How Do I Manage Toxic Staff and Bosses

Its common these days to see mention of the concept of toxic people in the workplace on linked-in and other places. I'm not personally an adherent of the theory that people can be toxic. I favor the idea that circumstances or situations may be toxic or counterproductive instead. I manage toxic behaviors by changing the circumstances and situations where its in my power to do so rather than changing a person or attempting to change a persons character traits.

Firstly let me say nothing I'm going to talk through on this matter should in any way be interpreted to disregard the pain or difficulty of an experience you have had. I feel your pain. I may have a slightly different take on the issue than what is common, but that doesn't mean the difficulties you've experienced in encountering toxic situations are not serious. There is evidence that counter-productive behaviors can hamper organizations.

Meriam Webster defines toxic as

containing or being poisonous material especially when capable of causing death or serious debilitation

Examples of toxic workplace behaviors according to an article by Schwantes are

Cliques, gossip, micromanagement, triangulating, no accountability, sabotage, lack of direct communication, withholding communication, failure to listen

What is the problem with the idea of toxicity? Well toxicity is an intrinsic quality of a material like arsenic. This breaks down with regard to people because I can pretty much guarantee as a security professional that I can construct a circumstance in which you (or anyone) will behave in a manner that fits the definition of toxicity. I can also construct a situation in which you are actually very happy and cooperating productively with a team if given enough resources and a little time to do so as well.

Foundationally there are a couple of problems with the idea of toxicity as a security manager that I have encountered when dealing with staff or bosses. Firstly these are behaviors not intrinsic properties of the individual. Deploying the concept of toxicity in dealing with personnel fails to meet security needs in management because it fails to allow the individual to rehabilitate themselves or allow the organization to change the situation to produce a naturally positive resolution (or avoid recurrences with new hires or regressions to past patterns). In this way this concept of toxicity fails to meet security needs for a large organization by failing to allow a way forward for individuals or organizations other than removing an individual or group of individuals. It is a case of the fundamental attribution error that is actually common in rigid societies. The fundamental attribution error makes the mistake of explaining peoples hostile or counter-productive behavior entirely in terms of their character rather than including the circumstances. In fact as security, law enforcement, or public policy professionals we can, if sufficiently resourced, create a situation that will produce various kinds of criminal or toxic behaviors fairly reliably. We can therefore be more cautious about this issue of attribution and look to altering the situation towards more pro-social circumstances.

What does that mean for managing a staffer or boss and what actions can be taken to change the situation

- we might change the pressures on the team

- improve staff and leadership training on managing conflict and challenges

- foster a regular communication cadence between staff 

- we might provide a greater depth of assistance in the team

- we might articulate new targets and goals to master

- we might alter overtime compensation, reduce overtime burdens, limit off-hours communication requests etc

- we might improve bonuses and benefits

- we might improve aircover by assessing difficulties that the team face with an eye to uncovering demoralizing or unwinnable circumstances

- we might change the reporting strucuture within the organization to align people better

- in some cases staff may be assigned to a position that better fits their training or given training on effectively performing a particular task set

- in some cases staff counseling may be useful - reducing the psychodynamic causes of dissatisfaction or conflict

- we can enhance tools and find technical remedies for challenges the team faces

- ask 5 why's to get to the root causes of problems 

In some cases the concept of toxicity is deployed in low order political strife in organizations. In such cases we might examine if there is enough work that the team can actually master and if the vision has been set in a way that allows alignment and creativity of the team. The point is the label of toxic manager or subordinate may be applied as a result of internal political strife related to the internal conditions of alignment and vision. Its vastly more efficient as a manager to alter these conditions than to try to change a staff member's character by exerting managerial pressure or terminating a staffer.

Finally toxicity can be used against people who run counter to the organizational expectations on a particular issue: they may disagree on an ethical issue, a matter of law or contract requirements or similar. In these cases the toxic label can be unhelpful for diagnosing the actual problem the organization faces. This is a concern since about 75 percent of software engineers who reported problems in how an organization was operating experienced retaliation and software and software security is having an increasingly outsized role in influencing societal outcomes. This can in some cases expose the organization to collapse or liability if not addressed. By contrast looking at circumstances may in some cases reveal these concerns and lead to pragmatic resolution that is actually agreeable to all parties.

As a security manager, especially if I were ever at the nation state level where strategically I want the best out of the whole population not just those who happen to be in my immediate team or employ, I don't use the concept of toxic people. I can use the concept of toxic situations or circumstances instead though. As security managers we are often aware of our ability to influence circumstances so we are aware of the fact that we can cause someone to lash out or behave in a seemingly toxic way if we allow their circumstances to become difficult or untenable. We are also aware of our ability to build situations that favor alignment and working relationships. Not all circumstances are in our control however. This fact that not all situations are within our control needs to be noted and assessed in responding to issues in an organization. Recognizing what is within the staff's ability to influence, and seeking help with what is not is vital. Nonetheless the concept of toxicity is something I find is an anti-pattern for my management of staff or bosses in my experience.

In summary I don't encounter toxic people. I may at some point encounter such a person. I'm not closed to that possibility. But generally the preponderance of the evidence suggests the idea of toxicity is too stigmatizing, escalatory, limits staff development and obscures root causes of problems. There is an abundant literature on the fundamental attribution error and its well understood to cause serious errors in criminal justice policy. However none of this should minimize the pain of people encountering these obstacles and frictions between staff. The harms and stressors are substancial from these experiences. All I would propose is that we look effectively at influencing the situation rather than tackling a person or an intrinsic characteristic of a person which is much harder to change than a circumstance is. 

At a national level I strongly support getting the full potential of our people, it follows that we make considerable effort to create circumstances that are productive and supportive of developing our people's full potential, their full success and wellbeing.

This doesn't mean you should risk your personal health and wellbeing to deal with a bad situation. It also doesn't mean you need to debug situations that you don't control. Suffering at work isn't necessarily uniquely valuable. So do take care of yourself. 

A final word: There is hope, there is often a way out of a difficult situation, or a way to influence or modify a circumstance. You do deserve to realize your full potential without these obstacles. I wish you success and a great work situation.