The Toxicity We Tolerate at Work | Catherine Mattice

Summary

Podcast Summary:

Work For Humans
Episode: The Toxicity We Tolerate at Work | Catherine Mattice
Host: Dart Lindsley
Guest: Catherine Mattice (founder, Civility Partners; author, Navigating a Toxic Workplace for Dummies)
Date: February 24, 2026

---

Episode Overview

This episode explores workplace toxicity: how it emerges, why organizations tolerate it, and practical strategies for healing and prevention. Dart Lindsley sits down with Catherine Mattice, a hands-on consultant specializing in resolving toxic work cultures. Together, they cover the subtle and overt forms of toxic behavior, the roles of ambiguity and leadership, and the crucial part managers, HR, and individuals play in either perpetuating or resolving toxicity.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Defining Toxicity at Work

• Toxic behaviors are broader than just harassment or legal violations; they include incivility, microaggression, sarcasm, neglect, and unresolved conflict.

• Toxicity exists on a spectrum—at the low end are eye-rolling, sarcasm, or subtle exclusions. If unaddressed, these escalate to bullying and harassment.

• “Toxicity is any behavior that's disrupting a team's functioning or causing harm.” (Catherine, 08:20)

  "Most toxicity at work is a lot quieter than that. It shows up as sarcasm, neglect, unresolved conflict, and a grinding erosion of trust."
  — Dart Lindsley, [00:58]

2. Culture and Its Role in Toxicity

• Culture is not abstract; it's the shared, daily expectations and behaviors within an organization.

• Ambiguity in roles, processes, and behaviors is a breeding ground for toxicity.

  "Culture lives in the everyday interactions of the workforce. It's how people behave based on what they believe will be tolerated or even rewarded."
  — Catherine, [10:47]

• OIL Model: Organization-wide behaviors, Individual behavior, and Leadership/management all interplay in defining culture.

3. Causes and Amplifiers

• Ambiguity creates frustration, survivalist behavior, and opens the door for bullies to thrive.

  "Ambiguity creates frustration, and human nature is to have expectations and have those be met ... people start to kind of survival of the fittest, start eating each other."
  — Catherine, [00:04] / [14:17]

• Neglect from leadership or lack of operational clarity often results in distrust and conflict during and after stressful incidents (ex: strikes, mergers).

• When managers or HR do not address low-level toxic behaviors, "reservoirs of resentment" build up, making problems much worse later.

4. Addressing Toxicity: Methods & Stories

Firefighting Organizational Toxicity

• Catherine describes interventions involving:
  • Listening sessions—to surface hidden grievances and begin trust-building ([17:55]).
  • Shared reports—transparency in findings to both leadership and rank-and-file.
  • Ongoing dialogue—structure for continued feedback between leadership and employee representatives.
• Case example: A hospitality organization post-strike faced resentment and cultural rifts. Through assessment and leadership coaching, they began operationalizing desired cultural traits, adjusted onboarding/interviewing, and started rebuilding trust.

Humor, Culture, and Boundaries

• Not all candid or “rough-edged” humor is toxic, but it must not cross into humiliation.

  “Humor is great, but if it starts to blend into somebody being humiliated because an entire room of people's poking fun at something, that person needs to feel comfortable to come back and talk to somebody about it and say, ‘yesterday in that meeting, I felt really humiliated.’”
  — Catherine, [25:56]

"Bad Actors" as a Cause

• Some toxicity stems from abrasive leaders—usually high performers intolerant of perceived incompetence.
• Such individuals are often unaware of their impact until confronted with structured feedback (e.g., 360 interviews).

  "Because these people are not psychopaths, most of the time, they are often very appalled. They had no idea that this is how badly they were seen, and they very much are interested in change."
  — Catherine, [38:33]

5. The Roles of HR, Leaders, and Managers

• HR: Often held back by a lack of authority or support from leadership. 75% of HR is female; the lack of power ties into broader systemic inequities ([44:27]).

  “HR professionals ... very much wanted to make it better ... It was because I couldn't get permission from the leader to address this problem.”
  — Catherine, [40:52]

• Managers: Underestimated as culture drivers. Their "superpower" is creating psychologically safe spaces, directly addressing bad behavior, and proactively building good day-to-day culture ([50:53]).
• Responsibility: CEO clarifies culture, HR implements processes, managers shape team experience, and individuals must also promote positive interaction.

6. Top-Down vs. Bottom-Up

• Most toxicity flows top-down (80%), but solutions must be both top-down and bottom-up. Everyone holds responsibility for the immediate circle around them ([52:43]).

7. Recognizing and Responding to Toxicity

• Listening to your gut: If you dread going to work or toward a coworker, it's a red flag ([47:27]).
• Compare company values against actual behaviors.
• Privilege plays a role: Those with more security (demographic, professional) may feel safer speaking out. HR’s real power depends on executive support ([43:30]; [44:27]).
• Collective voice: Problems are harder to ignore when surfaced by groups.

8. Replacing—Not Just Stopping—Toxicity

• Simply halting bad behavior isn’t enough; it must be replaced by intentional practices of civility and proactive respect.

  “You can’t teach people nothing. What happens when you leave? … And I said, civility.”
  — Catherine, [57:41]

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• "Toxicity is any behavior that's disrupting a team's functioning or causing harm." (Catherine, [08:20])
• "Reservoirs of resentment … build up. Things get worse." (Dart, [09:47])
• "Ambiguity is actually a really big predictor of workplace bullying." (Catherine, [14:01])
• "Humor is a great way for humans to connect… but if it starts to blend into humiliation, you need to feel comfortable to speak up." (Catherine, [25:56])
• "Managers are way undertrained on how to create culture within their team..." (Catherine, [50:39])
• "Culture exists within each of our individual behavior. Nobody should be waiting around for leaders to do something..." (Catherine, [52:51])
• "It needs to be replaced by something else. Civility – hence the name Civility Partners." (Catherine, [56:26])
• "If your gut feels that you're in a toxic work environment, if you dread going to work ... there's something worth exploring." (Catherine, [47:27])

