By Kelly Hearn
We are entering the phase of ‘Build Back Better.’ At the recent G7 summit hosted by the UK, Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s prepared remarks to fellow leaders said they should be aiming at “building back greener, building back fairer and building equally and – how should I put it? – in a more gender-neutral and perhaps a more feminine way.” His delivery was awkward, without conviction. As if he didn’t fully understand himself what he was saying. But what he lacked in style, he – and we all – have the opportunity to make up in substance.
What have we learned over the last 15 months, largely toiling away at home, about the way we want to live and work in the 21st century? Has the pandemic been a temporary break in the action before we resume as if nothing ever happened? A pit stop. Water break. And back into the race? Or does it create the space for something more meaningful, to call forward needed changes for growth and advancement, on a personal and societal level? It is early days, but in my client work I see reasons to be hopeful for the latter.
In the years leading up to Covid, we were the frogs in boiling water, definitely sensing something was up but not fully appreciating the magnitude of the danger. In the last year, the water started boiling over and shocked us into a fuller – even visceral- understanding. ‘Things have got to change, but really this time,’ a client said to me last week, echoing sentiments I’ve been hearing repeatedly over the last year.
And yet…. As offices start to open up, it is interesting to see some of the same old recycled messages in company mission statements and ‘welcome back’ communications. In particular, the word ‘resilience’ seems to be doing the rounds….again….
A common definition of resilience is the process of adapting well in the face of adversity – so a pretty appropriate focal point considering all we’ve been through, right? Except that in recent years, the word resilience has also taken on a quietly sinister stance. One that feels akin to blaming individuals for struggling in frankly unhealthy environments. In these cases, beating the resilience drum signals ‘suck it up, even if your circumstances are horrible.’ A shift of responsibility for stress, anxiety or even trauma moves from the organisation to the individual.
A challenge to this approach was introduced back in 2017 by Middlesex University Professor of Nursing Policy Michael Traynor in his book Critical Resilience for Nurses: An Evidence-Based Guide to Survival and Change in the Modern NHS. According to Traynor:
When you look at writing about resilience in nursing, it is overwhelmingly submissive. It is dominated by phrases like ‘roll with the punches’ or ‘helping the nurse to survive at the bedside for longer’. Papers encouraging nurses to be resilient always start the same way – ‘you can’t often choose what happens to you but you can choose how you react’. So, the largest clinical workforce in the UK (and most countries) with its 450,000-strong trade union has given up on influencing what ‘happens to it’ to use this passive phrase. Instead, the nurse promoters of resilience are telling the workforce to develop optimism, or a sense of humour; to bounce back or roll with the punches. Of course, their intention is good but what they end up doing is urging nurses to acquiesce, to support the status quo. I have never seen any paper about resilience claim that resilience is the basis for activism and change. The promotion of resilience is a purely individualistic attempt to mitigate systemic problems. Individual nurses are basically being asked to take responsibility for political decisions and systematic failures.
Traynor’s ‘critical resilience’ approach includes consideration of the structural forces acting within the workplace, evaluating these political and policy decisions as part of a mutually supportive dialogue among employees and employers. Nursing is a particularly apt industry in which to call out the limitations of an individualistic approach to resilience. This was true back in 2017, and all the more so now considering the demands placed on the NHS’s shoulders during the pandemic. But a more collective approach to fostering resilience seems more broadly applicable as well.
Even before Covid, there was much attention devoted to removing the stigma associated with mental health issues in the workplace. As a psychotherapist, I am of course fully supportive of these efforts. With 1 out of 4 people experiencing mental health challenges each year even before the pandemic, these issues are common enough to be addressing openly. And given how pervasive they are, we need to stop thinking about mental health challenges, and overcoming these, exclusively at the individual level. Like Traynor, I suggest widening our lens. There are several ways in which corporate ‘norms’ directly damage employees’ mental health: an ‘always on culture,’ a lack of civility, insufficient clarity or frequency in communication, a felt sense that employees need to keep a ‘game face’ on at all times. There has been some improvement in these and other now-outdated norms in recent years. In particular, the universal challenges presented by the pandemic meant ‘game faces’ went out the window by necessity (I am heartened to hear how many leaders say they refuse to put the masks back on – bravo!). Yet there is still much work to do.
