ľ�ϸ���Ӱ��

‘We expect people working in organisations to do more than simply ask themselves: are our activities commercially viable and do we operate within the bounds of the law? More than that, society increasingly demands that they “do the right thing” within that organisation.’ This is the argument of Elianne van Steenbergen, the newly appointed professor to the chair ‘Psychology of Supervision’, endowed by Utrecht ľ�ϸ���Ӱ�� and the Dutch Authority for the Financial Markets (AFM). ‘Traditionally, the supervision of organisations has been approached from a legal and economic perspective. I’d like to supplement these with a new perspective: the psychological perspective.’ Van Steenbergen delivered her inaugural lecture on 7 December.

When she was younger, Van Steenbergen heard a remarkable story about an acquaintance who had worked in an insurance company’s call centre for years, but at a certain point, confessed she ‘couldn’t bear the job any more’. ‘And that wasn’t because of an excessive workload or unpleasant co-workers,’ the UU professor continues. ‘It was because she’d been instructed that when a customer called about submitting a damage claim, she was to discourage them as much as possible. Basically, her job was to give customers the runaround. For years, this acquaintance had – by her own account – been unable to “do the right thing” for her customers. And that’s what caused her to develop stress-related symptoms.’ Van Steenbergen was astounded that her acquaintance, a very sweet woman, could be prompted to act in such a way by the place she worked. That incident motivated her to pursue a career in psychology, devoted to studying human behaviour in organisations.

Fine

Until recently, the academic study of supervision was mainly concerned with the economic and legal aspects. ‘Supervisory bodies examine the organisational results in minute detail, as well as whether things like products, services and advertising activities are in keeping with laws and regulations. Following often-lengthy legal proceedings, any violations are ultimately subject to sanctions, such as a fine. For a long time, prevailing wisdom held that such legal and economic interventions would automatically result in better behaviour among people in the organisations being supervised.’

For a long time, people thought that eliminating any bad apples would improve the work climate. However, the reality is less about the individual

Major influence of group standards

Yet Van Steenbergen asserts that recent research has shown that behavioural change within organisations is impossible to achieve without considering the psychological perspective. ‘It’s much easier to enact behavioural change within a business or organisation when people understand why the rules are important.’ Van Steenbergen also emphasises the importance of the group itself. ‘For a long time, people thought that eliminating any “bad apples” would improve the work climate. However, the reality is less about the individual: much more significant is the work environment, the culture or climate within the organisation, which has a strong correlation with displays of unethical behaviour. Both consciously and unconsciously, each of us is influenced by the standards and values within our group. Whatever our group views as normal, we start to consider normal as well. This in turn influences our behaviour at work.’

Psychological perspective

In other words, it’s high time for psychology at work – and in the supervision of what goes on there. ‘We need that psychological perspective in order to better understand why people in organisations abide by the law or not and why they “do the right thing” or not, as well as what supervisory bodies can do to promote ethical conduct. After all, “doing the right thing” is in the best interests of the individual customer, consumers, insured persons, the public and society as a whole.’