---

Important Timestamps

• Intro & motivation behind Catherine’s career: [04:31]
• Practical definition of toxicity and culture: [08:20] – [10:47]
• Ambiguity as a seed for toxicity: [14:01] – [14:17]
• Case study: Company post-strike and culture repair: [15:51] – [20:55]
• Humor, boundaries, and permissiveness: [24:07] – [28:39]
• Team-to-team toxicity and the role of silos: [29:43] – [32:23]
• Change management and lack thereof fueling toxicity: [32:52] – [34:15]
• Bad actors: coaching abrasive leaders: [34:38] – [39:06]
• HR’s limits; privilege and speaking up: [39:06] – [44:27]
• Recognizing toxicity as an employee: [47:12] – [49:30]
• Responsibility for cleanup; managers’ superpower: [49:41] – [52:37]
• Top-down vs. bottom-up approaches: [52:43] – [54:18]
• Replacing toxicity with civility: [56:26]
• Catherine’s personal motivation and costs: [58:46] – [61:05]

---

Flow & Tone

• The conversation is pragmatic, warm, and hopeful—grounded in on-the-ground problem-solving rather than abstract theory.
• Catherine balances realism (“It's hard, but I love it” [06:47]) with optimism and actionable advice.
• Dart brings a candid, reflective perspective, tying in personal and previous guest experiences, and keeps focus on tangible examples and operational solutions.

---

In Summary

The episode dissects the quiet and insidious nature of most workplace toxicity, emphasizing that it is often tolerated for the sake of high individual performance or due to systemic neglect and ambiguity. Catherine Mattice brings both compassion and rigor, advocating for proactive, practical steps—especially by managers and HR—to replace toxicity with operational civility, underpinned by clear expectations, open communication, and ongoing feedback.

For listeners: If your gut says something's wrong at work—or you witness daily low-level negativity—don’t ignore it. Addressing and preventing toxic environments is everyone’s responsibility, from the C-suite to the newest hire. Making civility operational is the route to healthier workplace cultures.

---

To connect with Catherine Mattice or learn more:

• CivilityPartners.com
• Her book: Navigating a Toxic Workplace for Dummies
• LinkedIn: Catherine Mattice
• Keynote speaking: katherinemattice.com

Transcript

[A]

Ambiguity creates frustration, and human nature is to have expectations and have those be met. To a certain extent, I should know how to get my work done and who I should ask for help and which department I need. And so that frustration starts to bubble up and people start to kind of survival of the fittest, start eating each other, you know, and trying to have more control than they're able to get. And that can result in getting after people. Also, ambiguity can be a tactic for somebody who engages in bullying. You know, I'm not going to give you all of the instructions and see if you can figure it out, because I'm going to test you because I'm not sure you're competent or I'm going to make things hard for you or hard for my team so that I am the hero in the story.

[B]

Welcome to the Work for Humans podcast. This is Dart Lindsley. When people talk about toxic workplaces, they often picture the most extreme ones shouting harassment, the kind of abuse that lands everybody in court. But most toxicity at work is a lot quieter than that. It shows up as sarcasm, neglect, unresolved conflict, and a grinding erosion of trust. My guest today is Catherine Matthias. Kathryn is the founder of Civility Partners and the author of Navigating a Toxic Workplace for Dummies. She's not a theorist. She's someone who goes in on the ground. She conducts interventions for organizations that are in trouble, struggling with bullying, harassment, incivility, and all the quieter forms of toxicity that slowly undermine trust and, ultimately, performance. In this conversation, we talk about why toxic behavior is so often tolerated, how high performers sometimes become protected sources of harm, and why ambiguity and poor change management can create the conditions for bullying to emerge. We also look at the roles leaders, managers, hr, and individual contributors can all play in either reinforcing or healing workplace culture. We spend time on what replacing toxicity looks like in practice, how respect becomes operational, and why creating a healthy workplace is less about slogans and more about everyday decisions. All right, if you enjoy the show, please leave a review and subscribe wherever you listen to podcasts so you don't miss the next episode. Now let's get on to my conversation with Kathryn Matthias. Kathryn Matthijs, welcome to Work for Humans.

[A]

Thank you for having me.

[B]

So on the show, we talk about work as a product and how to design it better. And all of my research and the research of people around me have led to the conclusion that people want to work that gets the job done for them. Whatever that job is, the job that they want done is incredibly diverse. In fact, when we really look at it, everybody wants something different from work, but they want to buy that product at a reasonable cost. And so on the show, we've spent a lot of time talking about the value of work and how to get more value out of the work. We spent a little bit of time talking about the cost. So, for instance, we had Jennifer Moss on the show talking about burnout. We had Christina Maslach on the show who really created the index of burnout and got burnout at work into the World Health Organization as something that really needs to be considered. And so we've done a little bit. You're speaking from a very different perspective position. You're speaking from, not a theorist, but somebody on the ground dealing with workplace toxicity. And you've written the book, which is Navigating a Toxic Workplace for Dummies. So it's a dummies book.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

Always so easy to read. So we're going to talk to you today and we're really going to hear a lot about kind of the reality, not the theory, what's going on? How did you arrive at doing this for a living?

[A]

Well, I was in a toxic work environment, so I was internal hr. And actually the culture itself was pretty good. The leader was really great. We had one toxic person that I watched firsthand dismantle the culture and make people unhappy. And as hr, they were coming to me for help. I was really seeing how much it cost because I was the one hiring people. And then they'd leave and I'd hire new people. And I just saw how damaging it was. And I also felt bullied. I was definitely on this person's list, and the leader just wouldn't address it. I kept talking to the leader of the organization about it, and he would just say, oh, that's just how he is. I don't know why people let it bother them. And you could be the bigger person, Katherine. Don't let it bother you. I started getting my master's degree while I was working there, and it's in communication from San Diego State. And my very first semester, my two classes were ethnography, which, as you know, is studying something you're in. And my other class was called the Dark side of Communication. So I needed a topic for both of these classes. I thought for ethnography, my paper will be on work, and for dark side, it will be on this person. So I started doing some research and came across the phrase workplace bullying in the academic research. Turns out there's at the time, 30 years of academic research from around the world on that topic. And I was very fascinated by it. So it was in some ways kismet. I just really used that as therapy. Everything I did in grad school was on the topic of workplace bullying. And then when I got out of graduate school, I wrote my first book. Ken Blanchard wrote the foreword to it. So that was pretty neat to have his endorsement that this was a thing that needed to be solved and started my business and here I am.

