Tell me how I'm doing

The BBC's Respect At Work report is indeed, "uncomfortable reading".

Particularly chilling is the section on "Known Bullies". Change Associates, who interviewed BBC staff past and present who felt they had something to say, defined a Known Bully thus (their grammar, not mine): A manager who regularly, in some cases daily shouts and berates members of their team and is known by HR, the Unions will have a file on them and may have active grievances out against them or have previously successful grievance cases proven against them.

The section in full:

Working with a ‘known bully’ - We heard from a number of people about how they fear being the one that gets picked on (and in some cases targeted) today. During interviews multiple members of staff in different parts of the BBC reported being bullied by a ‘known bully’. These individuals create a climate of anxiety and participants described how they live in fear that it will be their turn to be verbally abused today. People used very emotive language to describe how over time this affects their ability to do their job, as they actively avoid discussion for fear of confrontation and are reluctant to challenge any decision put forward. Comments were made that in some teams, the only common bond they have is ‘the fear of the one who calls the shots.’ People also cited the fact that they were ashamed about how this made them behave – when they feel relief that it’s someone else’s turn, they keep their head down and squirm and then are full of shame at how they have just watched their colleague take a verbal beating. Such public displays are most often conducted by senior staff, managers, programme makers or others who are sufficiently confident of their position and reputation to give such a performance. They have learned the signals of authority and power it can send. Visible behaviour such as this has, by definition, a public impact. It intensifies the pressure on the victim and acts as a warning to others.

Other stuff that's chilling: the distrust of HR, the complexity of processes, and the sense that the BBC "wins" more often than the complainants, who feel it's their own career paths that have suffered.

There's a nice remark from Dinah Rose that no staff want some form of "sheep dip" to put this right. The significant change to make things better, is expensive, but ought to be effective. Everyone with management responsibility for ten or more staff will have an annual "360 degree" review on how they uphold the BBC Values, which will be part of that manager's annual appraisal. That means staff get a genuinely anonymous chance to rate their bosses. All they need now is some assurance that a duff review will produce real action, not promotion. It will, won't it, Tone ?