Sexual Harassment as a Communication Phenomenon Creating Understanding as a Basis for Prevention

Sexual Harrassment EEOC definition--unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature if 1) submission is made a condition of employment, 2) submission to or rejection of conduct is the basis for an employment decision, or 3) the conduct seriously affects an employee’s work performance or creates a hostile, intimidating, or offensive work environment

Types of Sexual Harassment Quid Pro Quo--offering a reward or threatening punishment in return for sexual favors Hostile environment--sexually suggestive, intimidating, or offensive conditions Typical targets--college educated women under 35 working in predominantly male work areas

Sexual Harassment as Communication Can be verbal or nonverbal May result from differing communication styles (Tannen) May result from an expression of power in relationships May result from attempts at intimate interpersonal relationships in the workplace

Dealing with Sexual Harassment: Victim Strategies If you believe the conduct is wrong, say so. Tell the perpetrator in clear terms that the conduct is inappropriate Report the incident following workplace procedures Document incidents in written form If witnesses are present, have them verify the details of the incident

Organizational Responses to Sexual Harassment Charges Take the complaint seriously, listen carefully Conduct an investigation (outsourcing?) Maintain objectivity, be sympathetic but don’t make promises of action prior to investigation Suspend judgment--perpetrators have rights too Have a policy in place and follow it

Sexual Harassment Policies for Organizations Zero tolerance--commitment from the top Make punishment consistent with the behavior--don’t specify first offense penalty Consistent enforcement--same rules for all Multiple reporting options Can’t cover it just once, need updates Organizations with a cultural of accepting upward communication will be more successful at preventing SH

Solomon and Williams Sexual Harassment Study Vast majority of SH is hostile environment type--social-sexual communication often the key (sexual and relational advances) 1/3 of all relations people have are initiated in the workplace Highlights the importance of third party observations in cases of SH…but, what factors influence third party observations?

Solomon and Williams cont. Distinguishing romantic interest and sexual harassment perception of constrained behavior perceived desirability of sexual advances Study results Explicit advances seen as more constraining than implicit (ambiguous) ones Supervisor’s behavior is more likely to be seen as harassing than peer or subordinates

Solomon and Williams Study, continued Perceived severity of SH increases with the position power of the message initiator Attractiveness related to perceived SH unattractive men are more likely than attractive men to be perceived as harassers individuals charged with sexually harassing attractive targets are more likely to be found guilty with harassing than when targets are less attractive persons

Solomon and Williams cont. Gender differences in harassment: social-sexual communication initiated by males is seen as more constraining than females Males are more likely to welcome social-sexual communication than females and hence women view it as more explicit and harassing Females initiating social sexual communication were seen as less harassing than if the same messages were initiated by males

Solomon and Williams, conclude Observer sex as key to perceptions of SH women: are more negative on org. romances, view SH as more of a problem, show less tolerance for harassing behavior males: more likely to view women as complicit “Sexual harassment should be understood in terms of the power structures and gendered positions of males and females, which shape the meaning of social-sexual communication at work.”