Organizational Trauma: Causes and Aversion

Introduction

The subject of organizational trauma is not new to the business context because a number of researches have been developed in relation to that (for example, Hopper, 2012; Välikangas, et al., 2009; Hormann, 2007; deKlerk, 2007; Kahn, 2003). Trauma in the workplace does correlate with burnout, which is caused by excessive pressures (both internal and external) that employees must endure while performing their assigned tasks.The impact can only be negative because trauma brings about reduced commitment and dedication from the side of the victim – further resulting in reduced performance and productivity. Thus, this research is designed to understand what organizational trauma is all about, how it emanates, and how it can be averted and deterred. Such purpose is based on the following research objectives:

1. To understand what organizational culture is all about.
2. To gain an understanding of the causes of organizational culture.
3. To determine how organizational culture can be averted and deterred.

An Overview of Organizational Trauma

Those who are hurt emotionally view silence as a form of protection. However, they don’t choose silence but are brought to depend on silence as a result of their environment, according to Boris Cyrulnik.

Trauma is a very common facet in any given unit. In a simple term, trauma can be stated to mean stress – or change from the normal setting of any given individual which does have downward influence on the performance of such person. The organization, as a standalone entity, is understandably not devoid of such.This is because just like other units, organizations comprises of different people that perform different functions in order to effect its overall productivity. This has led to a number of researches in relation to organizational trauma and how it influences the overall performance of its units – and a resulting influence on the productivity of such organization. Existing literatures have also suggested (based on results from extensive researches) that many organizations are being affected by trauma (Hopper, 2012, p. xxxv; Välikangas, et al., 2009, p. 225; Hormann, 2007, p. 1; deKlerk, 2007, p. 49; Kahn, 2003, p. 364).

In terms of definition, organization trauma generally means a dysfunctional change in the behavioural patterns that exist at the organizational level (Hopper, 2012, p. xxxvii; Hormann, 2007, p. 21; Kahn, 2003, p. 364). One might be forced to ask as to what causes these dysfunctional patterns? The answer remains simple as to the fact that they emanate from ineffective work settings and other arrangements within the workplace (Kahn, 2003). These dysfunctional patterns have a negative impact on the long-term development of such an organization (Kahn et al., 2013, p. 377), as well as a negative impact on the image and identity of such a system and the ability to threaten the overall existence of a given organization (Hormann, 2007, p. 1).

The scope of understanding organizational trauma intersects with clinical discipline, as Hormann (2007, p. 18) pointed out.However, while the focus of organizational trauma is on existing systems within the workplace, the focus of clinical disciplines does however concentrate on the individuals that work within the system. On the same hand, there is a noticeable gap between the transfers of knowledge from one clinical discipline to down to the organizational trauma domain.

Be it in the form of shaping public policy or providing necessary services to families, communities, individuals or other corporations, workers are known to be fully engaged with the modern day societal problems. Thus, difficulties encountered at work can have both emotional and psychological consequences for these employees (Davies, 1998; Gibson, McGrath, & Reid, 1989). Such stress doesn’t just emanate from the process of undertaking their designated duties, as it can also be the outcome of existing organizational features (Sze & Ivker, 1986). In terms of cross-examination, occupational stress has been viewed primarily in the form of burnout (Maslach, 1993), but recent findings in the field of trauma has linked some of these unique stresses to work. Such stress that emanate as a result of work related issues have been conceptualized as vicarious trauma (McCann & Pearlman, 1990b; Pearlman & Saakvitne, 1995a, 1995b). Up till the present moment, majority of researches in this area have focused on the individual factors that are thought to bring about organizational stress, while neglecting the impact that organizational structure can have when it comes to creating stress on the workforce (Bell, 1998, 1999).

In line with the understanding created above, this book will define organizational trauma as a situation in which an individual is confronted with actual or threatened death, serious injuries or sexual violation, or exposed to death, injury or suffering of other people within the same working environment. Thus, organizational trauma can only be a product of negative activities within the workplace.

