In the aftermath of two Boeing 737 Max airliner crashes in 2018 and 2019, investigations pointed to two reasons why the aircrafts’ catastrophic design flaw was not identified and resolved. Both underlying conditions were related to the manufacturer’s organizational culture: a hyper-focus on bottom-line business results over design safety and fear of retaliation for speaking up.

“My pay was docked for putting quality concerns in writing,” says one Boeing quality manager, speaking in the Netflix documentary Downfall: The Case Against Boeing. Whistleblowers at the company said anybody who reported a problem was either fired, let go, or moved on, according to aviation analyst Michael Goldfarb in the documentary.

These experiences were emblematic of a retaliation culture that had infected the organization. “Boeing quit listening to their employees. So every time I would raise my hand, they would attack the messenger and ignore the message,” says yet another quality manager.

The severity of the Boeing case may make workplace retaliation seem like a rare occurrence—something that many senior managers would attest “doesn’t happen here.” But retaliation at work—in various forms—is very much on the rise. Since 2019, incidents of retaliation at work skyrocketed globally. According to a study by the Ethics and Compliance Initiative, a Vienna, Virginia-based nonprofit that helps organizations build and sustain high-quality ethics and compliance programs, 79% of U.S. employees and 61% of global employees reported experiencing some type of retaliation in the workplace in 2021. Additionally, more than half of cases (55.8%) formally filed with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in 2020 were for some form of retaliation.

Granted, in most organizations, retaliatory action can be far more subtle than what Boeing’s employees experienced. It could come in the form of a supervisor withholding constructive feedback, or leaving an employee out of an important meeting after they disagree with a management decision, or exercising their rights in a way that goes against the grain of the culture. However, the negative effect on the victims of retaliation and the business itself can be just as serious.

More on how leaders can build better workplace cultures

Including how to combat workplace toxicity , what to do about quiet quitting, and how to view the forces that are redefining what it means to be connected to an office.

Left unchecked, a culture of retaliation can spread throughout the organization, “creating entire climates of abuse,” says Villanova professor Manuela Priesemuth in her article, “Time’s Up for Toxic Workplaces.” “Because employees look to and learn from managers, they come to understand that this type of interpersonal mistreatment is acceptable behavior in the company.”

Researchers attribute the rise in retaliation, in part, to increased pressure on employees to compromise business standards. Since 2020, such pressure is the highest it has ever been, according to ECI. Globally, 29% of employees reported pressure in 2020, up from 20% in 2019.

For their part, employees are more willing to speak up about observed misconduct, thanks to heightened sensitivity following the Me Too movement, increased diversity and inclusion awareness, and a new age of employee empowerment brought on by the demand for workers. In 2020, 86% of employees were more likely to report misconduct, compared with 69% in 2017, according to ECI. The move to remote work in 2020 also created more opportunities for inappropriate behavior through digital channels. Inappropriate comments, jokes, GIFs sent through e-mail, chat messages, and texts could all be considered digital harassment with grounds for reporting.

In this climate, businesses need to be alert to signs of a retaliation culture and stop retaliatory behavior before it starts. This starts with creating an environment of psychological safety and extends to middle management training. Companies also need to put mechanisms in place for employees to address concerns promptly and transparently and provide multiple reporting channels to any employee who feels the need to raise an issue or report on a retaliatory event.

What retaliation actually looks like

Although retaliation is defined in multiple ways, two basic elements are always present: an issue is raised, and the person who raised it suffers as a result. The suffering can be overt or subtle and can be triggered by management or peers.

Often, retaliatory actions can be indirect or can even take the form of a lack of action. In fact, “exclusion is the number one form of subtle retaliation,” says Skip Lowney, senior researcher at ECI. For example, an employee who’s seen as too outspoken at meetings might find information being withheld that’s essential to them doing their job. Team members could also be discouraged from listening to an employee’s expertise or contributions after the employee challenges the direction a project is going. It could even be as subtle as an executive giving a disapproving look to a senior manager who speaks up at a meeting, signaling that they’re in trouble.

Such subtle acts of retaliation can be difficult to recognize, but they can still have a devastating effect. Subtle retaliation destroys careers, erodes the targeted individual’s sense of worth, and damages workforce effectiveness and productivity. Further, retaliation can diminish business performance because it discourages employees from offering input that could lead to innovation or steer management away from making poor decisions.

The reverberating effect of a culture of retaliation

Even companies that don’t have a culture of retaliation may have to deal with its damaging effects. Employees who experienced retaliation at a previous employer may be extremely sensitive to any nuance of it at any new workplace, or suspicion may be raised by retaliation claims on social media. Some workers are so distrustful that they won’t complete employee surveys for fear it will be linked back to them and used against them.

Jeffrey, a data scientist who asked that his real name not be used, is still haunted by the retaliation he suffered at a former employer. “It has shaped how I interact with everyone else for the rest of my career,” he says.

While working remotely for a small company, he was locked out of the company’s network and communication tools after voicing his frustration to the CEO in a group email about the team’s health insurance that had been stopped and restarted repeatedly. He later learned he had been fired.

“I was scared. My family is a single-income household,” he recalled. “Then I started spiraling. How am I going to pay for my wife’s meds? How do we not become homeless?” Jeffrey found a new job within weeks—but the experience had lingering effects on him and his former co-workers.

“There was a lot of fear on the team after I was fired. They were afraid to speak out and get fired themselves,” Jeffery says.

