Toxic workplace cultures are rife with hostility， cliques， gossip， mistrust， and selfishness. They’re a breeding ground for dysfunction due to poor communication， power struggles， negativity， and abusive leadership. Due to this， collaboration， productivity， and innovation falter while fear， manipulation， and blame grow. All of which reduces employee loyalty and leaves them feeling emotionally drained.

在有毒的職場(chǎng)文化中，敵對(duì)情緒、派系分化、遙言傳播、信任缺失及自私自利普遍存在。由于溝通障礙、權(quán)力斗爭(zhēng)、消極情緒和濫權(quán)管理，有毒的職場(chǎng)文化導(dǎo)致企業(yè)無(wú)法有效運(yùn)作。正因如此，協(xié)作、工效和創(chuàng)新難有發(fā)展，與此同時(shí)，恐懼、操控和指責(zé)不斷增長(zhǎng)。所有這一切都會(huì)降低員工的忠誠(chéng)度，令他們心力交瘁。

Now， more than ever， unhappy employees are quitting without another job lined up. To them， the risk of staying in a toxic workplace weighs more on their mental health than being unemployed. According to SHRM， 58% of employees quit a job due to a toxic workplace culture and the annual cost of culture-related turnover is $223 billion.

如今，因不滿現(xiàn)狀而選擇“祼辭”的員工比以往任何時(shí)候都多。在他們看來(lái)，相較于失業(yè)，有毒職場(chǎng)環(huán)境帶來(lái)的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)對(duì)心理健康影響更大。美國(guó)人力資源管理協(xié)會(huì)的數(shù)據(jù)顯示，58%的員工因職場(chǎng)文化有毒而選擇離職，與此相關(guān)的人員流失每年造成的損失高達(dá)2230億美元。

While there are various different types of toxic workplace cultures， here are five toxic cultures that are quite common.

有毒的職場(chǎng)文化形式多樣，以下列舉的是較為常見(jiàn)的五種類型：

Hustle culture

內(nèi)卷文化

Hustle culture is one of the most normalized cultures in the workplace and oftentimes， micromanagement1 is at its core. This profit-driven culture is known to exploit workers by having them work longer hours with little in return. Being a workaholic has been glamorized， making employees believe that the more hours they put in the more productive they are. As such， they sacrifice their mental health， personal life， forgo breaks， and resist taking PTO. Consequently， this results in employees being stretched thin， which causes them to eventually burn out.

內(nèi)卷文化在職場(chǎng)中司空見(jiàn)慣，其核心往往是微觀管理。這種逐利文化以剝削員工聞名，員工被迫加班卻幾無(wú)回報(bào)。工作狂得到美化，讓員工相信，工時(shí)越長(zhǎng)成效越大。就這樣，他們犧牲了心理健康和私人生活，放棄休息時(shí)間，甚至拒絕帶薪休假。結(jié)果，導(dǎo)致員工不堪重負(fù)，最終累垮。

Hayley Albright， senior brand and customer experience manager at Xena Workwear， said， “employees often feel the need to put in long hours due to tight deadlines and work that’s piling up due to the labor shortage and excessive online meetings. They’ll start by answering emails at late hours and move on to work outside of normal office hours and through holidays. Eventually， this schedule takes a mental toll. Businesses need to set work boundaries and help employees not feel guilty for unplugging.”

“澤納工裝”的品牌與客戶體驗(yàn)高級(jí)經(jīng)理海莉·奧爾布賴特指出：“員工常常感覺(jué)有必要加班，要么因?yàn)橼s工期，要么因?yàn)槿耸侄倘奔熬€上會(huì)議過(guò)多導(dǎo)致工作堆積如山。他們一開(kāi)始是深夜回復(fù)郵件，慢慢發(fā)展到非辦公時(shí)間和假期也在工作。最終，這種工作日程會(huì)對(duì)員工心理造成極大壓力。企業(yè)需要設(shè)定工作邊界，幫助員工避免因‘?dāng)嗦?lián)’而心懷愧疚。”

Blame and “every worker for themselves” culture

甩鍋和“人人為己”文化

A blame culture stops at the top. When leadership refuses to take accountability by placing blame， it establishes a precedence that mistakes are bad and unwelcome. Thus， nobody accepts responsibility for fear of being reprimanded， losing their job， or looking bad. In a blame culture， “that’s not my responsibility” is a common attitude. Not only does this harm a workplace environment， but people prevent committing to deadlines or expectations so they can easily place blame or shift accountability.

