted. Gossip, on the other hand, is only incidentally interested in the truthfulness of what is being talked about. Gossip is about being exciting, juicy, scandalous, spicy, salacious and sensational regardless of truth.
While both involve the informal sharing of information, primarily based on personal relationships, I see a significant difference between the two both in content and tone. What we are interested in is the destructive content and tone of gossip not the accuracies and inaccuracies of the informal spread of information through the grapevine of an organization. On the other hand, gossip and rumor collide when gossip is spread by way of the grapevine. In this case, gossip becomes the subject matter of rumor. It is the vibrancy of the grapevine that explains how gossip can quickly be transmitted throughout an organization.
While both involve the informal sharing of information, primarily based on personal relationships, I see a significant difference between the two both in content and tone. What we are interested in is the destructive content and tone of gossip not the accuracies and inaccuracies of the informal spread of information through the grapevine of an organization. On the other hand, gossip and rumor collide when gossip is spread by way of the grapevine. In this case, gossip becomes the subject matter of rumor. It is the vibrancy of the grapevine that explains how gossip can quickly be transmitted throughout an organization.
19.11.07
A Management Perspective
This blog is specifically concerned with the destructive effects of gossip on organizational culture and performance. The primary goal of my writing is to provide a thorough understanding of gossip and a path by which to overcome its destructiveness. Informal communication is an essential part of organizational behavior and, in my view; it does not have to have a malicious, corrosive side. Gossip is all too often a beast running free in the workplace inflicting great harm. It must be tamed and controlled to minimize the damage.
Managers must use as much sophistication when dealing with gossip as they would any other aspect of business life; taking employee communication seriously. Thinking about gossip requires work, because when you analyze it you must also think about concerns like the atmosphere of a workplace, whether interactions between employees tend more to the positive than to the negative and about whether positive communication is even encouraged at your workplace. It also makes managers think about a workplace’s corporate culture or style, something often admittedly uncomfortable. But ignore it at your own peril. If the style of your workplace is oppressive, or the overall tone or policies of the workplace is repressive, you’re guaranteed that toxic gossip will flourish.
Managers must use as much sophistication when dealing with gossip as they would any other aspect of business life; taking employee communication seriously. Thinking about gossip requires work, because when you analyze it you must also think about concerns like the atmosphere of a workplace, whether interactions between employees tend more to the positive than to the negative and about whether positive communication is even encouraged at your workplace. It also makes managers think about a workplace’s corporate culture or style, something often admittedly uncomfortable. But ignore it at your own peril. If the style of your workplace is oppressive, or the overall tone or policies of the workplace is repressive, you’re guaranteed that toxic gossip will flourish.
16.11.07
Read Aloud
Most gossipers in an organization will initially deny it and will be offended if accused. They probably even believe their own denials. Even when directly confronted with a vicious or poisonous e-mail, the person may insist that they were just being blunt or honest.
So, what can you do? Here is one suggestion: to break through the denial have the person read the nasty or gossipy message aloud. This can also be an excellent tactic to ensure that your own emails are not loaded up with a nastiness that you are not intending. When read aloud, you may very well get a response like, ‘Oh my god, I can’t believe it. No wonder that person got out of shape.’ Ultimately we all need to become better monitors of our own communication.
So, what can you do? Here is one suggestion: to break through the denial have the person read the nasty or gossipy message aloud. This can also be an excellent tactic to ensure that your own emails are not loaded up with a nastiness that you are not intending. When read aloud, you may very well get a response like, ‘Oh my god, I can’t believe it. No wonder that person got out of shape.’ Ultimately we all need to become better monitors of our own communication.
15.11.07
Say-it-in-Person Test
A cornerstone of this blog is the belief that an organization can build a communication culture that supports positive interaction while discouraging negative, personally destructive acts. So what is the enlightened office to do to encourage healthy, supportive and productive communication, be it a church or a Fortune 500 company? First off, thinking back over the immediate prior blog, if you can say something in person, don’t use email. Talking to someone personally has the impact of creating greater accountability for what a person is saying. If you can’t simply walk down the hallway to speak with someone, pick up the phone. E-mail has its place as a communication tool but it should be treated like a letter going out, versus something flippant. We should all remember that an e-mail is less personal than face to face interaction and does create a permanent record. The communicator should know that they will be evaluated on the basis of that permanent record. The defense that it is an e-mail not a formal memo should not be persuasive.