Types of organizational trauma

In recent years, the occupational stress of people working with trauma survivors have been receiving huge attention (Cunningham, 1999; Dalton, 2001; Regehr & Cadell, 1999). A number of authors have now come out with the suggestion that trauma theory is of high importance when it comes to understanding the burnout experience of people working within a confined unit (such as an organization) (Horwitz, 1998; Wade, Beckerman, & Stein, 1996). This has also led to a number of theories speculating that emotional impact of traumatic conditions in the workplace is contagious and it can easily be transmitted through empathic processes (Figley, 1995; Pearlman & Saakvitne, 1995; Stamm, 1995) – such as in a case where fellow staffs are constantly being exposed to traumatic stories from other staffs based on their past experience.

In the past decade, the impact of working with trauma survivors have been carefully studied under different constructs: compassion fatigue (Figley, 1995), secondary traumatic stress (Figley, 1993; Stamm, 1995), and vicarious trauma (McCann & Pearlman, 1990b; Pearlman & Saakvitne, 1995a, 1995b). These constructs as well as findings they have delivered have also been compared and debated (Pearlman & Saakvitne, 1995a; Stamm, 1995) but a detailed discussion on that ground is considered to be outside of the scope of this book. In any case, majority of studies in relation to organizational trauma have been based on the construct of vicarious trauma.

In terms of definition, vicarious trauma is the transformation produced in the inner experience of a staff due to such person being emphatically engaged with a trauma survivor’s traumatic material (Pearlman & Saakvitne, 1995a, p. 31). Vicarious trauma can cause psychological outcomes similar to post-traumatic stress reactions, and it can manifest as intrusive symptoms like flashbacks, obsessive thoughts, or nightmares, or constructive symptoms like numbing and dissociation (Beaton & Murphy, 1995).It also has the possibility of resulting to cognitive schemas – which is the disruption of important beliefs that such person hold about themselves, other individuals, and the society at large (McCann & Pearlman, 1990b; Pearlman & Saakvitne, 1995a, 1995b).

While some of the symptoms from vicarious trauma does look more like burnout and can in fact result to some level of organizational burnout, it is important that one understand that researches on therapists has begun to define vicarious trauma as a different concept from organizational burnout  (Figley, 1995; Pearlman & Saakvitne, 1995a). The difference is that unlike the burnout construct, constructs of vicarious trauma was developed from and is clinically founded on trauma theory – specifically grounded in self-development theory (McCann & Pearlman, 1990b). In different vast studied, findings show that burnout and overall tress levels were not inked to exposures to traumatized people, but exposure to traumatized people were found to be related to vicarious trauma in people (KassamAdams, 1995; Schauben & Frazier, 1995). On that ground, burnout on its own is not capable of capturing the effects of organizational related stress. While vicarious trauma has been found to result in certain levels of emotional exhaustion, depersonalization and some reduced level of personal accomplishment, it should also be noted that such trauma are unique and specific to certain working conditions.

In generally, one needs to understand that workers risk exposing themselves to vicarious trauma due to their exposure with traumatized people or materials that contain images of trauma. Such is classified as secondary traumatic experience. Secondary traumatic experiences occur as a result of exposure to traumatized individuals or images of traumatizing situations (Cornille & Meyers, 1999; Dalton, 2001). Numerous researchers have also supported that finding, claiming that a number of people in their workplace are at risk of post-traumatic outcomes as a result of their exposure to trauma victims or trauma-related materials (Chrestman, 1995; Follette et al., 1994; Kassam-Adams, 1995; Pearlman & Mac Ian, 1995).

While there are differences in terms of classifying organizational trauma, one thing that is certain is that organizational trauma does have a negative influence on both the victim and other staff that are exposed to the victim. The reason is that vicarious trauma is easily transferable from the victim or materials containing traumatic conditions to people exposed to traumatic conditions.

