IEEE Spectrum Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers
February 2001

Occupational Hazard
Defusing stress on the job can stem employee aggression, according to an expert on workplace violence

BY JEAN KUMAGAI
SENIOR ASSOCIATE EDITOR

The 26 December shooting that left seven people dead at an Internet consulting firm in Wakefield, Mass., was the kind of news that shakes everyone. Indeed, an annual survey conducted by Pinkerton Inc. consistently finds workplace violence at or near the top of the list of security concerns for Fortune 1000 firms.

Acts of employee aggression are seldom random, according to Richard V Denenberg and Mark Braverman, authors of The Violence-Prone Workplace: A New Approach to Dealing with Hostile, Threatening and Uncivil Behavior (Cornell University Press, Ithaca, NY, 1999; paperback, February 2001). In many cases, the authors argue, violence on the job may even be prevented — if the root cause is addressed early on. Denenberg spoke with IEEE Spectrum about what companies can do to keep the peace.

IN YOUR BOOK, YOU SAY THAT TRYING TO PREDICT WHO WILL ACT VIOLENTLY IS IMPRACTICAL. BUT WHAT CAUSES EMPLOYEES TO BEHAVE VIOLENTLY AND WHAT CAN COMPANIES DO ABOUT IT?

We look at the problem systemically, at the stress factors in an organization that may lead to violence, rather than just at the individual employee. Competitive pressure, loss of personal autonomy, fatigue, and surveillance can all be factors that increase the risk of violence.

We urge companies to create a culture where people take responsibility for what
goes on around them. Often, violence can be the result of a conflict that's left to fester — a person who is constantly taunted by co-workers may decide to take revenge, for example. If you see a situation that alarms you — co-workers who constantly argue or use threatening language — you address it yourself or else notify someone.

Setting up workplace violence planning and response teams gives people a place to report concerns like that. You can also train employees to do conflict resolution and give "emotional first aid." That way, if they see an individual who s under a lot of stress, they can personally offer support. It's like an early-warning system.

COULDN'T THAT BE CONSTRUED AS
SNITCHING OR AN INVASION OF PRIVACY?

Well, it could. But the goal is to try to stop the troubling behavior as early as possible, short of discharge or discipline. It can be as simple as talking to the person, and letting them know that others find their language alarming.

ARE TECHNOLOGY COMPANIES MORE
AT RISK FROM EMPLOYEE VIOLENCE?

The dot-com world, for example, is really high stress — everyone's competing to bring out the hot new product, and there's the feeling that if you don't succeed, you'll be wiped out. It's boom or bust. One has to assume that induces a lot of workplace stress.

I consider sabotage directed against the company or a co-worker as a form of violence. And it seems to me that high-tech firms are especially vulnerable to that kind of attack, because they use a lot of technology that is very easy to sabotage — a computer network, for example. A 1998 survey by the [San Francisco-based] Computer Security Institute found that computer attacks by employees are a more serious threat than hacking by outsiders — 70 percent of firms reporting computer attacks said they originated inside the organization.

These days almost every company relies on information technology and on IT professionals. Those people have the capability to do a lot of damage, so you [as an employer or manager] want to make sure they're happy people.

BUT PLACES LIKE SILICON VALLEY ARE INHERENTLY STRESSFUL. TELLING COMPANIES THERE TO REDUCE THEIR STRESS LEVEL IS LIKE SAYING, "DON'T BE COMPETITIVE."

They might not be able to change their deadlines, but they can still set up programs, like stress management courses, that help people deal with the stress better. Often it's the cumulative stress, both on and off the job, that may send somebody over the edge.

COULD THE RECENT SPATE OF TECH INDUSTRY
LAYOFFS RAISE THE RISK OF VIOLENCE AT WORK?

If you know that there's going to be workforce reduction and that your job may be affected, that tends to heighten stress and resentment. That goes for the people who get laid off and also for the survivors, whose friends may have been let go.

Some safety consultants counsel employers to do their firing "fast and dirty" — just get them out the door. But I think if you re going to fire someone for cause, you want to explain to them exactly what they did wrong. There's probably nothing more enraging than feeling like you've gotten short shrift. Also, having a grievance or appeal mechanism can act as a kind of release valve.

In many cases, the perpetrators of violence are motivated by the sense that some injustice had been done to them — being fired without good cause or accused of stealing. In the Wakefield shootings, it was garnishing the persons wages, which to some is an incendiary act.

Last May, Timothy Lloyd, a network administrator fired from Omega Engineering Corp., Bridgeport, N.J., in 1996, was convicted of planting a logic bomb that cost the company US $10 million. A judge set aside the verdict; the U.S. Attorney's office is appealing the decision.