14.11.07
Gossiping with Thousands
Recently I was talking with a professional colleague who specializes in the study of communication. He believes that there are those among us who hide their gossip behind a façade of honesty; “I am just being honest.” But, from his perspective, people who pride themselves on bluntness or what they term “honesty” in dealing with others seldom like to get a taste of their own medicine. “They don’t want anyone to communicate back to them that way. They want to send out a rocket or missile, without taking any flak themselves.”
We were further contemplating how e-mail has changed the impact of gossip. The following is a summary of his basic argument:
What I have noticed is that people who communicate face-to-face verbally have less issues of ever being misunderstood. With the advent of email and instant messaging, what should be routine communication easily turns into full-blown misunderstanding. At least when people used to gossip, they were talking to someone - it was one on one. Now it’s one on 1,000. With an email, I can pass my gossip on to 100 people, then stick it in my blog and it’s on to 1,000 more people. Gossip used to be somewhat restrained. Now it’s viral, and you can’t track it down anymore. Nowadays days, where can you go to get your good name back?”
We were further contemplating how e-mail has changed the impact of gossip. The following is a summary of his basic argument:
What I have noticed is that people who communicate face-to-face verbally have less issues of ever being misunderstood. With the advent of email and instant messaging, what should be routine communication easily turns into full-blown misunderstanding. At least when people used to gossip, they were talking to someone - it was one on one. Now it’s one on 1,000. With an email, I can pass my gossip on to 100 people, then stick it in my blog and it’s on to 1,000 more people. Gossip used to be somewhat restrained. Now it’s viral, and you can’t track it down anymore. Nowadays days, where can you go to get your good name back?”
13.11.07
Tilting at Gossip
Recently it was suggested to me that discussing the topic of gossip had a Don Quixote element. From this perspective, working to control gossip is futile given the propensity of the human race to talk about each other.
I would find this argument persuasive if my purpose was to eliminate or control every day chit-chat. But, I am not concerned about normal, benign interaction. My focus is on the destructive impact of communication when it turns ugly and I am not convinced that it is a futile effort to work on controlling or eliminating this type of communication from the workplace. I would further emphasize that my primary focus is not directly on eliminating malicious interaction but rather on building a civil workplace that is strong enough to choke out the dark side of gossip.
I would find this argument persuasive if my purpose was to eliminate or control every day chit-chat. But, I am not concerned about normal, benign interaction. My focus is on the destructive impact of communication when it turns ugly and I am not convinced that it is a futile effort to work on controlling or eliminating this type of communication from the workplace. I would further emphasize that my primary focus is not directly on eliminating malicious interaction but rather on building a civil workplace that is strong enough to choke out the dark side of gossip.
12.11.07
Magnifying the Problem
During the past year there has been an ongoing saga with regard to a small town in the New England states. It seems that a number of employees engaged in acts of gossiping about the city manager’s relationship with a female employee – the gossip all started when she received a nice promotion. Four long-term employees were discharged for having participated in the gossip. Lawsuits have been filed, at least one employee was returned to work and the drama continues.
So, should employees have their employment terminated when they engage in acts of gossip? Under a union contract that would be extremely difficult unless the problem was severe and the employee had been repeatedly warned that gossiping behavior was inappropriate and could lead to termination. Without a Union contract, there are still two primary problems. The first is the extent to which employees have been put on notice as to the fact that gossiping is considered a serious breach of conduct and can lead to discipline. The second is the problem of proof; what is the evidence that the employee has engaged in gossip? I will have much more to write about the relationship between discipline and gossip in a later blog.
Ultimately, one has to wonder whether the decision of the City manager to terminate the four employees works contrary to his interests. For one thing, it seems like an overreaction to what is a rather common phenomenon . Also, it can creates increased suspicion that the gossip was in fact true. Most important, regardless of whether the gossip was true or false, reacting formally to the presence of gossip gives it a front page presence and insurers that everyone is well informed about the subject matter.
Basically I do not believe that in most cases gossip can be attacked head on. Instead of reducing the problem it will most often magnify it. Rather, I believe that the only truly effective approach is to promote, primarily through modeling, the kind of behavior that leads to a positive, civilized workplace.
So, should employees have their employment terminated when they engage in acts of gossip? Under a union contract that would be extremely difficult unless the problem was severe and the employee had been repeatedly warned that gossiping behavior was inappropriate and could lead to termination. Without a Union contract, there are still two primary problems. The first is the extent to which employees have been put on notice as to the fact that gossiping is considered a serious breach of conduct and can lead to discipline. The second is the problem of proof; what is the evidence that the employee has engaged in gossip? I will have much more to write about the relationship between discipline and gossip in a later blog.
