Organisational pressure, how to cope.

Are you someone who finds the stress of your organisation or workplace is greater than the stress of your actual mahi / work? I find organisational pressures are increasingly the major stress supervisees are dealing with, rather than the work itself. This applies to front-line workers as well as team leads and managers. It can range from unrealistic reporting requirements to unhealthy workplace cultures, to overwhelming workloads, and toxic relationships amongst colleagues. What I have noticed in supervision is also that there seems to increasingly be a disconnect between upper management’s understanding of the work, and the reality of the work that kaimahi / workers experience on the daily. This is in addition to the reality that the work seems to be increasingly complex over the last few years. What might be helpful and sustainable ways to navigate issues like these?

Navigating toxic workplaces

There are so many examples I could refer to on this topic given the frequency it comes up in supervision. It is also something I have taken to my own supervision over the years. Two of the most frequent situations that supervisees bring to discuss are unrealistic reporting demands, and workplaces where team leads or managers are themselves not coping.

“Key Performance Indicators” or KPIs are frequently raised by supervisees as the bane of their lives. KPIs often seem to have little connection to the work kaimahi or team leads undertake, and/or the frequency of reporting on them hugely increases the workload. This often results in supervisees completing reporting demands after hours. And it has a significant impact on the wellbeing of the worker. While peaks in workloads may be managed short term by working extra hours (which are not always paid for or able to be taken as lieu time), it is not sustainable long term. It can also feel like workers have little ability to influence change in KPIs and reporting systems in their organisations, particularly if the organisations are large.

Line managers who have unhealthy ways of coping negatively impacts teams and has been raised in supervision quite frequently. This situation puts supervisees in a difficult position in terms of their role structurally as their line manager can have a big influence on how they are perceived in the agency, how this is reflected in the supervisee’s performance reviews, promotions, and day-to-day relationships in the workplace. This kind of tension in a team can impact how colleagues relate to each other and the support they provide each other. It takes a lot of courage for kaimahi to speak out about a manager’s negative behaviours, particularly balancing offering care and concern with needing support and guidance themselves in their roles. Given these tensions, how can situations like this be navigated safely whilst maintaining professional standards and using a mana-enhancing approach?

Addressing toxicity and maintaining mana

Peter (not the supervisee’s real name) raised the issue of KPIs being unrelated to the mahi he does, including them not relating to agreed client goals. This meant that statistics run by Head Office always show Peter has not achieved the required KPIs which is an inaccurate representation of his work. Peter wanted to see whether there were any ways to address the issue which he and his colleagues hadn’t considered.

In talking this through it was evident that Peter’s direct line manager, and the organisation’s CEO shared concerns about the KPIs. The situation had been raised by the CEO to Head Office, yet there was no movement on this. From our kōrero, I suggested there be clarification on whether the KPIs were contract / funding requirements, as knowing this could help determine a way forward. We also talked about the importance of Peter and his colleagues responding collectively to the situation, which minimised the risk of workers being singled out as ‘agitators’. As part of our discussion it was important to look at how Peter manages his workload so that working extra hours without compensation would not lead to burnout.

In a situation with a team lead’s mental health and behaviour negatively impacting the supervisee’s (and team’s) well-being, we explored this over a number of sessions. Danika (not her real name) had tried offering support to her team lead, however this consistently resulted in the team lead violating professional boundaries and inappropriately over-sharing and at times lashing out verbally at the supervisee. We looked at professional responsibilities of employers in regard to the team lead’s professional membership, which the supervisee subsequently raised with the service manager. Unfortunately, this resulted in a dismissive response from the service manager, who stated she was unable to cope with the situation.

We also talked through possibilities of responses for Danika to try with her team lead, while being cognisant that Danika needed to feel safe with whatever option she chose. Another avenue we considered was who else in the organisation it was appropriate to engage, given the service manager’s dismissive response. Key throughout our supervision kōrero was the need for Danika’s actions to align with her own values, including how she could uphold the mana of all involved, so that no one was shamed or belittled in the process.

Finding the line of accepting responsibility, and not

These situations raise issues for me as a supervisor, particularly when health and safety concerns are raised. Given there are professional responsibilities I am obliged to meet, I must consider my role in highlighting concerns to an employer and/or a professional body. Contemplating where my responsibilities as a supervisor sit in these situations are not always straight forward. Thankfully, that is where my own supervision comes in, and guidance from my supervisor is crucial in supporting me determine how I might respond.

For my supervisees, these issues are heavy to navigate, and balancing ethical, professional and organisational guidelines aren’t always clear on how to proceed. I am reminded of a whakataukī (proverb) which states:
“Mehemea he raruraru kei a koe, me wewete e koe / If you are afflicted by troubles, set yourself free of them.”

For both Peter and Danika, they needed to be freed from the heaviness of the situation they were in. A challenge in deciding how they might liberate themselves from the troubles they faced in the workplace was how they might find peace of mind for themselves, without this being at the expense of professional or organisational responsibilities.

For both Peter and Danika, responding to the awful situations they were in resulted in some actions where they had to “feel the fear and do it anyway” knowing a particular response was the right thing to do. Something that made this easier for them was having the opportunity to unpack the issues in supervision – the good, the bad and the ugly. Knowing that they had done their due diligence by considering a range of responses, and that they had the support and encouragement of their supervisor supported them to take action that sat comfortably with them personally, professionally and ethically. Feeling heard, knowing they had choices, and being confident of having my support helped them navigate what otherwise would be an isolating and distressing situation.

Glossary

Kaimahi – worker
Mahi – work, workplace
Mana – status, prestige, power
Raruraru – difficulty, problem, conflict, dispute, trouble
Tau – come to rest, settle on, resolve
Whakataukī – proverb

‍

‍