[B]

And your business is essentially being a fire jumper.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

Which is jumping in behind the lines of a fire and helping a company to heal itself from toxicity.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

I don't want that job. I will just tell you that sounds really, really hard.

[A]

It is hard, but I love it.

[B]

So you kind of said it. But if I'm a business leader, why should I care?

[A]

Well, just from a human standpoint, hopefully as a business leader, you care about the people who work for you and give you their all every day. You care that they're feeling respected and that their dignity is intact. From a business case standpoint, there's all sorts of research that toxicity causes burnout. For example, people are less loyal, they care less about customers, so they're leaving. Turnover is a cost. So there's a real bottom line cost that maybe a leader can't necessarily see on a P and L, but it's there. And unfortunately, I'll just add, a lot of times clients come to us where the narrative is that HR has been trying to get leaders address the toxicity that they see, much like I was doing way back when. And the leaders are looking at the P and L going, well, we're fine, we're good. Culture's sort of a nice to have in that leader's mind. And then some big ugly problem slaps the leader in the face and then they finally say, okay, hr, we're ready to have you solve the problem.

[B]

There's two terms I know I'm going to want to pinned down. One of them. Is toxicity toxic. What falls into that category? Is it different from harassment? Is harassment a subset of it?

[A]

Great question. I'm going to start with a loose definition. Toxicity is any behavior that's disrupting a team's functioning or causing harm. So toxicity could be microaggression, could be incivility, it could be conflict that is not getting solved and creating friction. It could be one manager or leader who's a bully. I think burnout fits under toxicity. It's creating harm. That's toxicity. And I always talk about the spectrum of behaviors. So at one End is these things I'm talking about incivility, microaggressions, sarcasm that's pushing the boundaries or making fun of someone that's at the low end of bad behavior or toxicity. And if that stuff's allowed to go on, then it can certainly evolve into harassment, which of course is also toxic. But I think the disconnect is that a lot of times organizations don't pay attention to this quote, unquote, lower level bad behaviors or toxic behaviors because they're not unlawful and we're not here to micromanage each other. And everybody's had a rough day and they might snap at a coworker, but when it's this pervasive, ongoing bad behavior that's causing harm, then that's toxic and it should be addressed before it escalates to bullying or harassment.

[B]

I heard an interesting thing in what you said, that there are actions which are toxic, but then there's a reservoir of resentment that there's something that it's not like the action happens, it goes away, things build up, things get worse. There's probably a reservoir of I got away with that before and so I think I can get away with more. So there are these different places where it happens and places where it continues to smolder.

[A]

Yes.

[B]

How do you define culture? I will tell you, every time I hear the word culture, what's the feeling I get in my heart? It's a word sort of like dreams, which is I don't know how to touch it or change it, and I don't know what it is. And I feel like it's ephemeral, so I can't fix it. So how do you define culture?

[A]

Culture lives in the everyday interactions of the workforce. That's culture. So it's how people behave based on what they believe will be tolerated or even rewarded.

[B]

I did hear, and you almost, I think you said it there, which is that I did hear a good definition of culture that I liked, which is shared expectations of behavior. Yeah, the culture, it's not just expectations of behavior. It is shared among the population, correct?

[A]

Yes. And so organizations have the ability to influence those shared expectations through how the organization itself behaves, how it makes decisions, the policies it has in place, whether or not it's consistent in holding people accountable to respectful behavior. And then individuals in teams develop their shared expectations. And then the leadership team has to be very clear about what the expectations are and give resources and money and time towards allowing that shared expectation to flourish. So we call that the oil model. Organizational behavior, individual Behavior and leadership, team behavior. So, yes, it's shared expectations. That's a nice concise definition, but it lives in those three areas. And when those areas are not aligned or not even clarified, then that's when toxicity starts to bubble.

[B]

In our interviews, we've interviewed a lot of people about the cost of work, and I want to pull up our list and see which ones, because not all costs of work are toxicity.

[A]

Right.

[B]

And so there are things that are costs of work, many of which are just opportunity costs. Which is the cost of my work is I don't get to do this other work, which I would rather do. Or the cost of work for me is that I'm not able to bring all of my potential. And so there's a cost of wasted potential. And so let me really quick pull up the list.

[A]

Yeah, I would think the cost of, you know, I have to work late and miss dinner with my kids because I want to get promoted or be seen in this organization.

[B]

Exactly. And so we have. It cost me my freedom, which is essentially lack of autonomy. Some of them line up, though, and so I didn't sort them ahead of time, but I think I can say some of them status threats. So demeaning comments or demeaning behavior would fall into toxicity. My commute is a cost, but that's not toxic. Time away from my family is a cost, but that's not toxic. But then we get to these other ones. Moral injury, being asked to do things that I think are wrong. Bullying definitely falls in. Interesting. The idea of uncertainty, which is one of the things that people say is my job gives me no ability to predict my schedule and no ability to predict whether I'm going to have a job next year, what my pay is going to be. That's a costly thing for some people who prefer certainty. And although it's potentially not toxic, it's

[A]

a kind of neglect in and of itself. It's not toxic, but it certainly would breed toxicity as people are frustrated or things are ambiguous for them. Ambiguity is actually a really big predictor of workplace bullying.

[B]

Tell me about that.

[A]

When things are ambiguous, whether it be I don't know the schedule or I don't know who's supposed to do what, or I'm going to do this because I don't know who else to does it or I don't know who to ask. Ambiguity creates frustration, and human nature is to have expectations and have those be met. To a certain extent, I should know how to get my work done and who I should ask for help and which department I need. And so that frustration starts to bubble up and people start to kind of survival of the fittest start eating each other and trying to have more control than they're able to get. And that can result in getting after people. Also, ambiguity can be a tactic for somebody who engages in bullying. You know, I'm not going to give you all of the instructions and see if you can figure it out because I'm going to test you because I'm not sure you're competent or I'm going to make things hard for you or hard for my team so that I am the hero in the story.

[B]

So I want to start exploring types of toxicity, the sources of toxicity and the solution. And I want to do it as much as possible through story. So it's always going to follow this type source solution. If we can pull that off, can you tell a story of a fire that you jumped into, how you go about discovering what's going on, what you discovered? And we'll go from there.

