Top Ten Signs of a Blaming Culture
by Rick Brenner
The quality of an organization's culture is the key to high performance. An organization with a blaming culture can't perform at a high level, because its people can't take reasonable risks. How can you tell whether you work in a blaming culture?
Beatty Pennsylvania broad ax. The broad axe (also called hewing axe or side axe) was the preferred tool for squaring timber or flattening the sides of logs. This was an essential step in preparing material for log buildings and timber framing for houses or barns. Later applications were for railroad ties and trestle bridges. The blade is as broad as a headsman's axe, though the handle is shorter. Photo courtesy U.S. Federal Highway Administration.
Lenore and Brad stepped through the revolving door and out into the sunshine of the plaza. Lenore had intended to wait until they got to the car, but nobody was around, so she took a risk. "Here's a tip, since you're new," she began. "It's just not safe to talk that way in these meetings."
Brad was listening. "I figured," he said. "Warner's reaching for his double-bladed axe was the tip-off."
"Uh-huh," Lenore agreed, "and you haven't even seen real trouble yet."
Lenore is educating Brad in survival strategies for the organization he has just joined. Hopefully, it isn't too late, but if he had known what to look for, he might have been a little more cautious. Here are ten attributes that suggest that your work culture might be a blaming culture.
- Blame runs downhill in public, and uphill at the water-cooler
- Lessons-learned panels rarely assign any responsibility to the owner of the panel or to any superiors. Blame almost always runs downhill. But water-cooler talk is the opposite — people grumble about management.
- We rarely blame processes
- In a blaming culture,
if something goes wrong,
it's always the fault
of some one person
- Blame is rarely assigned to equipment, to a process, or to a situation. If something went wrong, human error is the cause.
- We usually blame an individual
- Rarely do we assign blame to a group or to several people. One is enough to satisfy the beast.
- We kill messengers
- Bearers of bad news are especially at risk, because we have a pattern of killing the messenger.
- CYA is a standard business procedure
- Since you can't be sure when you might need cover, it's only prudent to take every opportunity to cover your behind.
- In response to catastrophe, we apply revised policy retroactively
- When something bad happens, we convene a panel to write or revise policies and procedures. Then we apply them retroactively, and we blame violators.
- We never revise policy in response to success
- When something good happens, we feel that our policies and procedures are validated, so there's nothing to do.
- We have designated winners
- When good things happen, we usually assign credit to someone who's already an anointed winner. Heroes are rarely found in the trenches.
- We blame people for breaking unwritten rules
- Some policies and rules are written down only in obscure documents, if they're written at all. No matter. You can still be blamed for violating them.
- People get sandbagged
- Some people find out about a failure or policy violation for the very first time in their annual reviews. This is especially maddening when having withheld the information prevented the employee from righting a wrong, or from avoiding repetitions.
If you find yourself being blamed, remember that blame is almost always inappropriate. Blaming yourself then only adds to your trouble. Learning is a far better choice. Top Next Issue
Is every other day a tense, anxious, angry misery as you watch people around you, who couldn't even think their way through a game of Jacks, win at workplace politics and steal the credit and glory for just about everyone's best work including yours? Read 303 Secrets of Workplace Politics, filled with tips and techniques for succeeding in workplace politics. Order Now!
Your comments are welcome
Would you like to see your comments posted here? rbrenfTSIzcQTHKwRsXWtner@ChacTwTHZWwCqBZrQkEUoCanyon.comSend me your comments by email
, or by Web form
About Point Lookout
Thank you for reading this article. I hope you enjoyed it and found it useful,
and that you'll consider recommending it to a friend.
Point Lookout is a free weekly email newsletter. Browse the archive
of past issues. Subscribe for free.
Support Point Lookout by joining the Friends of Point Lookout,
as an individual or as an organization.
Do you face a complex interpersonal situation? Send it in,
anonymously if you like, and I'll give you my two cents.
More articles on Workplace Politics:
- Are You a Fender?
- Taking political risks is part of the job, especially if you want the challenges and rewards that come with increased responsibility. That's fair. But some people manage political risks by offloading them onto subordinates. Be certain that the risk burden you carry is really your own — and that you carry all of it yourself.
- Dismissive Gestures: Part I
- Humans are nothing if not inventive. In the modern organization, where verbal insults are deprecated, we've developed hundreds of ways to insult each other silently (or nearly so). Here's part one of a catalog of non-verbal insults.
- Conflicts of Interest in Reporting
- Reporting is the process that informs us about how things are going in the organization and its efforts. Unfortunately, the people who do the reporting often have a conflict of interest that leads to misleading and unreliable reports.
- The Advantages of Political Attack: Part III
- In workplace politics, attackers have significant advantages that explain, in part, their surprising success rate. In this third part of our series on political attacks, we examine the psychological advantages of attackers.
- The Politics of Lessons Learned
- Many organizations gather lessons learned — or at least, they believe they do. Mastering the political subtleties of lessons learned efforts enhances results.
See also Workplace Politics, Conflict Management and Managing Your Boss for more related articles.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming May 4: Just-In-Time Hoop-Jumping
- Securing approvals for projects, proposals, or other efforts is often called "jumping through hoops." Hoop-jumping can be time-consuming and frustrating. Here are some suggestions for jumping through hoops efficiently. Available here and by RSS on May 4.
- And on May 11: Characterization Risk
- To characterize is to offer a description of a person, event, or concept. Characterizations are usually judgmental, and usually serve one side of a debate. And they often make trouble. Available here and by RSS on May 11.
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates.
Contact Rick for details at rbrenRPcFXYNIcZXmzIxXner@ChacUShvkBRYRovogpTioCanyon.com
or (617) 491-6289, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.
Get the ebook!
Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:
Reprinting this article
Are you a writer, editor or publisher on deadline?
Are you looking for an article that will get people talking and get compliments flying your way? You can have 500 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info
- Managing in Fluid Environments
- Most people now work in environments that can best be characterized as fluid, because they're subject to continual change. We never know whats coming next. In such environments, managing — teams, projects, groups, departments, or the enterprise — often entails moving from surprise to surprise while somehow staying almost on track. It's a nerve-wracking existence. This program provides numerous tools that help managers who work in fluid environments. Read more about this program. Here's an upcoming date for this program: