Work Doctor's Policy/Code Enforcement Procedures

Ideally, executives and managers of intimidating and disruptive individuals would spontaneously recognize the misconduct when it occurs or receive warnings about incidents by employees affected by the negative behavior. Then, they would stop the conduct by appropriately managing the offender, provide incentives to cease and desist, and leverage punishment as a potential consequence when warranted. However, research and anecdotal evidence suggest that the perpetrators' managers either discount or ignore reports and actually reward the misconduct through explicit actions or tacit approval.

Therefore, a new set of managerial responsibilities is introduced during the Policy writing session. It constrains individual managers' freedom to not ignore witnessed bullying behavior by peers.

The requisite activity to ensure compliance with EP 5 is the development of Complaint-Response-Remedies processes that, in turn, effectively implement the Policy. This is completed concurrent with writing the Policy. The process takes a minimum of two (2) on-site days, depending on the size of the writing group.

Complaint procedures, both informal and formal, are devised. Much benefit is derived from creating a group of employees trained to recognize and ameliorate workplace bullying to which potential complainants can be directed. The aggrieved individual retains the right to not file a formal complaint, to be non-adversarial, while simply seeking information about her or his experiences of mistreatment. (This feature of our work also satisfies the Joint Commission's #8 suggested action.)

When Complaints are formally filed, a system for protecting the rights of both complainant and alleged violator will be in place. The Policy writing group determines who handles the complaints, in what format, and to whom or to which group the responsibility for fact finding is assigned.

The Policy-writing group also creates the organization's Response system. Complainants will know beforehand relevant deadlines, mandated timelines for the onset and completion of fact finding, who is notified when, and protections to ensure confidentiality for involved parties. The credibility of the response system depends on timeliness and the perceived safety of procedures.

The EP 5 mandate to "manage" the disruptive and inappropriate behaviors will be satisfied, in large part, by creating a set of applicable (or obligated) Remedies when violations are confirmed by fact-finding procedures. That is, typically the Policy writing group creates a list of recommended consequences for violations which depend on both frequency and severity of offenses. Not all remedies are punitive; many are restorative. However, there will be consequences including, but not limited to, suspension, termination, loss of clinical privileges, and reports to professional licensure bodies (this is #3e on the Joint Commission list of suggested actions).

Creating the Complaint-Response-Remedies processes poses the greatest challenge to the Policy writing group. It is imperative that the Policy be applied throughout the organization, applicable to all employees at all levels, without exception, in order to be effective and credible.

Finally, the Policy-writing group develops the organization's education and training schedule to rollout the new Policy and procedures. (The Joint Commission's #1 suggested action.)

Investigations of Alleged Policy/Code Violations

When a new Policy is introduced and it represents a major shift in the corporate culture, as the JCAHO-driven Policy will accomplish, Work Doctor consultants can conduct the investigation of the first complaint to ensure a successful start for a new process. As neutral, third-party observers, we can launch the new process with fairness and credibility.

Work Doctor consultants brings forensic experience as well as extensive knowledge about organizational behavior coupled with an unmatched expertise in conduct exhibited by perpetrator, complainants, and witnesses. We have specialists in healthcare and a physician who can lead the investigation if the initial complaint involves one or more physicians.

The fact-finding techniques that we employ will uncover bullying that others fail to recognize. As specialists in bullying and its many covert forms, we are not fooled by brilliant but abusive individuals. We ask the right questions of the right people. Work Doctor can also train internal peer fact finders (See the following Suggested Actions section of this proposal.)