Causes of Organizational Trauma

In general, organizational trauma is a result of stress (both physical and emotional) in the workplace. Understanding the factors that result in organizational products is therefore critical to understanding the causes of organizational trauma.Maslach (1993) presented a description of organizational stress as having three dimensions: 1) emotional exhaustion; 2) depersonalization, which is defined as a form of negative attitude towards clients, detachment from certain events, or loss of ideals; and 3) reduced persona accomplishment and commitment towards one’s task in the workplace. In terms of conceptualization, stress in the organization has been viewed as a process rather than a defined condition or state, and some theories have been established to note how it sequentially progresses throughout each of the defined stages or dimensions (Maslach, 1993). Some of these studies have also examined how interpersonal and organizational characteristics influence stress at the corporate level. One interesting finding in the context of this study is that organizations can either promote higher levels of job satisfaction or contribute to corporate level burnout (Söderfeldt, Söderfeldt, & Warg, 1995).Thus, the causes of organizational trauma are discussed below.

• Downsizing

In the organizational setting, especially with the treacherous levels of economies across the globe, downsizing has become a common phenomenon in the global workforce. This is because machines are constantly being invented to replace human labor, and companies are constantly pushing towards a cheaper production cost by outsourcing to countries where cheaper labor costs are obtainable. Considering that these employees are human beings and not parts of replaceable machines, it becomes easily evident that they could easily be affected as a result of these layoffs. The interesting part is that these effects are not limited to those laid off, as a number of researchers have linked layoff effects to even those still employed within the corporate system. Research in the area of organizational downsizing has demonstrated an array of negative outcomes and minimal positive results for companies, with such ranging from a decline in job satisfaction to an overall decline in organizational commitment among survivors (Luthans & Sommer, 1999). A study published in the British Medical Journal did show that the risk of workers having a heart attack and being hospitalized increased by 100% following downsizing, and this was coupled with a number of other conditions; rapid expansions also increased the risk at a higher rate (Vahtera et al., 2004).

One group of researchers has actually described a "survivors’ syndrome" with the suggestion that survivors of layoffs pass through three stages following a layoff: a sense of anguish as a result of chance, increased job insecurity, and the loss of friends and companions; a neutral stage that is more of a healing time; and the moment in which these staffs get a grip of themselves and become productive once more (Appelbaum et al., 2000). This is most evident in organizations where the workforce functions as a team. If a member or some members of the team are laid off, other survivors will definitely be negatively affected by such decisions from the management, and the resulting impact will be a decline in overall productivity and commitment. In cases where the people laid off represent an integral part of the overall functionality of the system, the negative influence on productivity could linger on for more time.

• Workload and complexity of the job

Researchers have been successful in demonstrating that there are job-related sources when it comes to understanding the causes of organizational trauma. In terms of workload, exposing these employees to either a light or heavy workload can cause some related organizational stress. However, the potential is more prevalent in cases where the workload is enormous (Jenkins and Elliot, 2004). The reason is that when people are offered to do more than they can actually handle, there is the tendency for such tasks to impact negatively on their overall satisfaction, and when they are not satisfied with their overall performance, they could start to experience some level of discontent and eventual organizational stress.

• Role definition

The way responsibilities are defined also represents an integral aspect of the corporate system because it makes it easy to hold people responsible for their actions within the corporate setting. As such, clearly defined roles will bring about job satisfaction, while unclearly defined roles will push the staff to the brink of job dissatisfaction (Cooper et al., 2001). Nobody (be it in the corporate setting or not) wants to be held responsible for other people’s irresponsibility, as they will deem such an action unfair. Therefore, not clearly defining a staff member’s role within the organization can bring about mixed judgment as to how his or her role might have impacted the organization’s success (negatively or positively). There won’t be much complaining in cases where such decisions result in positive sentiments, but the reserve will definitely bring about a reverse effect—and increase the potential of such a person experiencing work-related trauma.

• Relationships

The level of relationships one maintains at work, such as those with supervisors, colleagues, and subordinates, are key elements when it comes to either attenuating or increasing the overall stress level experienced within the same corporate system. Cooper et al. (2001) have linked negative interpersonal relationships and a lack of social support from other people within the workplace as being significant stressors with the potential of creating some level of organizational trauma. On the corporate level, these stress factors can bring about changes in the bureaucratic structure of the company and, as such, increase the overall structural stress on the supervisors. In the wake of difficult relationships with supervisors, the supervisor might be forced to assign difficult tasks to the employee, and the resulting effect will be dwindling interest in job roles as well as a decrease in the overall commitment of the personnel.