[A]

So one type of toxicity is just organizational toxicity wide, organization wide. That comes from leaders not being clear about what the culture should look like and not putting resources towards that. So as an example, we had a client last year, we're still working with them. Now they're in hospitality and they had 200 people go on strike. And it was interesting because when the strike was over and those individuals came back, people weren't necessarily mad that they went on strike. It wasn't that. It was while you were on strike. I observed behavior from you that makes me not trust you or even like you. I saw the sign you were holding that was getting after the leadership or I saw what you posted on social media. And so there all of a sudden was all of this distrust between those folks who went on strike and the leadership team and the managers who obviously had to put in a ton of work to make up for these 200 people being on strike and then feeling pretty attacked.

[B]

Can I tell a story about that?

[A]

Sure.

[B]

My sister was a charge nurse. She was the manager of a neonatal intensive care unit. She had 250 direct reports. Her job was already absolutely impossible. That was three shifts. And what was on the line? The lives of babies. I mean, it was really a difficult position to be in. The nurses would go on strike and she was incredibly offended by what they would say about her. Not by name, but in general. And it was hard when they came back. It's exactly the story you're talking about, which is that when everybody came back from strike and wanted to go back to normal. It was hard as what we were talking about. A reservoir of resentment that she couldn't shake.

[A]

Yeah. And it was interesting because the people who came back were like, okay, let's work. We're back, we're ready. And they didn't quite understand, like, why doesn't my boss want to talk to me? I feel like they're ignoring me. I don't get it. And the answer was, well, they read what you posted on social media and they're angry and hurt. So the way that we solved that and we still have a long way to go, but what we started off with was listening sessions. So the biggest thing is to help build trust and help people trust us as the consultants, but also start to recognize that they can let their guard down and trust leadership too. Like, hey, your leadership is putting effort and resources towards solving this problem through stability partners. So we did a ton of listening sessions with a variety of groups. We did some one on one interviews with key players on both sides. We met with the union team, and from there we worked very closely with the leadership team of that group to decide what the culture could look like and should look like. And part of the problem, you know, we go on strike for benefits and pay. But really what had cracked was two different cultures had been merged. And one culture was known for being kind of toxic on its own, and the other culture was kind of seen as the boy scout side. And so they had these merging of these. All of these employees a few years prior where they had never come together on a culture. So we were able to find out through those listening sessions, what do you need from each other? What do you want the culture to look like? What happened? Why did you go on strike? Beyond the obvious extra $2 pay or whatever. And so then we were able to help the leadership team recognize that they could make culture operational in the same way that they have operations for everything else when XYZ happens. Here's what you do about that. So really helping them make culture not so abstract. We did a lot of coaching with the top leader of that whole group. One of his issues was that he was kind of a yes man. So helping him really take on a leadership role and be in charge and recognize that you should be making decisions, even if people disagree with them. Explain why you made that decision. You can still be democratic about it, but in the end, you have to lead. So that was a big component of it as well. This coming year, we'll be helping them with their onboarding so that they can bring culture more into the conversation with their onboarding. We help them with their interview process. So there's just a lot of different places to touch, you know, to help them move their culture. But they've come a long way and sometimes just those listening sessions is a big win. Or a lot of times where it's just kind of a sigh of relief of like, okay, we feel like there's hope to repair this.

[B]

Who needs to be seen listening? Who needs to be seen doing the listening? Is it okay for you to go in and listen?

[A]

Yes.

[B]

Is that enough? And then turn it into a report that you give to other people, or do people need to meet face to face?

[A]

So we start off as the buffer. We're doing all of the listening. We do create a report and everybody gets a copy. It's not here's leadership secret report, it's here's the report and everybody gets it so that everybody's on the same page. That builds trust. And then, yeah, we start facilitating listening between the leaders and the group. So in that particular case, we helped the union leadership and the leadership start to build a process where they're going to start meeting much more regularly so they can address issues more regularly and in an ongoing basis. So, yes, they are pre paired up to be listening, but initially there's a lot of distrust when we get there, so. So we're the ones who have to do the listening.

[B]

One of the challenges between unions and management is that the only thing that they can negotiate, because it's ultimately going to end up in a contract, are things that can be captured in a contract. They're the very most legible things. And so it becomes a discussion about pay, it becomes a discussion about benefits. And those are important things. But there's a very large number of things that can't be contractually arranged.

[A]

Correct. But you lean into culture. So one of the things that we did with that group was the leadership and the union leadership, together with our facilitation, created professional standards, kind of a code of conduct. So, no, it's not in the contract, but we're going to lean on culture. Right. So now the union leadership is pushing this down into the ranks. The managers are pushing it down into the ranks. So there's this unified, here's how we think we should all be behaving, and we're all agreeing that we can hold each other accountable to it.

[B]

You mentioned something about the Boy Scouts and the two cultures, the toxic side. Well, it's sort of my question, which is, I'm going to make some assumptions, and I'm deliberately going beyond what I think is probably true. The Boy Scouts were easily offended culturally. Here's my example. My New York relatives, if they like you, they're going to be insulting you all the time. It's actually a love language with my New York relatives to give somebody a hard time. And I was initially, I'll admit, put off by that. But then I realized, no, this is actually affection. And so I learned to like it or not like it, but I learned to understand what it was. And so I think when people hear about something like we need to stop doing toxic things, a bunch of things come up and one of them is the thing you were talking about, which is those people should just get over it. Another one is, are you going to take all the fun out? Is like fun against the rules now?

[A]

Yes, we get that question. You don't know how many times in our listening sessions. Yes.

[B]

How do you navigate that boundary? And I think it's particularly challenging around humor. One of the people we had on the show, John Truby, scriptwriter, he talked about how action epics are a great genre to go into because everybody in the world gets action epic. Because action epics work every place in the world. Comedy is always regional. Comedy does not transport well from one culture to the next. And so humor is something that is very, very culturally based and kind of deliberately edgy. So how do you navigate this boundary between, I'm going to say, rough edges and being offended? Hey, everybody. Here are some upcoming events. On March 5, 2026 in Oakland, Robin Zander, the organizer of the Responsive Conference, is launching the first of a new series, the SNAFU Conference. It's about something that's important to all of us who are mission driven, which is how to sell yourself without selling out. Remember to use promo code 11fold. That's one one fold to get a significant discount for tickets to SNAFU. Also, big event. On March 20th, I'll be speaking at PX Live in London. Luc Omani and his remarkable community of PX leaders are getting together for a one day event. If you want to deliver an extraordinary people experience, this is the single best opportunity to meet kindred leaders. Thanks. And watch this space for announcements about my future speaking events.