Because the outdated norms cause unnecessary stress and anxiety, even burnout. What’s worse, many people experiencing these challenges are then blamed, or blame themselves – for being ‘weak,’ ‘too sensitive,’ needing to ‘toughen up’ or ‘get more resilience training’ – rather than questioning the damaging effects of the corporate culture itself. Many organisations have responded by offering individual therapy for employees via EAPs or private health insurance. This is a step in the right direction, and incredibly supportive to employees who receive these benefits. But as a therapist who has worked with many of these clients, I can also feel that I am merely nursing the battle-bruised before sending the troops back into hostile territory for more. Unless the organisation itself is healthy, the mental health fallout on its employees will continue.
Critical resilience asks us all to be accountable in how we manage through adversity together. It demands that sufficient resources are in place to allow individuals to get on with their jobs successfully. Some protest this equates to making employers or companies paternalistic, or that it lets ‘snowflake’ millennials off the hook from meeting the demands of high intensity industries. I disagree. Yes, it requires managers to build an awareness of realistic workplace demands, and to ensure adequate support is in place. This isn’t just the human thing to do, it is also good for business.
As for employees, the widespread prevalence of workplace mental health challenges means we are talking about issues that affect all of us, not just a few vocal advocates. Most of my clients are seasoned professionals with decades of experience. They get that there will always be periods of high stress and demand. Many of them work late nights or weekends at times, a high-octane sprint to the finish line for an important deliverable. When managed well, these employees are supported in the ‘race’: clear communication about expectations, shared responsibility with colleagues, respectful interactions throughout even when tensions are high, time for rest and regrouping afterwards. They have a sense of ‘we are in this together and we have each other’s backs.’ And, importantly, this heightened activity is only called on when necessary. Employees are willing to show up and put in the extra effort when they know it matters.
Some leaders have been brilliant during Covid, rising to the extra challenges presented by the pandemic with an increase in communication and support for their teams. However, many others are still operating under a 1990s-style playbook and need to rethink their approach as we start ‘building back.’ Resentment percolates when an all-out sprint becomes the norm, either because the business is structurally under-resourced or because managers aren’t respectful of their people’s time and limitations. Frustrations build when individuals aren’t given flexibility and autonomy – a sense of agency – in their work. Those same manager-sceptics who equate being human in the workplace to being ‘paternalistic’ think nothing of micromanaging their underlings; it seems they know how to do ‘critical parent,’ it’s just ‘nurturing parent’ they have a problem with. In these cases, employees may vote with their feet.
Now more than ever, people are doing the mental calculus whether work is truly working for them. Jenny McGee, one of the nurses who attended to Boris Johnson when he was in hospital with Covid, very publicly resigned in May of this year citing a ‘lack of respect’ for NHS workers as well as an ‘insulting’ 1% proposed pay rise. “Yes, we have put ourselves on the line and we have worked so incredibly hard, and there’s a lot of talk about how we’re all heroes and all that sort of stuff. But at the same time, I’m just not sure if I can do it. I don’t know how much more I’ve got to give to the NHS.”
McGee is not alone. A recent article in The New York Times reported that nearly four million Americans quit their jobs in April, the highest number on record. ‘With new opportunities and a different perspective as the pandemic eases, workers are choosing to leave their jobs in record numbers.’ The frogs are jumping out of boiling pots.
It need not be like this. There is an opportunity to truly ‘Build Back Better,’ but it necessitates fostering an active, communal, critical resilience. It requires rebalancing responsibility for needed changes, appropriately calling on action at the organisational, not merely individual, level. I remain hopeful that all we’ve experienced over the last year ultimately leads us in this direction, and gives way to healthier new workplace norms. That the definition of a successful organisation emerges as an intensely human one, supporting individuals in their quest to engage in and deliver meaningful work. This doesn’t mean losing sight of important business success metrics, rather it is an acknowledgement that these are more likely to be achieved when the work environment is fundamentally a healthy one.