Psychological safety = good decision-making

Organizational psychologists agree that the first step to avoiding or repairing a culture of retaliation is to promote and reinforce a culture of psychological safety. Psychological safety is grounded in an unwritten contract of behavior expectations between employer and employee. These expectations create an interpersonal climate where people feel free to speak up honestly and openly. The perception that there will not be consequences for taking interpersonal risks at work is at the core of psychological safety, says Amy Edmonson, professor at Harvard Business School.

“The most important thing that psychological safety enables for executive teams is good decision-making,” Edmonson says in a podcast. “They will not fall prey to a very common trap, which is to make a consequential decision in a particular direction that one or more people had grave doubts about but didn’t feel safe to speak up about them.” This isn’t a rare occurrence, she adds.

“Some of that is just slightly below conscious awareness. You sort of hold back,” Edmonson says. Even if it’s not a matter of feeling unsafe about speaking up, people may not want to come across as unpleasant, or they may doubt themselves because the area of discussion is somewhat outside of their area of expertise. “One executive described it as, ‘I didn’t want to be the skunk at the picnic,’” she says. “In an executive team of high psychological safety, that just doesn’t happen.”

The vital role of middle managers and supervisors

While executives set the cultural tone, middle managers and supervisors are central to avoiding a culture of retaliation or repairing one damaged by it. Data from Gallup going back to 2015 indicates that managers account for 70% of the variances in employee engagement, which means a good manager can make a world of difference in every employee’s perception of the culture.

On the flip side, middle managers and supervisors at every level in the organization can create distinctive microcultures, even when they are subject to the same corporate policies and organization-wide practices. Empowering managers has many advantages, but autonomy also leaves more space to create a toxic subculture. In their research, senior lecturer at the MIT Sloan School of Management, Donald Sull, and cofounder of Culture X, Charles Sull, found that middle managers were more than twice as likely to be the source of a toxic subculture compared with other companywide factors.

To curb a culture of retaliation, executives and managers need the tools to deepen their self-awareness regarding the actions they take and their effect on the people who report to them. Education programs can help managers learn to identify mental patterns that block them from absorbing and accepting new ideas that allow them to change their behavior, says Robert Kegan, co-author of Immunity to Change: How to Overcome It and Unlock the Potential in Yourself and Your Organization.

Managers should also be encouraged to examine their conscious or unconscious ulterior motives. To what extent are their actions a result of ego, stress, or self-protection? What effect has that had on others?

They must also examine their relationships with those around them and identify how they might treat their inner circle and outer circles differently. From here, managers can start to recreate a culture that is open and inclusive.

Exposing and eliminating retaliation culture

As important as it is to discourage a culture of retaliation, it’s just as vital to have plans and mechanisms in place for when these transgressions occur. Organizations should consider the following when developing strategies and processes for managing instances of misconduct.

Develop clear policies and communicate them

Employees need to be aware of the channels for reporting on both misconduct and retaliatory behaviors. Companies may use human resources, an anonymous hotline, supervisors, a complaint process, or a combination of these and other methods, to encourage employees to report concerns. The entire organization needs to know what retaliation looks like, and the definition needs to be shared repeatedly with all employees.

Hear out employees

Managers need to intentionally set aside time to talk with their direct reports and allow them to air out any concerns, says Dr. Anthony Klotz, an associate professor of organizational behavior at University College London School of Management. “But they’re so stretched, they usually don’t have time or feel stressed, and when they do have time, they’re usually in defensive mode.” Klotz suggests setting aside time weekly to hear how employees are experiencing work. “Then their job is to funnel that up to higher levels of the organization so they can make changes and adjust accordingly,” Klotz says.

Managers should also be trained to recognize appearances of unfair behavior, including their own, and address it immediately, Lowney says. “If a problem comes to the supervisor, they are supposed to resolve it, but also report that to the ethics and compliance office to monitor and track it,” he says.

Set manageable expectations

Employees need to understand what will happen once a report is made and how long it’s likely to take, from reporting through evaluation and investigation to potential disciplinary actions.

It needs to be made clear that just because a report is made; it does not mean specific actions will be taken. If a formal investigation is to be launched, the employee should be notified and made aware of how long the investigation may take.

Employees who file a complaint will likely be especially sensitive to others’ behavior—suddenly, even the most minor interactions can feel like retaliation, such as a boss who doesn’t say hello in the hallway, or their peers who suddenly seem quiet. To ameliorate such fears, employees should be made aware of what is and is not retaliation, so they know how to manage any heightened sensitivity while awaiting a response to their report and thereafter.

Keep the lines open

While it is not necessary or feasible for employees to be alerted to every step of the formal process, it is important for them to know there is a process and generally what it entails so they feel confident that something is being done, their allegations are being taken seriously, and their complaint is heading toward some type of conclusion. Employees should be told what leaders found in their examination of reported unethical or retaliatory behavior, what they’ve done with that information to resolve the problem, the progress made, and then follow through on changes leaders have identified as being necessary.

All these steps can equip individuals to speak up for themselves and for the benefit of the organization. Employees who work in a culture of psychological safety feel valued and are more productive, and organizations benefit from better decision-making and, ideally, greater innovation.

“You want a culture where people feel it is safe to speak up,” Klotz says. “If it’s a climate of support and psychological safety, having a voice leads to very positive outcomes for the organization.”