[A]

I hear you. So when I get that question during my listening sessions, for example, or even from leaders sometimes around, are you taking all the fun out? The answer is no. We're here to help you build a respectful culture where people are thriving and humor is a great way for Humans to connect. We connect over inside jokes. We connect over stories we've told each other. We connect over humor. So it's not to take all the fun out. And that's why that spectrum I talked about earlier is so important. That humor is great, but if it starts to blend into somebody being humiliated because an entire room of people's poking fun at something, that person needs to feel comfortable to come back and talk to somebody about it and say, yesterday in that meeting, I felt really humiliated. So ultimately, our goal is to help create communication and enough respect for people to be able to say those things. People are always going to misstep. We're going to hurt each other's feelings when we're working together, just like we might hurt our partner's feelings. You know, you're together with people, something is going to happen. So the goal is to help them recognize that you guys have to have a culture where if something is offensive, that you feel comfortable to say, I was offended by that and be able to talk it through. So you can certainly have a lot of humor without being offended. I'll say to that group, boy scouts maybe was the wrong word. They were the group that they were well behaved. It wasn't because they don't have fun. They were just the group that was like the solid group of employees that everybody knew they could rely on. The other side was maybe a little more like cowboys. They were more inclined to harass each other and say inappropriate things in their morning meetings. They were kind of forget the rules. They're meant to be bent or broken. And interestingly, just a little data point, that side, the kind of cowboy side, their leader of that group was everyone described as like the grandpa figure. He treated everyone like his kid, you know, and he was the older guy who'd been there forever. And that sounds like it wouldn't be toxic. But what happened is people got away with all sorts of behavior they shouldn't have been getting away with because he wasn't stepping in in the way that he needed. So when someone complained about sexual harassment, he wasn't treating it with the seriousness that it needed to be treated with. And so that family environment was really working against that group.

[B]

I can see that. I can see a leader who essentially loves their team and forgives boys will be boys or girls will be girls kind of behavior. How often do you see team to team toxicity? And the reason I bring it up is that I was in recruiting for a long time. Recruiting is a sales function, and recruiting is full of cowboys. And it's valued to be. Go for it. But one of the things that this leader used to do is he used to say about other departments, ah, those people are a waste of skin. He grew up as a tire salesman in the Midwest and he had definitely had rough edges. And it felt great for us actually to feel like we were worthwhile and everybody around us was idiots. That felt good. On the other hand, we thought teams around us were idiots. And so there was a kind of a team to team toxicity that wasn't necessarily person to person.

[A]

I would say I see more often teams that should be communicating and aren't. So the silos between teams and departments is much more common in what I've seen over the years. We do sometimes get requests for help between teams that should be working together. We had recently a client where these teams worked together already. They had some friction because they had different needs. And the company before they hired us decided that they were going to move them all into one department as their solution for solving the conflict. And so they wanted our help with the change management process of bringing those two teams together under one leader. So they were having conflict. I've also seen we're coaching somebody right now who's. Well, it's two people on two different teams. But interestingly, the organization is driving these individuals conflict. So they're on two different teams. The teams work together. According to both of them. They started off more as administration data input nine years ago and they've both been there about nine years and the organization's really grown and they've purchased other companies and all these things. So their jobs have really evolved. But the organization has left these teams to evolve on their own rather than say here's our organizational goal and here's what you all should be doing now. So that was interesting that the organization really was the reason these two people were in conflict. But yeah, to answer your question, it's more often silos.

[B]

I also heard again the theme of abandonment and neglect are all it takes.

[A]

Yeah, well, when you think of, you know, Maslow's hierarchy of needs, getting your basic physical needs met is at the very bottom. But next step is safety. And being abandoned is creating feelings of not being safe. Right. What's going to happen to me? Am I doing my job right? Am I getting feedback? Am I still going to be here as we keep growing?

[B]

I can relate this to another episode with David Obstfeld. He spoke about social networks and he spoke about the importance of the brokerage role. And it sounds to some extent that that's something that you do a lot of which is, how do I lower the activation energy between two groups? How do I bring them together? How do I, I would imagine, create empathy in each for the other? Is that a part of it?

[A]

Yeah. Oh, yeah. Hadn't thought about that as a brokerage role, but in a way, yeah. Our job is to bring people back together so they can continue to grow and thrive and move forward.

[B]

That would be a good episode for you to listen to. It's a great episode. The brokerage role is between any two teams where if you could bridge them, if you could bring them together, create trust, they would function better together. Any two groups, any two people, anything like that.

[A]

I would say a lot of what we come across in our clients is a lack of real change management principles. Organizations are ever evolving, and every organization, especially those that are evolving quickly, need to have somebody who understands the clear change management, which is in basics, Assess what we have, figure out what the goal is and where are the gaps. And a big part of that is communication. Communication. Communication. And for example, that client where they were bringing two teams under one leader. Part of our role is obviously all that change management communication. And when we first met with them, you know, okay, let's set up a communication plan to start announcing this and make sure that managers have questions answered. So when they get questions, they feel a part of it. The organization goes, oh, well, we were just going to make an announcement. That's what we always do. Okay, but you can't just make an announcement and then walk away. And now we're going to help them come together as a department, especially since they're in conflict already. That's an example where I think organizations don't think through what really needs to happen when they make change, and that's that they're lacking the brokerage role.

[B]

It's interesting because a lot of times when we think of a toxic workplace, at least when I do, the first thing that comes to mind is bad people.

[A]

That's another type.

[B]

Is that a type?

[A]

Yes.

[B]

Okay. It's not that it's always systemic and related to change. Sometimes there's bad people. Can you describe a story like that and what was the cause ultimately? And was there a solution?