• Career development

Career development is crucial when it comes to weighing up employees’ commitment and dedication, as it does play a significant role in determining the way an individual manages other stress factors in the workplace. Some of the established sources of work-related trauma include job insecurity (as discussed in downsizing above), perceived under-promotion, over-promotion, and an overall lack of achievement in the workplace (Cooper et al., 2001). When an employee does not receive what he expects from his career development, his level of commitment and dedication suffers.

• Organizational culture and ethical conflicts

Organizational structure also represents an integral element when it comes to understanding how trauma emerges in the corporate setting. In essence, the way a company acts towards its employees can potentially define the way that employee will also act towards the company. While the business of every business has to be defined as "business," one needs to understand that there is a need for such business to be mutually beneficial. This means that the company must be as willing to help the workforce as the workforce is to help the company. Therefore, if the organization is not structured to be attentive to the needs of the staff and handle certain conflicting issues that arise within its system, then staff experiencing these issues can easily become traumatized.

Factors That Influence Organizational Trauma

While the previous discussion focused on the causes of organizational trauma, this section will seek to understand how they can be either enhanced or hindered within the system. A number of factors contribute to burnout in the corporate world, and the higher the risk of burnout, the higher the chances of staff being traumatized by the event (Söderfeldt, Söderfeldt, & Warg, 1995). They include factors like:

Unsupportive administration

Administrative support is critical for employees to meet corporate objectives.This is because such supports serve as a guide in areas where employees might easily default, as well as an encouragement for jobs well done. In cases where this is obtainable, staffs easily deliver as expected (Arches, 1991; Beck, 1987; Himle, Jayaratne, & Thyness, 1986). However, the lack of management support might leave them with a reduced productivity level and a resulting increase in traumatic situations. Thus, a lack of administrative support does have a huge influence on the likelihood that workers will experience traumatic situations in the corporate world.

Lack of professional challenges

Job excitement also has a way of bringing about job satisfaction (Arches, 1991; Beck, 1987; Himle, Jayaratne, & Thyness, 1986). Staff want to be challenged with new ideas in their workplace as it relates to their designated roles. The reason is that these new ideas will help them to grow significantly and ensure that they attain the desired level of self-actualization as it relates to their designated tasks. Thus, a lack of professional challenges will leave employees bored and stressed in the long run.As such, a lack of professional challenges can bring about organizational trauma in the long run.

Perceived low pay

Every individual has a way of justifying his or her own view of fair pay, but in general, fair pay entails being fairly rewarded for work done. If one views his or her pay as not being fair, then a tendency toward reduced commitment and loyalty to the work will emerge. Additionally, one will be less reluctant to adopt personal measures that can bring about the overall success of the company because such attempts will be viewed as unworthy. A number of studies (Arches, 1991; Beck, 1987; Himle, Jayaratne, & Thyness, 1986) and findings indicate that offering employees low pay does bring about organizational burnout and the feeling of being neglected.

Risks and difficulties associated with the task

Different tasks have their own risks and difficulties that one must face in the course of achieving such tasks. When people are exposed to high-risk, difficult jobs, their proclivity to become traumatized increases (Arches, 1991; Beck, 1987; Himle, Jayaratne, & Thyness, 1986). As such, risky and difficult tasks in the workplace have the tendency to increase organizational trauma for people who are exposed to them.

A Sample Case of Organizational Trauma

Allen was a lovely young lady who had spent the majority of her life working for ABCD.It was a job she enjoyed, and she had been given the tools she needed to advance in the corporate world.Her subordinates were all supportive and empowering to her, so there wasn't much to complain about.

However, she is about to experience a nightmare beyond her personal imagination. She was shifted to the marketing department and given the task of bringing in at least $20,000 per year. The permanency of her job depended solely on whether or not she brought in the deal. Additionally, she will earn more if she brings in more money.