甩鍋文化止于高層。當(dāng)領(lǐng)導(dǎo)層諉過(guò)推責(zé)時(shí)，便樹(shù)立了這樣一種優(yōu)先認(rèn)知：出錯(cuò)很糟，不可接受。于是，無(wú)人愿意承擔(dān)責(zé)任，因?yàn)楹ε掳づu(píng)、丟飯碗或沒(méi)面子。在甩鍋文化中，“責(zé)任不在我”是一種普遍態(tài)度。這不僅危害職場(chǎng)環(huán)境，還會(huì)讓員工避免對(duì)期限和目標(biāo)做出承諾，以便在出問(wèn)題時(shí)輕松推卸責(zé)任。

Matt Erhard， managing partner at Summit Search Group， explained， “success is viewed as a limited commodity and mistakes are seen as personal failures rather than learning opportunities. For this reason， employees cover mistakes up or deflect blame instead of putting their effort into fixing the problem and preventing it in the future. This creates an ‘every person for themselves’ mentality， with coworkers viewed as competition rather than collaborators， and leads to gossip， backstabbing， undermining， and other toxic behaviors.” He added， “trust bonds are then broken and employees become so desperate for positive attention that they’ll resort to underhanded methods to get it， like taking credit for someone else’s work.”

鼎盛人才集團(tuán)的管理合伙人馬特·艾哈德分析道：“成功被視為稀缺品，錯(cuò)誤則被當(dāng)成個(gè)人失敗而非成長(zhǎng)機(jī)會(huì)。因此，員工會(huì)掩蓋錯(cuò)誤或推卸責(zé)任，而不是積極解決問(wèn)題、預(yù)防問(wèn)題再次發(fā)生。這就會(huì)催生‘人人為己’的心理，同事不被視為伙伴而是對(duì)手，流言蜚語(yǔ)、背后算計(jì)、暗中拆臺(tái)等傷害行為便接踵而至。”他還補(bǔ)充說(shuō)：“信任關(guān)系就此遭到破壞，有員工會(huì)為博得賞識(shí)不擇手段，比如竊取他人勞動(dòng)成果?！?/p>

Clique culture

小團(tuán)體文化

A clique culture is the opposite of an inclusive culture as it creates an environment where people aren’t comfortable being their authentic selves. This is due to a lack of protection from management and HR in regards to inappropriate jokes and comments.

小團(tuán)體文化與包容性文化背道而馳，它所營(yíng)造的環(huán)境使員工難以做真實(shí)的自己。這要?dú)w因于管理層和人力資源部門(mén)對(duì)不當(dāng)笑話和言論缺乏管制。

Anyone who doesn’t operate with the same mindset as the members of the clique are excluded， made to feel invisible， and often targeted by way of bullying. This leads to employees feeling isolated. Cliques undermine the team and prevent connection， unity， and collaboration. Often， high-performers or those in a clique are held to lower standards than everyone else.

與小團(tuán)體成員理念不同的人都會(huì)受排擠，感覺(jué)自己成了職場(chǎng)隱形人，還常常遭遇霸凌。這會(huì)導(dǎo)致員工感到孤立無(wú)援。小團(tuán)體文化會(huì)削弱團(tuán)隊(duì)凝聚力，阻礙溝通、團(tuán)結(jié)與合作。績(jī)效優(yōu)異者或那些小團(tuán)體成員往往被放寬標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。

Suzanne Wylde， coach and author， explained， “exclusion from an invisible inner circle is a common form of toxicity in groups. It may be that one team member is purposefully left out of certain emails or meetings， not asked for their opinion， or never invited out socially. It may be obvious or very subtle， but it may also be a form of scapegoating—sacrificing the wellbeing of one person to appease the egos of others. This exclusion can be deeply psychologically harmful to people and is a kind of bullying.”

