I, you, he/she harass(es)…

Not every harasser is necessarily a degenerate or a ‘psychopath.’ Sometimes a person becomes a harasser little by little, without really becoming aware of it. But it can also happen that from the beginning the behaviour becomes deliberate. Ambition sometimes serves as motor for harassment, as can a feeling of one’s own superiority and one’s own skills in comparison with others. But take care: a potential harasser could be slumbering in each one of us, ready to wake up in the case of a specific situation we might find ourselves in. Thus, during times of professional or personal difficulty, certain people begin to take it out on others and become harassers, which they would a priori not have done in other conditions. ‘On the other hand certain people do not allow themselves to get locked into the position of a harassed victim, whilst others will be more likely to let themselves become dragged into it,’ stresses Adélaïde Blavier. ‘The dynamics at play in work influence the emergence of cases of harassment. Thus certain work contexts prove to be more risky than others. For example when people are placed in a competitive situation by a far-off chain of command, which is rarely onsite and pays attention only to results, and/or when the atmosphere is one of ‘everyone for themselves,’ the context becomes riskier. Certain individuals are then more at risk of rushing through the breach of harassment.’

In the face of the repeated attacks and behaviour of the harasser, victims begin to doubt and question themselves. ‘Their self image worsens to the point where their work ends up being influenced. For example, they make mistakes, they begin to forget things or they become more ‘muddled’ and their work becomes markedly disorganised. Their abilities are affected. As a result, that strengthens the harasser and gives him or her more weight, above all if the management personnel do nothing about it. A vicious spiral risks being triggered,’ warns the psychologist.

Neither victim nor tormentor: together...

Starting from this general context, the value of the Liège model, such as applied by Professors Blavier and Faulx to a problematic situation within a business company, is that it does not settle for centring on the victim, or on their experience and on the help that can be offered them. ‘In this model, we also take an interest in the potential harasser. What is their point of view? Are they aware of the acts they have committed and their impact? In fact we try to analyse the relationship between the presumed victim and the presumed harasser, all the while in the knowledge that this single relationship does not tell us everything and that all by itself it is too simplistic.’ Another dimension is thus brought into play, as this model also includes an analysis of the work context and environment, the relationships which are formed at the level of work organisation, the relationships which exist amongst all the different protagonists, the influence of the management team, as well as the evolution of the situation over time.

This original approach includes something of a major practical value: it in effect enables a distinction between and a diagnosis of two situations which often tend to be merged together: harassment and hyper-conflict: ‘In a business company there exist conflicts which are so fierce that they can lead to physical attacks. But it is not a question of harassment. In both cases the situation is harmful but it is necessary to distinguish them. The application of the Liège model allows us to do so,’ assures the psychologist. In studying the relationships between the two people (and those with their work circle), it consists of attempting to discern if symmetrical relationships exist between them. In this case the protagonists confront each other and clash over one or more problems. But both of them possess resources, skills and a psychological strength which can enable them to find something to lean on. Generally a symmetrical relationship indicates that there is a conflict or hyper-conflict situation. ‘On the other hand, when the people involved have complementary relationships, when one of them cannot ‘exist’ without the other, when one is in a position of power in relation to the other and when the latter, the victim, is incapable of extricating themselves from, then one can talk of a context of harassment,’ stresses Professor Blavier, who is frequently called upon to adjudicate in juridical assessments. In this article the application of the Liège model, along with an analysis of the contents of the interviews, enabled an understanding that harassment had indeed occurred, how it had established itself, persisted, developed and then swung round. And gave rise to two presumed victims rather than just one…