During one of her marketing duties, she met a wealthy man who promised her a contract worth $50,000 for a six-month supply period.With the year coming to a close and no contracts in the pipeline, this was a dream come true for Allen.She honored the man’s invitation for a discussion at his office. However, the man took advantage of the young girl’s innocence and raped her. The saddest part was that she was not even offered the contract at the end of the year and was fired at the end of the year due to her inability to meet set marketing targets.

Allen was rehired in the same marketing position after a successful interview at company WXYZ, but she still had flashbacks.She found it very difficult to work with male colleagues at her workplace and mark male marketing contracts. This has an obvious negative impact on her young career, with an eventual decline in the marketing world. She lived with the trauma for much of her life. From: The author

The main thing that happened in the above case study is that organizational trauma doesn’t necessarily have to originate from the person’s present workplace, and its effects can be transferred from one workplace to another. As a result, organizations must understand the background of their potential workforce for past cases of organizational trauma, as such understanding is critical to providing them with the necessary supports to excel in their current workplace and ensuring that past experiences do not cause a potential drop in their overall productivity. 

AVOIDANCE AND DETERMINATION OF ORGANIZATIONAL TRAUMA

The majority of discussions relating to the prevention of vicarious trauma have primarily focused on the individual (Yassen, 1995). Nevertheless, the organizational context of trauma in the workplace has also been discussed as a factor in the development of secondary trauma. A number of authors have highlighted their own experiences in relation to agencies focused on serving traumatized individuals. In any case, such research has been successful in suggesting both strategies for averting and deterring organizational trauma in the areas of organizational culture, working environment, workload, education, supervision, and recourses available for self-care. All these factors as they relate to averting and deterring organizational trauma will be discussed in turn below.

• Organizational culture

In general, work expectations are set by the values and cultures of a given organization. In cases where such work does include contact with trauma, the organization also sets expectations on how workers will experience trauma and deal with it—in terms of both their professional and personal lives. One thing that calls for major concern is that organizations that serve trauma survivors, be it in the case of rape crisis centers, shelters provided for battered women, or organized programs designed for veterans, have all acknowledged the fact that such trauma experiences have an impact on both the individuals and the organization. The significance of such was further highlighted by the writings of Rosenbloom, Pratt, and Pearlman (1995) for their work at the Traumatic Stress Institute: "We continuously work together towards developing an atmosphere where it is inevitable for one to be affected by the work" (p. 77). A statement that further demonstrates how traumatic experiences of trauma survivors in an organization can be transferred to the organization is that the company lacks the necessary culture to prevent this from happening.It is common for the feelings and reactions created by trauma to leave workers feeling much less effective, powerless, and even unskilled. Therefore, an organization that wishes to provide the right environment to "normalize" the effects generated from working with trauma survivors needs to provide supportive workplaces for its workers to address such effects within their own work and personal lives.

Yassen (1995) offered the right example of a good negative "norm" that has the potential to frustrate workers' ability to provide self-care for themselves. In certain situations, one could assume that when employees don’t work overtime, they don’t seem committed to their work, or that those who don’t take vacation are more committed to their work (p. 201). A supportive environment as it relates to the workplace is one that doesn’t just allow for vacations but also provides the right room for workers to vary their own activities and workload, participate in community education, take the necessary time off for illness, and also provide time for other self-care activities. SMEs can actually signal their commitment to staff self-care by making it part of their mission statement, thus understanding that ultimately it does affect client care. Similarly, administrators can monitor staff vacation time and provide necessary encouragement for staff with a lot of accrued time to take time off.The staff meeting could also provide the right space for addressing self-care issues, and the right opportunities for continuing self-care education can also be circulated to the staff. In organizations that operate with limited resources and time, such a continued level of education, irrespective of how small, cannot be considered inconsequential as it can go a long way towards deterring and averting organizational trauma.

As an addition, the first case analysis above does show that organizational culture can have a directly negative impact on the potential of staff averting or deterring traumatic experiences in the workplace. This is because corporate culture defines the way things are done within a given organization. Therefore, the process of averting and deterring traumatic experiences in the organization should also revolve around understanding the core elements that make up the corporate culture and also adjusting any shift in that culture.

