Harasser or victim?
Before drawing the lessons of this study, Adélaïde Blavier and Daniel Faulx did not neglect to wonder about the validity of the Liège model, which they here tested in an in depth manner. In effect, like any academic or scientific advance, this model obviously contains flaws. It is thus, for example, based uniquely on interview accounts. In addition it is restricted to grasping processes as they have been understood, interpreted and reconstituted by people who have experienced a specific professional event. Nonetheless the concordance between the different statements increases their credibility and their validity. In the end, ‘the combination of all the dimensions included in this model constitutes an innovative approach which should contribute to providing new knowledge concerning the phenomenon of harassment, if only through going beyond a view focused on the victim. Or by taking into account a dynamic perception, true to the evolution of situations,’ estimates the psychologist.
In the end, the Liège model’s multi-level, multi-perspective and multi-temporal analysis has enabled a better grasp of the evolutions which this story has undergone. From embodying victim status, Anne, finally supported by the group and the management, has shifted to a position of strength in relation to Xavier. As a result, the relationship between them has become symmetrical, and no longer complementary...even if Anne continues to see herself as a victim. But the turnaround which has taken place has led Xavier to see himself as a victim or scapegoat as well.
‘We can see in this story that in referring to different dynamics and temporalities, the two characters involved can take on victim status. The model which we have applied allows this point to be highlighted very well, whilst showing the reasons and the facts on which such interpretations,’ points out Professor Blavier. And that casts a special light on harassment: in effect, one can easily imagine that in certain situations, a harasser, all of a sudden feeling like a victim, is the first to register an official complaint concerning harassment.
Other people’s fault
‘In legal tribunals we often come across people who have been indicted who attribute the position of the victim completely to themselves,’ observes Professor Blavier. ‘On a personal level they do not see that what they have done is reprehensible. In addition these people accuse their environment and have the responsibility or the problem weigh on it. In short, everybody is guilty, apart from them!’ Xavier demonstrates this phenomenon perfectly. He justifies his initial behaviour by the fact that, professionally, ‘Anne knew nothing.’ When his attitude is no longer accepted by those around him he thinks: ‘she does her job badly, she is fragile and it is me who is punished!’ In fact, because of his great professional skills, he was supported in everything that he did. The problem is that he extended and interpreted this support from the group and the management personnel to every one of his attitudes.
Adopting a victim’s position corresponds to the way the majority of harassers function: ‘they never question themselves. It is the other person who is guilty. Or the others, ganged up against them. An external cause always justifies their attitudes. In domestic violence, for example, this discourse crops up repeatedly. Furthermore, the aggressors are not always aware of the harmful consequences of their behaviour. That is thus why when offering counselling to the perpetrators of aggression it is necessary to help them begin this process of becoming aware and to evacuate their anger against others,’ spells out the psychologist, who thus highlights one of the important developments in the treatment in harassment situations.
Focus on the harasser
‘This work has told us much about the presumed aggressor. It has brought to light the meaning of the mechanisms which were behind his behaviour and justifications,’ insists Adélaïde Blavier.
Besides indispensable support for the victim, this study has also enabled it to be stressed to what extent an intervention – as long as it is accepted (and which is now often insisted on by the authorities) – with the presumed harassers could help them reflect on their behaviour, whilst pushing them to position themselves in other relational modes and not to go too far. Hand in hand with these types of intervention the article also suggests other initiatives or recommendations aimed at specialists who intervene when a case of harassment is signalled. First of all, in order to better target the aid offered, it reminds them that it is necessary to determine if the situation is one of harassment or hyper-conflict, in a complementary or symmetrical relationship. Here, for example, Xavier put a stop to his harassment, but the situation remained conflictual.
