Self-Motivation
David Goggins
Former Navy Seal
Career Development
Bryan Cranston
Actor
Critical Thinking
Liv Boeree
International Poker Champion
Emotional Intelligence
Amaryllis Fox
Former CIA Clandestine Operative
Management
Chris Hadfield
Retired Canadian Astronaut & Author
Learn
from the world's big
thinkers
Start Learning

Sexual harassment: Organizations must stop protecting ‘brilliant jerks’

More rules is not what's going to stop sexual harassment at work, says Johnny C. Taylor, Jr. Change the culture.

JOHNNY C. TAYLOR, JR.: Too many organizations have tolerated the brilliant jerk. Too many organizations have tolerated the highly profitable sexual harasser or bully. And what you then do is message to everyone, despite what we say, this is a competitive environment, and he who brings the most money or he who is at the highest level in the organization dictates the rules. And so they vary. There's two sets of rules. There are rules for the powerful and for the not-so-powerful. That is a really complicated issue. And I think it's why we struggle with it.

I'm going to give you an example of something that I just recently experienced. I was interviewed recently with a younger woman, millennial—happens to have been—and she talked about having began her career on Capitol Hill. And she said while on Capitol Hill, she was subjected to a sexually hostile workplace. There was harassment in the traditional sense, people asking people out for dates; the person to whom she reported was openly physically interested in her. And then just the overall milieu, the work milieu—conversations were inappropriate. And she said she knew that she could go to HR, but she chose not to. And she said she knew the policies, the practices and how you could make a complaint. But she chose not to because after she talked with her other colleagues, men and women, what they told her was, if you do that, you're likely not only to limit your career opportunities here, but outside of the organization. You won't ever begin to fully understand the consequences and the ramifications of complaining about this because of the power of the person in the job.

And so essentially, she began to consent to it. And that's a really interesting dynamic that I had never thought about. So on one hand, she said, 'I knew I could have complained. I chose not to because I knew, I factored in what damage it would do to my reputation, professional reputation, going forward.'

So there is a part of people, especially those of us who are upwardly mobile, who decide to tolerate certain behaviors. But from the employee's perspective, it does a couple of things, one, productivity. I can not be focused and deliver my best work, and be as efficient and effective as I can be if I'm distracted by sexual harassment in the workplace. That's number one. Number two, it makes me not bring my true self to work because I'm busy protecting, at least the part of me that's at risk as a result of the incidents of sexual harassment. So it is so important as we invest tens of thousands and, in some cases, hundreds of thousands of dollars in an individual—think about your salary. You're paying someone $50,000 a year; I want $50,000-plus return on that investment. And if that person can't bring their true self, their best self, to you, then you're losing money, and they're not being able to flourish and thrive. So that's the other thing.

Overall morale is people have a fundamental sense of fairness. And it is unfair if the word gets out that this is an organization that tolerates sexual harassment or, in worse cases, encourages it. It so affects the overall culture and the morale and the sense of well-being, that you—it's just countless. We can't even measure the damage that it does to organizations.

Designing a culture where you explain to people what may not rise to the level of legal consequence, but it is of consequence to the culture, to the overall wellness of the workplace. It becomes a really critical part in finding, retaining, and promoting the right people. So this focus, almost a maniacal focus on culture now is the answer versus having new laws, new rules. You see, we've had new rules and new laws on the books for a very long time. Yet we still have sexual harassment and other forms of workplace harassment and discrimination. If rules could solve for this, then we wouldn't have a problem 20 or 30 years later. I mean, we've had a Civil Rights Act Since 1964. And yet we still have race discrimination claims. We still have age discrimination claims. We have all of these things in spite of rules. So what we've now got to do is really focus on how we change the culture in an organization, so the culture itself exists and it pulls people who don't engage in good behavior out. And that's difficult. I mean, think about it. Your star performer is known to flirt the line, if not cross the line, with respect to inappropriate workplace behavior. Are you prepared to fire that person, even if it means you may lose a major contract? That's when employees will judge who you are and what this company is really about. They're going to judge you on what you do, not what you say.

  • "Too many organizations have tolerated the brilliant jerk. Too many organizations have tolerated the highly profitable sexual harasser or bully," says Johnny C. Taylor, Jr., CEO of the Society for Human Resource Management. At this point in time, more rules is not the answer. The workplace culture must reject harassers.
  • When organizations do nothing to stop harassers and have one set of rules for the powerful and one for the powerless, productivity, workplace culture, and morale are affected in ways we can measure, and in insidious, destructive ways that we cannot.
  • "Think about it, says Taylor. "Your star performer is known to flirt the line, if not cross the line, with respect to inappropriate workplace behavior. Are you prepared to fire that person, even if it means you may lose a major contract? That's when employees will judge who you are and what this company is really about. They're going to judge you on what you do, not what you say."



LIVE ON MONDAY | "Lights, camera, activism!" with Judith Light

Join multiple Tony and Emmy Award-winning actress Judith Light live on Big Think at 2 pm ET on Monday.

Big Think LIVE

Add event to calendar

AppleGoogleOffice 365OutlookOutlook.comYahoo

Keep reading Show less

Study details the negative environmental impact of online shopping

Frequent shopping for single items adds to our carbon footprint.

Photo by George Frey/Getty Images
Politics & Current Affairs
  • A new study shows e-commerce sites like Amazon leave larger greenhouse gas footprints than retail stores.
  • Ordering online from retail stores has an even smaller footprint than going to the store yourself.
  • Greening efforts by major e-commerce sites won't curb wasteful consumer habits. Consolidating online orders can make a difference.
Keep reading Show less

Childhood sleeping problems may signal mental disorders later in life

Chronic irregular sleep in children was associated with psychotic experiences in adolescence, according to a recent study out of the University of Birmingham's School of Psychology.

Personal Growth
  • We spend 40 percent of our childhoods asleep, a time for cognitive growth and development.
  • A recent study found an association between irregular sleep patterns in childhood and either psychotic experiences or borderline personality disorder during teenage years.
  • The researchers hope their findings can help identify at-risk youth to improve early intervention.
  • Keep reading Show less

    Neom, Saudi Arabia's $500 billion megacity, reaches its next phase

    Construction of the $500 billion dollar tech city-state of the future is moving ahead.

    Credit: Neom
    Technology & Innovation
    • The futuristic megacity Neom is being built in Saudi Arabia.
    • The city will be fully automated, leading in health, education and quality of life.
    • It will feature an artificial moon, cloud seeding, robotic gladiators and flying taxis.
    Keep reading Show less

    Why do people believe in conspiracy theories?

    Are we genetically inclined for superstition or just fearful of the truth?

    Videos
    • From secret societies to faked moon landings, one thing that humanity seems to have an endless supply of is conspiracy theories. In this compilation, physicist Michio Kaku, science communicator Bill Nye, psychologist Sarah Rose Cavanagh, skeptic Michael Shermer, and actor and playwright John Cameron Mitchell consider the nature of truth and why some groups believe the things they do.
    • "I think there's a gene for superstition, a gene for hearsay, a gene for magic, a gene for magical thinking," argues Kaku. The theoretical physicist says that science goes against "natural thinking," and that the superstition gene persists because, one out of ten times, it actually worked and saved us.
    • Other theories shared include the idea of cognitive dissonance, the dangerous power of fear to inhibit critical thinking, and Hollywood's romanticization of conspiracies. Because conspiracy theories are so diverse and multifaceted, combating them has not been an easy task for science.

    Quantcast