• Workload

According to research findings, having a more diverse caseload is associated with lower levels of traumatic experiences (Chrestman, 1995).The benefit is that such diversity can potentially help the social worker keep the traumatic experience in perspective and prevent the possibility of a traumatic worldview (Pearlman & Saakvitne, 1995a). On that same hand, agencies can also develop the right procedures that attempt to distribute their respective clients among staff in such a way that attention is given to the risks associated with traumatic experiences that survivors can present to staff within the workplace. If possible, trauma cases in the organization should also be distributed to staff with the necessary skills (Dutton & Rubinstein, 1995; Regehr & Cadell, 1999; Wade et al., 1996). Additionally, workers whose duties entail providing direct services to traumatized people can also benefit from the opportunity given them to participate in social change activities (Regehr & Cadell, 1999). Companies that don’t have such services at their disposal can also consider providing community education or outreach that works to influence policies. The benefit is that such activities will offer a necessary sense of hope and empowerment that can easily provide energizing and neutralizing "norms" for the negative effects that trauma brings along with it.

Additionally, companies can also offer "an attitude of respect" to trauma survivors (Pearlman & Saakvitne, 1995b, p. 170) within the workplace by acknowledging that work with such people normally involves multiple, long-term services and that they seem to slowly recover from their past experience. Such attitudes will not only entail supporting the staff but also decreasing their overall workload where necessary (Pearlman & Saakvitne, 1995b). Also, collaborating with organizations that work for traumatized victims can also help companies provide the necessary material supports and prevent the isolation and frustration that these trauma survivors can experience from having to "do it alone" by themselves.

• Workplace atmosphere

A safe, private, and comfortable working environment is important for staff in corporate settings that have the potential to expose them to violence (Pearlman & Saakvitne, 1995b; Yassen, 1995). When workplaces are located in high-crime areas, the likelihood of workers experiencing primary trauma rather than vicarious trauma increases.In a report, Dalton (2001) found that staff are sometimes threatened by their clients or related families of the client, and such threats strongly correlate with compassion fatigue. While it is right to consider it more of a challenge in certain settings, the ability to protect workers’ safety is something that should be of major concern to the administration of any given company. Paying for security services or security guards may be considered a necessity for businesses in order to protect trauma survivors while also ensuring that other employees do not suffer from primary trauma.In cases where the money for such a system is not available, the company might need to develop a form of buddy system in which, if there is a case of threat against one worker, others can rally behind the worker and inform the police as necessary.

In addition to the need for basic safety, Pearlman and Saakvitne (1995b) suggest that workers have items that are personally meaningful in their workplace.This can include pictures of their children or places they have visited, scenes of nature, or a quote that reminds them of who they are and why they do the work.In cases where the heat is extremely intense, this can help provide an instant shift toward a positive mood.The staff can also be encouraged to make such investments by seeing pictures on posters of inspiring quotes or moments in their lives. Additionally, the company also needs to provide a rest room for the staff that is separate from the place of contact with the clients. Such a provision will go a long way in creating an enabling environment for staff to relax and discuss issues that concern them, as well as create strong bonds between each other, with the eventual outcome of ensuring that staff become supportive of one another. By fighting for each other, these staff members will also be fighting for themselves, and the workplace will slowly but surely develop into a family unit. The end result will be the appropriate environment required to deter and prevent trauma within the corporate system.

• Education

Education that is centered on trauma aversion and deterrence also reduces the potential of staff experiencing trauma in the organization. The right information can provide the necessary help for individuals to name their experience as well as provide the right framework for understanding and responding to such experience. Training settings such as the schools for social work do have the responsibility of providing companies with necessary materials and information for staff that will encounter trauma (Pearlman & Saakvitne, 1995b). Dalton (2001) also found from research that staff with master’s degrees showed a lower level of traumatic stress when compared with those with only baccalaureate degrees. The finding does imply that the level of clinical training provided for master's graduates may be overlooked by the necessary part of training people in baccalaureate programs to avoid and deter secondary stress as well as the resulting trauma from such stress experiences.