[A]

Yes. I love talking about my bad actors. So, yeah, one of the things we do is coach leaders who have been accused of bullying or creating drama and trauma. Sometimes it's on the heels of an investigation for a hostile work environment. And technically it's not hostile because it's not harassment. When it's equal opportunity. Harassment. That's not unlawful. So, yeah. So I'm going to use the phrase abrasive leader for these bad actors. So what causes that? Well, from an individual standpoint, people who engage in that behavior are living in a state of competence versus incompetence. And that's how they assess everybody around them. And once they've decided that somebody is incompetent, whether because they made a mistake or they don't like this person's work output or whatever, then that's when the bullying sets in, punishing this person for being incompetent. What I found in coaching these individuals all these years is that they've been fighting for competence their whole life. They all have stories about it from childhood. And the way I know that is I have a work history call. I ask them, tell me about your first job, whether it was a lemonade stand or newspaper delivery, and walk me through your work life. And that theme is always threaded throughout. For example, a doctor who was a female, she was the only female in med school way back when. A woman who was from China, she came here not speaking English, and worked her way up to being the quality assurance for a big pharmaceutical company. So they've all been fighting to show their competence, and so they get upset and anxious when people are incompetent, quote, unquote. So the coaching is all about helping them recognize they don't have to be the competence crusader and they need to use their powers for good. The other component of that is the organization is obviously allowed the behavior. So I do not like it when we're villainizing those bad actors. It's up to the organization to squ squash that before it gets to the point of somebody filing a hostile work environment complaint. And often these people, because they're so focused on competence, are really high performers. They bring in results, and they're crushing it with their goals. And so often the organization's afraid to address that behavior. Kind of like, well, if we tell them to be nice, maybe they'll quit. Which I think is funny. Nobody's going to say, well, if you won't let me bully, I'm leaving. So the solution for these individuals is to hold up a mirror for them. So we interview 15 people who work with them. The names have been provided by the client, so they get to choose who's going to share this assessment of them. So it's a 360, but it's just through interviews. Take all the interview notes, move all those notes into themes, and then read that document to the individual. Usually that document's about 20 pages, and it's kind of like, all right, theme number one, you publicly shame people. And here are the 25 bullet points from the interview notes from the people that you chose. Here are their words. That is a big moment for them because they have been getting told, hey, could you be nicer? And so it's like the CEO or HR has been asking them to be nicer, but in a very casual way. Right. People kind of think you're being an ass. Can you calm down? And here I'm really showing the damage they cause. And because these people are not psychopaths, most of the time, they are often very appalled. They had no idea that this is how badly they were seen, and they very much are interested in change. So then the coaching happens, and after about four months, we re interview all of those people. And most of the time, the feedback is that they've really made a lot of change. They're a lot more positive. People are less afraid of them. They really don't want to be seen that way. So it's really helping them see that while you're very competent at your job, you're not a very competent leader. And so it kind of hits them where it hurts, and they want to be a competent leader.

[B]

You had a list of myths in the book, and one of the myths that you said is there's a myth that HR can't help. In my experience, that's no myth. Only had to turn to HR a couple times in my career, and in both cases, it got worse. And so help me get past that.

[A]

Yes. I also talk about in the book that if we put ourselves in HR shoes, they have to have the permission and the resources to solve problems. That's why they can make it worse in the end, is if they aren't given the permission and the resources to help change culture or address one person who's bullying, then they're reacting in a way that feels harmful and probably is harmful because they don't really have any other option. So a lot of times HR says things like, figure it out on your own. Sounds like conflict. You guys can solve that on your own. Or maybe there's retaliation because that person who's engaging in the toxic behavior is such a high performer. And HR has been given the charge of making sure that person doesn't leave the organization and stays happy. But people go into HR because they like people and they want to help people. So while I know that that can be very true, that HR can make it worse, I also know in almost 300 clients that all of those HR individuals I've worked with very much wanted to make it better. So I, you know, I have a lot of empathy for those individuals and I was there, I was the HR person who couldn't help and probably made it worse. But it wasn't because I was purposefully doing that. It was because I couldn't get permission from the leader to address this problem. I saw.

[B]

Does it take a certain amount of privilege to be able to raise an issue with one's own leadership? In other words, I can do it because. Well, not always. Not always. I mean, I will tell you, I've personally had a very good run of leaders and a very good run of managers and hardly any not good ones. There were a couple and this is probably over 40 managers, you know, leaders, directors, whatever, VPs. But it was hard for me to know it was happening when it happened. And so it's kind of a two part question which is on the one part, if you can recognize it, does it take privilege to speak up about it? We'll answer that one first. And then the second one is I knew I was miserable, but I didn't know why. And it wasn't until I started comparing notes with all the people who were at my level in the organization that I found out we were all being put into the hospital by one leader. So let's do the privileged one first and then is it easy to see second?

[A]

Privilege is an interesting word choice. I hadn't thought about it through that word before. Yes, I think it does in a way. As I talk about in the book, I have this whole kind of assessing whether or not HR can even help you before you complain. And all of that is around. Looking at the interactions between HR and the leadership team, what role does HR play? Are they a cost center admin person or are they at the executive meetings? Does the leader seem to trust the, the HR professional and take their advice or not? Obviously it's easier to assess the closer you are to those two individuals. So privilege, Yes. I think it requires that the CEO recognize that HR is an integral part to the organization's success. And unfortunately, HR has been trying to get a seat at the table all these years and still has a very long way to go. And you know, I do a lot of webinars for HR professionals. That's how I market myself. And the comments in my webinars are consistently, essentially, this is great information. I wish my leader would let me implement this. So I just see over and over and over Again, that the C Suite does not understand what HR is capable of accomplishing if they would give them the privilege to do so.

[B]

Why did I use the word privilege? Part of the reason I use the word privilege is because I'm a white male, 6 foot 4, presence in a company, and I think that probably gives me a sense of invulnerability, relative invulnerability compared to others. I know I can get another job. I know I'm in demand. You know, there's all these different things that actually put me into a position to be able to take some risk. And so a part of it was individual privilege and the ability to speak up and whether or not I think that's safe. And then I agree with the second part, which is, is HR in a position to be able to act upon it is also relevant. Is that a pattern or am I making that up? It's the sense I have that I can speak up that is probably the greatest privilege.

