Corporate organisations are often considered to have psychopathic characteristics. Extraordinary levels of pay for boardroom fat cats is a well known phenomina illustrating narcissism and exaggerated self-importance. The traits of one or more psychopaths with high positions within a company, can permeate and taint the entire company and its workforce.
To illustrate examples of psychopathic behaviour in practice, the following are some techniques that companies often use to fob off complainants or whistleblowers:
Incidentally, a common strategy for dismissing complaints by pupils to teachers is that they are just "telling tales".
To illustrate examples of psychopathic behaviour in practice, the following are some techniques that companies often use to fob off complainants or whistleblowers:
- Using the "hot air" or "paying lip service" technique of appearing to agree with the complainant and saying what action will be taken to remedy the problem but then doing little or nothing - "empty words" - "rhetoric".
- Using the "passing the buck" technique of denying responsibility and referring the complainant to another department or organisation who may also deny responsibility and, in turn, refer the complainant elsewhere.
- The "closing ranks" technique where others are willing to cover up a colleague's mistakes - "turning a blind eye".
- Responding to the complainant with "lame excuses". "Fobbing off" the complainant. Using corporate "spin".
- Using "weasel words" (being intentionally evasive and misleading).
- Ignoring complainant ("the silent treatment", "wall of silence", "being sent to Coventry", or "being up against a brick wall"), for example, by not returning phone calls or not responding to letters or emails.
- Delaying tactics - "Kicking into the long grass" or "playing for time".
- Trying to wear you down using a "war of attrition".
- Saying "You don't appreciate how this organisation works. It is more complicated than you think"
- Isolating complainant by saying "No-one else has made this complaint."
- Making a counter complaint against the complainant - "scapegoating" - "victimization". Attempting to discredit the complainant using "trumped up charges" and therefore finding an excuse to sack him if he is an employee.
- Clouding the issue by introducing complexities and jargon to befuddle to complainant. Attempting to make the complainant lose focus - "muddying the waters" - spreading "misinformation" - "moving the goal posts" - "pulling the wool over your eyes".
- Using displacement or deflection techniques. One way of doing this is to overemphasise a small flaw, real or invented, in the complaint to try to discredit the complaint completely.
- Using "smoke and mirrors" to cover up devious activity.
- Not making materials or documentation available to the complainant which would support his case.
- Hiding evidence of a misdeed by doing a "cover up".
- Incriminating information conveniently "gets lost" or "goes missing".
- Tampering with evidence. For example, restrospectively altering documentation and backdating it to make it look genuine.
- Branding complainant as a trouble maker or a "difficult person".
- Ridiculing and undermining the complainant.
- Suggesting that the complainant is mentally ill and therefore imagining the complaint.
- Company just responds with a "blanket denial" - "stonewalling" - "whitewash" .
- Company reinforces a blanket denial by trying to force closure on the complainant by saying "The matter is now closed."
- Admitting the complaint, if the evidence is strong and irrefutable, but saying that it is just an isolated instance when it could really be a widespread systematic problem.
- Company responds by saying that they have no recollection of alleged events taking place - "collective amnesia".
- Company attempts to "gag" the complainant by, for example, threatening legal action. Psychopathic bully Robert Maxwell famously threatened any whistleblowers with legal action.
- The complainant is "bought off" where he is offered an inducement to pry no further into his complaint.
- Dismissing a dispute between a bully and a bully target as just being down to a "personality clash".
- Saying that the complainant (a bully target maybe) is over sensitive when really it is the bully who is undersensitive. This is an attempt to shift the problem from the bully to the target.
- Intimidates the complainant by using "scare tactics" or "putting on the frighteners".
Incidentally, a common strategy for dismissing complaints by pupils to teachers is that they are just "telling tales".