培訓(xùn)師兼作家蘇珊娜·懷爾德指出：“將某人排除在無(wú)形的小圈子之外是一種常見(jiàn)的職場(chǎng)毒性行為。比如，某個(gè)團(tuán)隊(duì)成員被刻意排除在某些郵件或會(huì)議之外，意見(jiàn)無(wú)人征詢，也從不被邀請(qǐng)參加社交活動(dòng)。這種排斥或明顯或隱蔽，但也可能是在‘找替罪羊’——犧牲一人的福祉來(lái)滿足他人的自我。這種排斥可能是一種極具破壞力的心理傷害，是一種職場(chǎng)霸凌。”

Another commonly known type of clique is the “bro culture”， where white male employees are seen as superior to women. As such， non-white men and women are blocked from being involved in decision-making. This “bro culture” exists not only in tech， but in other industries such as politics， banking， and finance. This leads to women fighting to feel valued and accepted， thus putting up with belittling， sexist and misogynistic comments， discriminatory and inappropriate behavior， pay disparity， and being ostracized. All of which leads to a hostile working environment for women.

另一種常見(jiàn)的小團(tuán)體文化是“兄弟文化”——在這種文化中，白人男性雇員被視為優(yōu)于女性。由此，非白人男性和女性都被禁止參與決策?！靶值芪幕辈粌H存在于科技領(lǐng)域，也存在于政界、銀行業(yè)和金融業(yè)等領(lǐng)域。這導(dǎo)致女性必須竭力爭(zhēng)取獲得重視和接納——為此不得不忍受貶低、性別歧視和厭女等言論，歧視和不當(dāng)?shù)男袨椋匠瓴罹?，以及職?chǎng)孤立等。所有這一切都會(huì)讓女性陷入充滿惡意的工作氛圍。

Authoritative culture

威權(quán)文化

Power and control are at the core of an authoritative culture. As such， bullying and discrimination run rampant. An authoritative culture is filled with favoritism， nepotism， and “yes （wo）men.” Jean Holthaus， LISW2， LMSW3， stated， “in this type of culture， employees are punished for honesty either overtly or covertly.” She explained， “the person who speaks the truth is labeled as the troublemaker， or the employee who dares to question the wisdom of their boss’s new proposal is passed over for a promotion because they’re not a team player.”

權(quán)力與控制是威權(quán)文化的核心，霸凌和歧視因此猖獗。威權(quán)文化充斥著徇私偏袒、裙帶關(guān)系和唯命是從。持證獨(dú)立社工、持證碩士社工瓊·霍爾特豪斯表示：“在這種文化中，員工會(huì)因誠(chéng)實(shí)而遭到明里暗里的懲戒。說(shuō)真話者會(huì)被貼上‘麻煩制造者’的標(biāo)簽，敢于質(zhì)疑老板新提議不夠明智的員工會(huì)因沒(méi)有團(tuán)隊(duì)精神而失去晉升機(jī)會(huì)?！?/p>

In order to maintain control， leadership asserts its hierarchical power. Hilda Wong， founder of Content Dog， said， “in authoritative cultures， leaders don’t respect the opinions and ideas of employees， making them feel less valued and dejected in the organization.” They keep employees out of the loop because they feel those in non-management positions are inferior with nothing of value to offer. It’s not until changes have already taken effect， or through the rumor mill that employees learn about what changes are coming.