[A]

Yeah, this is just a gut feeling I have. Well, first of all, 75% of HR is female. That's not a gut feeling, that's the truth. My gut feeling is that, well, gosh, women are still trying to get paid the same as men. They are often underrepresented in leadership groups. So I do wonder about this whole argument that HR needs a seat at the table and the fact that so many HR are female and I don't have a lot more to say about that. That's just something I think about a lot and worth diving into more, you know, in the future for me. But then some of it also is personal courage. Do you have the courage as an individual to speak up? And I think about somewhere along the line I got the courage. So When I was 18, I worked in a law office and this lawyer who worked in that office would say things like, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to know the answer. So if you asked him a question, that was often him basically saying, you're an idiot. And I don't know why, but as an 18 year old, among all these other people, nobody else was speaking up. But one time he said it to me and I just said back, why do you say that? And he goes, well, I just figure you should know the answer. I'm like, any of us who ask you a question don't know the answer. That's why we ask. So you need to stop doing that. And I just remember he kind of leaned back in his chair and he goes, thanks for that feedback. I hadn't thought about that and here a bunch of receptionists had come and gone because of that attorney. But I had the courage to push back on him. Maybe it's because at 18, you know, you don't have any fear. It's like, fire me, that's fine, I'll get a job at Jamba Juice or something. So I think there's some of that too. That as much as we can feel for HR in general, that each individual has to have the courage to speak up and recognize that, yeah, maybe it's a risk, but I've got to stand my ground and stand up for the things that I believe in. And I don't think people should be treated this way. So I'm going to speak up. Lastly, I'll say there's powers in numbers. So using your example, if there's all these people who are feeling this way and being put in the hospital, as you put it, the more of you that complain, the harder it is to ignore. So part of it is you have to have a business case. I think a lot of times people maybe go to HR and they're hurt and they cry and they're complaining, but what they really need to do is help HR make a business case so that HR can present it to whomever they need to present it to and get permission to solve it.

[B]

I suspect that from my own experience, people can go a long time without recognizing that the thing that's hurting them is toxicity. And so how do you recognize it a little more quickly?

[A]

Well, the short answer is if your gut feels that you're in a toxic work environment, if you dread going to work or you dread interacting with a specific person, that means there's something there worth exploring. Maybe they're toxic, maybe there's other reasons, but toxicity could be one of them, right? That's the short answer. Listen to your gut and pay attention to how you're feeling. The other component is, I guess a more sort of process driven version of that is looking at the company core values and then asking yourself if you're treated in accordance with those core values. A lot of times organizations have core values and don't live them or really require people to live them. Nobody really knows what they are. But core values are essentially a set of behaviors that aren't toxic. I've never come across a core value that says we should be toxic towards each other. So that's maybe a more process driven version of that. And also talking to others, perception checking, hey, I feel like that person gets after people or publicly shames. Did you Notice that? Do you feel like they do that too? I'll add a little piece of history too. When I first started doing this, talking about workplace bullying, first of all, it was really hard to get into conferences or speak at different professional associations because nobody even knew what workplace bullying was. And they'd kind of tell me, that's not a thing. We don't need you to come talk about it. But once I started getting those acceptances, people were coming up to me after in droves. Thank you for helping me have some verbiage and vernacular for what I'm going through. You have so succinctly described exactly how I feel. Now we've fast forward all these years later, I think it's more readily available to look up what toxicity means. But that will stick with me for a long time. How normal bad behavior is that people didn't really know how to talk about it or that it was really happening until they saw my presentation.

[B]

Whose responsibility is it to do the environmental cleanup? Who's on the list? And then I want to go through a couple of key players.

[A]

So I'm going to start by saying the CEO is responsible for clarifying what the culture should be. But I really disagree with that statement that culture comes from the top. Again, culture is about shared expectations. So unless the CEO is somebody I work closely with, that's not where culture is coming from for me. Right. I think the CEO gets to sort of mandate what culture should be. And I believe that HR is the person or the group that holds culture and builds the processes and the systems that facilitate that culture. I think that managers are overlooked as being responsible for the culture. Managers are managing these little pods, right? Little teams. Managers are way under trained on how to create culture within their team, how to proactively build a good culture. So that's on the list.

[B]

I want to talk about managers. That's the one I wanted to really go in on. You say that manager superpower is creating a respectful work culture. What does that superpower look like?

[A]

That superpower looks like creating a psychologically safe space around them so that people feel comfortable to talk to them, get advice from them, brainstorm with them, partner with them. And it also looks like holding everybody else accountable to being psychologically safe as well. So. So making it very clear that they don't tolerate gossip or inappropriate sarcasm or some of these things at the quote unquote, low end of the spectrum. And so managers need to feel confident to coach those people. What bothers me is that managers know if somebody makes a big Mistake or keeps making a mistake, or shows up late or harms a customer's loyalty in some way. Managers really readily step into that. Right. Generally they know that that's bad behavior. It needs to be addressed. Maybe they go through the disciplinary procedure, but how come we're not doing that when there's gossip or other kinds of incivility, bad behavior, that is toxic. So that's the other component is coaching those individuals and making it clear that they don't tolerate that. The third component of that superpower is the proactive component. Doing things every single day that keep culture top of mind, keep the team's relationships top of mind. Could be anything from starting off a staff meeting, talking about a core value, or giving people time to give positive feedback to each other, to talking with people about behavior, what they expect. So that's the third component. So psychological safety, addressing bad behavior and proactively creating good behavior.

[B]

What percentage of toxicity flows from the top down versus the bottom up?

[A]

80%. 20% is bottom up.

[B]

What percentage of the solution flows top down versus bottoms up?

[A]

I'm not sure it's 80%. So I see where you're going with the question. Because culture exists within each of our individual behavior. And I say this all the time in my trainings, I say it in my book. Nobody should be waiting around for leaders to do something or take action because they may or may not. So everybody has a responsibility to positively influence their own circle as much as they can, to the best of their ability. And if managers are taking that on, they have the power, or they have more power, obviously, than an individual contributor to sort of mandate respect or a better work environment within their team at least. But again, I don't think culture comes from the top. It comes from your interactions and the expectations you've learned through those daily interactions. I'm trying to think about it in IT case study format. So let's say our manager is a bully. So it's up to that person, the bully, obviously, to recognize and correct their behavior. But if they're getting rewarded and acknowledged by the organization for results, they don't think there's anything wrong with their behavior. So it's up to everybody else, unfortunately, who interacts with that individual to make a case that that behavior's actually quite damaging.