Ultimately, one has to wonder whether the decision of the City manager to terminate the four employees works contrary to his interests. For one thing, it seems like an overreaction to what is a rather common phenomenon . Also, it can creates increased suspicion that the gossip was in fact true. Most important, regardless of whether the gossip was true or false, reacting formally to the presence of gossip gives it a front page presence and insurers that everyone is well informed about the subject matter.
Basically I do not believe that in most cases gossip can be attacked head on. Instead of reducing the problem it will most often magnify it. Rather, I believe that the only truly effective approach is to promote, primarily through modeling, the kind of behavior that leads to a positive, civilized workplace.
9.11.07
Rumor v. Gossip
I have often called gossip the dark side of informal communication. The term informal communication is usually associated with an organization where communication has both formal and informal dimensions. Informal communication has a lot to do with the social networks within an organization and the word grapevine used as a synonym. Informal communication can be very important to the success of an organization because it is almost always faster than formal communication. Additionally informal communication has the advantage of candor but also the potential problem of inaccuracy.
Rumor is another form of informal communication. Rumor can be defined as spreading and collecting information through the grapevine. Gossip, as I am defining it in this blog, can be spread by way of rumor. However, while it is easy and often common place to use the words rumor and gossip interchangeably, they can be distinctly separate activities. Gossip is defined as malicious communication about a person or persons. Rumors do not have to be personal in nature as they often involve organizational activities, technical information, changes in organizational strategy and other matters of importance to individuals within the organization.
Rumor is another form of informal communication. Rumor can be defined as spreading and collecting information through the grapevine. Gossip, as I am defining it in this blog, can be spread by way of rumor. However, while it is easy and often common place to use the words rumor and gossip interchangeably, they can be distinctly separate activities. Gossip is defined as malicious communication about a person or persons. Rumors do not have to be personal in nature as they often involve organizational activities, technical information, changes in organizational strategy and other matters of importance to individuals within the organization.
8.11.07
Examples
One of my reasons for publishing this blog is to provide a venue for sharing examples of destructive gossip and tactics that have been tried to address the problem.
Please, share your thougts and experiences.
Please, share your thougts and experiences.
Say it to Their Face
One of the difficulties in discussing gossip is the fact that the term encompasses a wide variety of behavior. My interest in the topic is narrowly focused on gossip as malicious, destructive communication behavior. I recognize that we are all social creatures and that spending time with others discussing the details of people’s lives is both normal and important. So, how does one distinguish between the gossip that I want to expunge from the workplace and that which is both necessary and healthy? Here is one test; in talking with a fellow employee about a third employee would you change what you were saying if the third employee joined the conversation? If what you are saying about a person cannot be said when that person is present then maybe you should not be saying it at all.
7.11.07
Gossip as Punishment
One of the articles that I recently read about gossip focused on the act of gossiping as a payback tool. In other words, an individual feels wronged by a person in a power position and gossiping about that person is a way of punishing for the wrongdoing. An example that was given in the article focused on a study of women in a traditional, middle-eastern culture. The women in the study were all married to a man with multiple wives. The researcher found that the women spent an inordinate amount of time talking in extremely disparaging ways about their husbands. Conclusion, a culture in which women have little power and in a marital relationship with even less power, gossip becomes the available tool by which to strike back.
It is not hard to extrapolate from this example to the American workplace where women have traditionally had little power. In this context, gossip on the part of low power women can be viewed as a method to punish, for example, a male boss who abuses power. Similar logic can be applied to racial or cultural groups that have been assigned low power positions in organizations.
Keeping in mind the basic purpose of this blog which is to promote a civilized workplace over one filled with malicious, destructive communication, the problem with gossip as a tool to redress grievances is that it promotes a hostile work environment while not addressing the problem. Obviously from the above examples, there are two significant problems: 1) the power imbalance and 2) the abuse of power through a failure to show respect and appreciation for those in a subordinate position. Gossiping will not confront either of these problems.