為了維持控制，領(lǐng)導(dǎo)層會(huì)強(qiáng)調(diào)其等級(jí)權(quán)力?！皟?nèi)容犬”公司創(chuàng)始人希爾達(dá)·黃曾說(shuō)：“在威權(quán)文化中，領(lǐng)導(dǎo)不尊重員工的意見(jiàn)和想法，這讓員工感覺(jué)在組織中被輕視并為此沮喪?！蹦切╊I(lǐng)導(dǎo)會(huì)對(duì)員工屏蔽信息，他們認(rèn)為非管理層的員工毫無(wú)價(jià)值，因此低人一等。往往等到變動(dòng)生效或通過(guò)小道消息，員工們才知道會(huì)發(fā)生什么。

Fear-based culture

恐懼驅(qū)動(dòng)型文化

In healthy workplace cultures， employees are encouraged to respectfully challenge processes， procedures， and anything that isn’t working. In a fear-based culture， employees are silenced by intimidation， abuse， gaslighting4， and domination. Logan Mallory， VP at Motivosity， said， “a fear-based culture is one of the most toxic workplace cultures because it creates a harsh working environment. Employees will do everything they can to avoid punishment， including not taking risks or cutting corners.”

健康的職場(chǎng)文化中，員工受到鼓勵(lì)對(duì)流程、制度等任何無(wú)效的事物提出合理質(zhì)疑。在恐懼驅(qū)動(dòng)型文化中，員工則因受到威嚇、虐待、心理操控和強(qiáng)權(quán)壓制而噤聲。摩提云聚公司副總裁洛根·馬洛里表示：“恐懼驅(qū)動(dòng)型文化是最具毒性的職場(chǎng)文化之一，它會(huì)制造出高度壓抑的工作氛圍。員工會(huì)竭盡所能避免懲罰，比如不冒風(fēng)險(xiǎn)或敷衍了事?！?/p>

In a workplace where fear overpowers trust， employees’ anxiety is heightened due to frequently worrying about consequences they may face or potentially losing their job. This leads to

在一個(gè)恐懼壓倒信任的工作環(huán)境中，員工的焦慮會(huì)日益加劇，因?yàn)槌３?dān)憂自己可能要承擔(dān)責(zé)任甚或失去工作。這會(huì)導(dǎo)致：

● Employees afraid to tell the truth or report bullying， harassment or misconduct

· 員工不敢說(shuō)出實(shí)情或舉報(bào)欺凌、騷擾與不當(dāng)行為

● Being too focused on their daily goals rather than the bigger picture

· 過(guò)于關(guān)注眼前小目標(biāo)而忽視大局

● Doing whatever it takes to appease their boss and avoid blame

· 費(fèi)盡心力討好老板以避免挨罵

● A rampant rumor mill that appears to be more credible than what’s conveyed from management and leadership

· 謠言盛行，似比管理層和領(lǐng)導(dǎo)層傳達(dá)的信息更可信

（譯者為“《英語(yǔ)世界》杯”翻譯大賽獲獎(jiǎng)?wù)撸?/p>

1 micromanagement（企業(yè)管理中的）微觀管理，是管理者密切觀察或控制員工工作的一種管理方式，通常有負(fù)面含義。

2 LISW = Licensed Independent Social Worker持證獨(dú)立社會(huì)工作者，通常屬于臨床社會(huì)工作者的高級(jí)執(zhí)照，允許持證人獨(dú)立執(zhí)業(yè)并提供心理治療、診斷和干預(yù)。" 3 LMSW = Licensed Master Social Worker持證碩士社會(huì)工作者，屬于基礎(chǔ)性執(zhí)照，通常需在督導(dǎo)下工作，側(cè)重非臨床或宏觀社會(huì)工作，提供社區(qū)資源對(duì)接、個(gè)案管理、政策倡導(dǎo)等服務(wù)。

4 ?gaslighting煤氣燈效應(yīng)，一種心理操控手段，通過(guò)歪曲事實(shí)、否認(rèn)受害者的感知或記憶，使其逐漸懷疑自我認(rèn)知、判斷力甚至精神狀態(tài)，最終達(dá)到操控者支配受害者的目的。這一概念源自1944年的美國(guó)驚悚片《煤氣燈下》（Gaslight），影片中，男主角通過(guò)調(diào)暗煤氣燈并堅(jiān)稱燈光未變讓妻子懷疑自己“瘋了”。