Counterproductive Work Behavior (CWB) is behavior harmful to the employer's legitimate interests. Gruys and Sackett have developed a complete typology that I briefly described in Part I of this catalog. Controlling these behaviors in knowledge-oriented workplaces requires recognizing the special forms they take there. That's why I collect knowledge-oriented CWBs as I remember them or encounter them. Here is Part II of my collection.
- Deviating from required procedures
- In knowledge-oriented workplaces how work is done can be as important as whether work is done. We have mandatory procedures to ensure that work is done correctly. Whether deviations and shortcuts result from negligence, ignorance, or intention, they erode confidence in results.
- Concealing deviations from required procedures
- Fearful about being discovered and then facing the consequences, those who deviate from required procedures sometimes conceal their deviations. Employers take note: when designing required procedures, take care to devise mechanisms that can detect both deviations and attempts to conceal those deviations.
- Misrepresenting sources
- When authoring reviews of knowledge literature, citing sources is a respected and valuable tradition. Typically, authors include citations when they paraphrase an important morsel of knowledge previously reported by another author. The key word here is paraphrase. To paraphrase is to restate in one's own words, usually to simplify or shorten the original statement. Restating the original statement so as to alter its meaning — often called "spin" — is not paraphrasing. It can be negligent misrepresentation, or lying, or goodness knows what else.
- Withholding results, intermediate results, or methods
- To withhold or conceal results is clearly a violation of the trust the employer places in the employee. Less often recognized as a violation is withholding intermediate results or the methods used to obtain them. How we generate knowledge can be as important and valuable as the knowledge itself — maybe more important and more valuable.
- Misrepresenting status
- Under pressure Under pressure to produce results,
some seek relief from the
pressure by misrepresenting
the status of the effortto produce results, some seek relief from the pressure by misrepresenting the status of the effort. They claim more progress than they actually have, or they claim they've recently resolved obstacles not actually resolved, or they claim they're blocked by obstacles that don't actually exist, all to conceal the true state of the effort. The pressure they feel is sometimes unfair — it might be the root cause of the problem. Still, misrepresenting status is not the solution. It conceals the real problem, and therefore prevents resolution. - Invoking confidentiality illegitimately
- Certainly there are occasions when internal confidentiality is appropriate, as when we must compartmentalize for security reasons the distribution of information and knowledge. And just as certainly, and certainly unethically, confidentiality can be abused for personal or internal political purposes. Such abuse can hinder the organization's attempts to fulfill its mission. Monitoring abusive invocations of confidentiality is difficult and doable. Don't get caught abusing the process.
Have you witnessed any of these behaviors? What did you do about it? First in this series Top Next Issue
Are your projects always (or almost always) late and over budget? Are your project teams plagued by turnover, burnout, and high defect rates? Turn your culture around. Read 52 Tips for Leaders of Project-Oriented Organizations, filled with tips and techniques for organizational leaders. Order Now!
Your comments are welcome
Would you like to see your comments posted here? rbrendPtoGuFOkTSMQOzxner@ChacEgGqaylUnkmwIkkwoCanyon.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.
This article in its entirety was written by a human being. No machine intelligence was involved in any way.
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.
Related articles
More articles on Ethics at Work:
- Tornado Warning
- When organizations go astray ethically, and their misdeeds come to light, people feel shocked, as if
they've been swept up by a tornado. But ethical storms do have warning signs. Can you recognize them?
- Currying Favor
- The behavior of the office kiss-up drives many people bats. It's more than annoying, though —
it does real harm to the organization. What is the behavior?
- Some Things I've Learned Along the Way
- When I have an important insight, I write it down in a little notebook. Here are some items from my
personal collection.
- Ethical Influence: I
- Influencing others can be difficult. Even more difficult is defining a set of approaches to influencing
that almost all of us consider ethical. Here's a framework that makes a good starting point.
- Devious Political Tactics: A Field Manual
- Some practitioners of workplace politics use an assortment of devious tactics to accomplish their ends.
Since most of us operate in a fairly straightforward manner, the devious among us gain unfair advantage.
Here are some of their techniques, and some suggestions for effective responses.
See also Ethics at Work and Devious Political Tactics for more related articles.
Forthcoming issues of Point Lookout
- Coming April 3: Recapping Factioned Meetings
- A factioned meeting is one in which participants identify more closely with their factions, rather than with the meeting as a whole. Agreements reached in such meetings are at risk of instability as participants maneuver for advantage after the meeting. Available here and by RSS on April 3.
- And on April 10: Managing Dunning-Kruger Risk
- A cognitive bias called the Dunning-Kruger Effect can create risk for organizational missions that require expertise beyond the range of knowledge and experience of decision-makers. They might misjudge the organization's capacity to execute the mission successfully. They might even be unaware of the risk of so misjudging. Available here and by RSS on April 10.
Coaching services
I offer email and telephone coaching at both corporate and individual rates. Contact Rick for details at rbrendPtoGuFOkTSMQOzxner@ChacEgGqaylUnkmwIkkwoCanyon.com or (650) 787-6475, or toll-free in the continental US at (866) 378-5470.
Get the ebook!
Past issues of Point Lookout are available in six ebooks:
- Get 2001-2 in Geese Don't Land on Twigs (PDF, )
- Get 2003-4 in Why Dogs Wag (PDF, )
- Get 2005-6 in Loopy Things We Do (PDF, )
- Get 2007-8 in Things We Believe That Maybe Aren't So True (PDF, )
- Get 2009-10 in The Questions Not Asked (PDF, )
- Get all of the first twelve years (2001-2012) in The Collected Issues of Point Lookout (PDF, )
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 500-1000 words in your inbox in one hour. License any article from this Web site. More info
Follow Rick
Recommend this issue to a friend
Send an email message to a friend
rbrendPtoGuFOkTSMQOzxner@ChacEgGqaylUnkmwIkkwoCanyon.comSend a message to Rick
A Tip A Day feed
Point Lookout weekly feed