[B]

Yeah, it was one of the things that came up. I can't remember when we talked about it on the show, but it was that one of the symptoms of narcissism is a lack of self awareness. And so essentially asking narcissists to be self aware is going to be a long road. And so it's something where that awareness needs to be created in a way that it wasn't otherwise. And so it is sort of like, I mean, not all toxic actors or abrasive actors are narcissists, but some are correct.

[A]

And I think there's a difference between narcissistic tendencies and being a true narcissist. And I hate to say that people I coach have some narcissistic tendencies because I always come to love them and they're great people and they generally care very much about everybody else, but they were obviously lacking self awareness because when I give them the feedback that's 20 pages of how awful they treat people, they're most of the time quite shocked that that's how they're perceived. But I do find a lot of times those individuals are great people. I'll give you an example. He was one of my very first coaching clients way back when, like 15 years ago. And he was kind of the golden goose at his organization. So the CEO would say to him, you're responsible for 5,000 paychecks. So ironically, he felt a lot of stress for achieving his goals and doing all the things he's supposed to do because he cared about everybody getting paid. But meanwhile, he treated everybody horribly. So that always stuck with me. I remember he said, I'll never forget the quote he said, I take that to mean there's no room for mistakes. And so people made mistakes and it was like, ah, I'm bullying you because you need to get back in shape.

[B]

Is it sufficient to stop toxicity or does it need to be replaced by something else?

[A]

It needs to be replaced by something else. Civility, not hence the name of Civility Partners.

[B]

I see. Yeah, that's great. That's great. Because telling people to stop doing that just leaves them doing nothing.

[A]

Yeah, yeah.

[B]

They need to have a replacement.

[A]

Yep. So in the coaching, that's what we're teaching is how do you get performance from people through just normal coaching conversations. And then in those big, giant changes we're doing with culture, it's helping the organization put processes and procedures and systems in place that hold people accountable to civility and respect. Teaching the individuals that respect means being on your best behavior, but it also means speaking up when you feel like you've been stepped on and teaching the leadership team to recognize their role in culture and communicating about it. So, yeah, and it's an interesting question because when I first started my business, it was called no workplace Bullies. And I had a mentor right off the bat. And I just remember our very first breakfast, I said, I feel like you don't like the name because it's a no, it's a negative. And she said, exactly what you did. Well, you can't teach people nothing. What happens when you leave? And I said, civility. And she actually came up with the name Civility Partners.

[B]

Actually, I'll tell you what part of the book that I think we're not going to have time to talk about, but I thought was really interesting, was about preventative measures. And it reminded me of a. It's a misquote. I think of Abraham Lincoln, which is. He was talking about slavery, and he said, if there's a snake out in a field and I kill it, everybody would say, great, but if there's a snake in bed with your children, it's not as easy to deal with it. And in talking about the west, he said, in the west, there's a snake crawling toward the bed, and that's a place where we should stop it in its tracks. And that's. So this idea that it might be easier to prevent than it is to cure once it's already there, once the snake's already in the bed. My closing questions are, what job do you hire your job to do for you? Your clients hire you to do something for them. What do you hire your work to do for you?

[A]

I hire my work to be creative. I love doing the marketing for Civility Partners. I hire my work to be on stage. I love being on stage and sharing my message, and I get a lot of positive reinforcement from the audience, so that feels good. And I hire myself to be a leader in the sense that I'm constantly learning about how to lead and how to build a successful consulting business.

[B]

What does it cost you?

[A]

Not much. I love my job. I have great work, life balance. I have a great team who takes things on if I need to go pick up my kid and I get to travel around the world speaking. And I love my job.

[B]

Many founders actually will say that. Yeah, many founders who have been able to essentially build a job around what they want.

[A]

I'll say if you'd asked me that maybe a couple years ago, I would have a long list of things that cost me. You know, as you know, it takes a while to get to a place where you're doing exactly what you're good at and want to be doing and have other people doing the things you don't want to be doing.

[B]

One of the things on the list of Costs that people have reported is empathy burn, which is that sometimes, essentially if you're a fire jumper like yourself, you might be exposed to situations that are hard to know about.

[A]

I would say yes. Over the years, it has cost me empathy burn. But I moved out of doing the real on the ground client work and have built a team around me that I trust wholeheartedly. And sometimes I go with them or I'm involved. But that was a big goal of mine over the last few years, is to really move into being the CEO. So not so much anymore with the empathy burn, but my consultants.

[B]

Well, it's very interesting because for some people, being the CEO is full of cost. They don't get to have face to face with clients anymore. They don't get to see the direct effect of their helping people. So it's really good that you love the parts of the company that are being the CEO.

[A]

Yeah, I do, I do. I mean, I'm still involved. I still read the survey reports and I still get to see the interviews with coaches before and after coaching. And so I'm still getting some of

[B]

that impact which you designed in, which is I'm only going to take the part of the job that's the victory lap, which is absolutely. No, I get it. I understand.

[A]

Yeah. 17 years in, that's my right. I feel like,

[B]

how can people learn more about you, your company, your book Navigating a Toxic Workplace for Dummies. I find that the dummies bit is demeaning. Thank you. No, I don't.

[A]

Yes, it's ironically titled. So I'[e-mail]. that's our website. My speaking, you know, I do a lot of keynotes. That'[e-mail]. certainly you can find me on LinkedIn. I'm everywhere. You can google me, send a carrier pigeon or fax.

[B]

And for anybody who needs to know, Matice is spelled M A T T

[A]

I C E. Thank you. Yes.

[B]

Thank you very much for coming on the show. The way you approach toxicity, it makes it sound. It's very funny. Like I'd be okay with some. You know, it's weird because you're not wound up about it, you're just. No, it's a practical work problem that we can solve. And so it was a real pleasure talking to you.

[A]

Thank you. I really appreciated the time to hang out with you as well.

[B]

Thanks for joining me for another episode of Work for Humans. If you enjoyed this episode, please give us a five star rating. Wherever you listen to podcasts and share the show with one person you think would get value from it. Believe it or not, this really helps us grow the show and reach more people who want to build the kind of work that people really want. As always, thank you to my producer Jason Ames at 9th Path Audio for his insights into content and his high standard for quality. Final note, the opinions shared here are my own and not the views of Google or Cisco Systems. Thanks again for listening. See you next time.