I recently ran across a short internet article about a town in Brazil that was so fed-up with gossip in the workplace that it passed an ordinance prohibiting it. I hate to be the bearer of bad tidings to the town council but their ordinance will have little impact on the private communications between their employees. Instead, the council might look to the relationship between superiors and subordinates and evaluate the extent to which some groups (women perhaps) have been traditionally denied access to power positions and/or look at the way power is used by the individuals occupying positions of power. My sense is that the council will achieve a lot more towards halting destructive communication by taking these actions than by their anti-gossip ordinance.
It is not hard to extrapolate from this example to the American workplace where women have traditionally had little power. In this context, gossip on the part of low power women can be viewed as a method to punish, for example, a male boss who abuses power. Similar logic can be applied to racial or cultural groups that have been assigned low power positions in organizations.
Keeping in mind the basic purpose of this blog which is to promote a civilized workplace over one filled with malicious, destructive communication, the problem with gossip as a tool to redress grievances is that it promotes a hostile work environment while not addressing the problem. Obviously from the above examples, there are two significant problems: 1) the power imbalance and 2) the abuse of power through a failure to show respect and appreciation for those in a subordinate position. Gossiping will not confront either of these problems.
I recently ran across a short internet article about a town in Brazil that was so fed-up with gossip in the workplace that it passed an ordinance prohibiting it. I hate to be the bearer of bad tidings to the town council but their ordinance will have little impact on the private communications between their employees. Instead, the council might look to the relationship between superiors and subordinates and evaluate the extent to which some groups (women perhaps) have been traditionally denied access to power positions and/or look at the way power is used by the individuals occupying positions of power. My sense is that the council will achieve a lot more towards halting destructive communication by taking these actions than by their anti-gossip ordinance.
2.11.07
Gossip: Good or Bad?
Gossiping is not always seen as something that is bad. It depends somewhat on how you define it and what perspective you take towards it. Gossip can be defined as communication about the doings, the virtues and vices of others. From this context anthropologists and sociologists often see gossip as providing the positive outcome of maintaining the unity, values, norms and morale of social groups. Gossip, then, is a censoring of inappropriate behavior, a way of ensuring conformance with group standards. One academic source I recently visited insisted, in fact, that it is nieve to view gossip as a destructive event.
With due respect to academics (I am one) and recognizing that there is a larger context within which to study the impact that gossip has on groups of various size, we are still left with the reality that gossip within an organization can be highly destructive and certainly demoralizing. We are also left with the question of whether the hurtfullness of gossip is a price that must be paid to ensure conformance with group norms. Are there not more constructive ways for the group to ensure adherance to basic values?
Paint me naive but I am convinced an affirming civilized workplace can be achieved without the presence of the dark side of gossip.
With due respect to academics (I am one) and recognizing that there is a larger context within which to study the impact that gossip has on groups of various size, we are still left with the reality that gossip within an organization can be highly destructive and certainly demoralizing. We are also left with the question of whether the hurtfullness of gossip is a price that must be paid to ensure conformance with group norms. Are there not more constructive ways for the group to ensure adherance to basic values?
Paint me naive but I am convinced an affirming civilized workplace can be achieved without the presence of the dark side of gossip.
Taking the Sting out of Malicious Workplace Communication
During the past year in a small farming community, located within the state of my residence, the town newspaper had a front page article about a confrontation between two male principals in the local school district. A yelling match occurred in front of students to the extent that police had to be called and both of the principals were arrested on a charge of disorderly conduct. Both entered guilty pleas to the charges and one resigned from the district while the other was demoted back to the position of a teacher. Allegedly one of the principles had been engaged in the spreading of gossip about a relationship between the other principal and one of the female teachers in his school.
Gossip, as it is being defined in this blog, is the dark side of informal communication within an organization. No workplace is free either of gossip itself or the negative effects that often accompany its presence. Obviously, there is a lot of on-going chit-chat that might be called gossip. That is not the focus of this blog. My concern is the type of informal communication that is destructive and hurtful.
My intention is to share thoughts and examples that will illustrate the nature of the problem and just that spell out tactics and strategies for dealing with the problem. Please feel free to sharing samples from your work experience: what happened? How was it dealt with? To what success?
So what about the process of taming gossip? There was a recent blurb on the internet about a town council in
I also wrote the No Asshole Rule because there is so much evidence that civilized workplaces are not a naïve dream, that they do exist, and that pervasive contempt can be erased and replaced with mutual respect when a team or organization is managed right – and civilized workplaces usually enjoy superior performance as well.
My thought is that civilized workplaces do not feature malicious gossip. So, let’s go about the business of building a civilized workplace. I will have much more to say about this in future blogs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)