But study shows HR practices can make a big difference
Does the type of workplace make a difference when it comes to people identifying sexual harassing behaviours?
Yes, according to a study out of Cornell University in Ithaca, NY.
Employees who work in industries that experience a large amount of sexual harassment are far less likely to identify clear violations.
“We really think it's a story about the normalization of harassment in these industries where there's an expectation that this is going to be part of the work experience,” says lead author Phoebe Strom, PhD candidate.
“It's not something that you make a fuss about if you want to cut it in the industry, you're expected to tolerate it. And what we're suggesting is that people adapt to that.”
Wide range of scenarios for study
A group of 408 participants who work in such industries — such as accommodation and food services, retail, manufacturing and information — were selected for the study. The researchers used data from the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission from 2005 to 2015 to determine industry sexual harassment prevalence.
As to why some industries are more prone to sexual harassment, that could be because they feature more one-on-one time with customers, such as restaurants, or there’s a predominantly low-wage, female or racialized workforce, “so there's a lot of vulnerability baked in there,” says Strom.
And the researchers presented them with a wide range of scenarios.
“They're all written to clearly signal that the harassment is unwelcome, so the targets in the scenario always say they are uncomfortable, they say they are finding the harassment unwelcome and don't want to be subjected to this behaviour anymore,” she says.
“Unwelcomeness is a key feature of the legal definitions, so we really wanted that to be very obvious.”
For example, to show “ambient harassment,” the participants were presented with this scenario:
“Men working at a seasonal restaurant in a popular beachfront tourist destination complain about constant sexual banter from female customers related to male performance and physical attractiveness. They also are bothered by female customers regularly rating the attractiveness of male passersby and looking at explicit photos of nude men on their phones.”
Disappointing results
Presented with seven scenarios of harassment, only six per cent properly identified all seven, while 25 per cent only identified one or two.
The percentages ranged from 31 per cent, for a scenario presented unwanted sexual attention targeting men, to 74 per cent, for a scenario presenting gender harassment targeting women.
The results suggest that individuals who work in industries with the highest levels of sexual harassment “may develop a higher threshold for what they see as harassing behaviours based on persistent industry-wide normalization of these behaviours,” say the authors of “Drawing the line: How the workplace shapes the naming of sexual harassment” in Personnel Psychology.
“As with other understandings of professional norms, individuals’ understanding of what constitutes sexual harassment seems to be influenced by the norms of the broader industry in which they are currently working.”
Even if people know about harassment on a rational level, they go into these workplaces in these industries and they adapt, says Strom.
“They start saying, ‘OK, this is what it means to be in the workplace. This is how work is. I can't call all of this harassment; it can't all be harassment.’ So they start narrowing their definition down until only certain very severe things meet their threshold.”
The type of industry can make a huge difference, says Janet Candido, founder and principal of Candido Consulting Group in Toronto.
“The companies that are male-dominated, especially if the leadership is all male, you're going to see more cases of harassment. And not an acknowledgement that it really is harassment — that's where you're going to hear more of, ‘Oh, he was just kidding’ or ‘OK, take a joke.’ Or it gets to the point where you don't even say anything, because nothing's going to happen.”
Many employers in these industries also tend to have weak HR functions or HR departments that are largely focused on recruitment and paperwork, as opposed to policies on harassment, she says.
Plus, there is still a misunderstanding of what constitutes harassment, especially sexual harassment, says Candido.
“I think that a lot of people, including women, think that it must mean more along the lines of a sexual attack, rather than comments or the type of behaviour you might see in the workplace where the women are not getting the same opportunities or where they're have to put up with jokes and comments,” she says.
“If that's accepted in the culture, and if everyone is doing it, it just becomes a part of the workplace. And it can also be a matter of ‘If you want to work here, this is what you have to put up with.’”
Proof that HR can make a difference
Can HR truly make a difference when it comes to diminishing or even preventing sexual harassment?
Yes, judging by the study, which found that workers are more likely to be aware of these unwanted behaviours when presented with a “bundle of HR practices” such as a formal sexual harassment policy, formal voice mechanisms and hiring practices meant to reduce marginalized employee populations.
It’s a “big optimistic takeaway,” says Strom.
“We actually did find that this bundle made a huge difference to the point that organizations within toxic industries could actually overcome the industry climate. So a restaurant, for instance, that really worked to create this positive HR climate could overcome the norms of the broader industry in which they sit, which is a really, I think, incredible finding.”
That suggests that when organizations in more problematic industries adopt more high-road employment practices, “that can make a huge difference,” she says.
And that has implications for similar HR programs, such as those for DEI or conflict management, says Strom.
“It's hard sometimes to gain traction, and an approach like this, I think it helps.”
Next steps
However, going from awareness to action is a big step and more research is required in this area, says Strom.
“Once you've identified it, the next step is: are you going to actually take the next step and do something about it…? We think that many of the HR practices that improve identification would also improve reporting. But someone needs to test that.”
But for now, it’s all about really clear, zero tolerance policies, says Candido.
“And it has to be coming from the top. And it has to be more than just the president signing off on a policy, [leadership] has to really demonstrate that this type of behaviour is not tolerated.”
Plus, the person who's speaking out needs to know that they're going to be protected in some way, and they won't be blamed for it or fired or ostracized, she says.
“There has to be a level of trust. So I do think it has to be more people talking about it, more people talking about why it's wrong.”
To even further the impact, talking about the impact on business can also make a difference, says Candido.
“Talk about the impact on productivity, the impact on your customer service, because those are the things that the leadership are really going to pay attention to. I'd love to think they're going to pay attention to the fact that it's not right for women to have to put up with this, or men for that matter, but what they'll really pay attention to is ‘These things impact your productivity.’”
