Banter vs. Bullying- Are they really so hard to differentiate? What’s the role of banter in your . [+] organisation? And how can you tell if you’re getting it right?
Banter vs. Bullying- Are they really so hard to differentiate? What’s the role of banter in your organisation? And how can you tell if you’re getting it right?
Defined by Oxford Dictionary as ‘the playful and friendly exchange of teasing remarks’, research conducted by the Institute of Leadership and Management in 2018 illustrates that a clear majority of workers perceive clear benefits from workplace ‘banter’. These included getting to know their colleagues better (65% of men and 59% of women), building team spirit (65% of men and 54% of women), and making the workplace more fun (59% of men and 55% of women). 73% of those surveyed also stated explicitly that they would not welcome a ‘banter ban’ at work.
As I’ve noted previously, the psychological safety of employees is a key component for innovation, and one might reasonably assume that building friendships with colleagues may well be conducive to this state. So should leaders encourage ‘banter’ amongst their employees? Unfortunately the answer is not necessarily. It’s clear that many workers derive pleasure from workplace banter, and this can be of benefit to organisations. As observed by Dr. Jan West at National Business Research Institute, ‘banter’ can lead to friendships with colleagues that contribute dramatically to employee satisfaction ‘skyrocketing’. Yet the negative implications of ‘banter’ can be significant, in extreme cases even leading to individuals reporting it has adversely affected their confidence and mental health. The Chartered Institute for Securities and Investment (CISI) represent the financial and other professional service industries, and their research emphasised these findings, stating that 97% of members who responded to the survey said they had been made to feel uncomfortable by ‘banter’ at some time. Stella Chandler, Director of Focal Point Training, which partnered with CISI on this banter survey said: “Banter can bring barriers down in teams but as soon as it crosses the line, barriers go up. This can have a damaging and long-lasting effect on teams and individuals.’
Research from the TUC conducted in 2016 on workplace based sexual harassment, indicated that whilst initiators would often describe their actions as ‘harmless fun’ and dismiss those who complained as being ‘unable to take a joke’. Yet in their research, Barbara A Plester and Janet Sayers observed that ‘for those not socialized through the banter into the in-group (emphasis added), banter [was] often experienced as painful, exclusionary and even insulting.’
It is obvious that people of different ages, backgrounds, cultures etc will have their differences, as they do even within these social groups, so as organisational leaders, how do we know how to get the tone right? It can seem daunting to attempt to create a policy that correctly strikes the balance, but perhaps it can be more straightforward than it first appears. As Plester and Sayers have indicated, words that are spoken aloud can only ever tell part of the story, but what can be seen is who’s laughing… and at whose expense.
A crucial part of this story are the power dynamics between employees. For example, and according to the ILM research again, men (73%) are more likely to directly challenge inappropriate ‘banter’ than women (55%). It is evident that given perceptions of acceptable masculinity, men may feel more pressure to respond aggressively to inappropriate ‘banter’, and indeed to claim that they would directly challenge this type of behaviour when in fact they are unlikely to do so. Nonetheless, it is also evident that today many industries remain disproportionately male, and thus it is equally plausible that women may feel less entitled than men to challenge the status quo as a result of a gender imbalance. It was also found that whilst 79% of senior managers would be comfortable reporting or challenging inappropriate ‘banter’, only 40% of graduate trainees felt the same; and it would be somewhat credulous to assume this is a coincidence.