The necessary efforts to educate employees about corporate-level trauma can begin at the job interview stage (Urquiza, Wyatt, & Goodlin-Jones, 1997).Corporations have the responsibility of warning applicants of potential organizational risks as well as the resilience level of new workers (Pearlman & Saakvitne, 1995b). Considering that new workers are more likely to have the most impact from trauma, it is important for new employees to be educated about the risks and associated effects of trauma (Chrestman, 1995; Neumann & Gamble, 1995). This includes continuing education and discussions of trauma theory and its effects in staff training (Regehr & Cadell, 1999; Urquiza et al., 1997), as well as ongoing highlights in staff meetings as they progress.In this area, companies can take advantage of the increasing number of workshops done in the area of vicarious trauma as it occurs within the organization at professional conferences. Such workshops can provide the staff with the opportunity to understand the basics of trauma, its effects, how it evolves, and how to develop resilience towards it. The ability of staff to understand new ways to address trauma can also help prevent the traumatic experience on its own. Certain theories, like the constructive self-development theory (McCann & Pearlman, 1990), which serves as the basis for developing the theory of vicarious trauma, maintain a double focus between past traumatic experience and the current resources and strength such individuals have towards averting any potential new trauma. This is to say that working from a theoretical framework that acknowledges and enhances client strengths as well as focuses on solutions in the present can somewhat provide an empowering atmosphere for staff and potentially reduce the risk of such staff experiencing trauma within the corporate setting. Thus, the right education on trauma and ways to handle it can help avert organizational trauma as well as deter the effects that might emanate from such an experience.

• Group support

Both literatures in the area of corporate burnout and trauma have placed emphasis on the importance of social support within the corporate world (Catherall, 1995; Munroe et al., 1995; Rosenbloom et al., 1995). Providing staff with the opportunity to debrief and discuss traumatic materials with their colleagues and supervisors has been proven to be very helpful (Horwitz, 1998; Regehr & Cadell, 1999; Urquiza et al., 1997). A more formalized approach for processing certain traumatic experience material is critical incident stress debriefing (Mitchell, 1983, as cited in Wollman, 1993), but this can be less helpful when it comes to the management of repetitive or chronic traumatic material (Horwitz, 1998). Support can come in the form of help from co-workers or emergency backups. Providing time for social interactions between staff, such as birthday celebrations in the company, can help in team building and increase the feeling of cohesion and mutual support between teams and groups.

The importance of group support is more common in big corporations, where analyzing individual traumatic experiences can be very hard. Some people might be living within the trauma sphere in the workplace without the potential of being noticed by the management due to the high workforce volume. Thus, groups form necessary bridges for understanding the problems of their members. The reason for this is that trauma victims may gain more confidence in the group and share traumatic workplace experiences, allowing the group to act on his or her behalf.This, if properly processed, can eventually lead to an understanding of traumatic experiences occurring in the company and improve the company's overall ability to provide necessary remedies for averting and deterring such.

• Supervision

Effective supervision is an important component when it comes to averting and deterring organizational trauma. This is because such responsible supervision does create a perfect relationship in which the staff feels safe when it comes to expressing fears, inadequacies, and concerns (Welfel, 1998). Companies that provide weekly group supervisors for their employees can create the right environment for processing and normalizing traumatic materials and their subsequent personal effects as part of their responsibilities.As an addition to providing necessary moral supports, supervisors can also teach the staff about trauma in the workplace in such a way that it becomes supportive, sensitive to the effects of such experience, and respectful (Pearlman & Saakvitne, 1995b; Regehr & Cadell, 1999; Rosenbloom et al., 1995; Urquiza et al., 1997). When possible, the processes of supervision and evaluation should be established as separate functions within the organization, because when employees are concerned about the evaluation process, they may become hesitant to raise issues in the workplace that may be signs of traumatic experience.Dalton (2001) discovered that variances in the study of social workers and secondary trauma experiences were related to the supervision offered to these workers. In essence, supervisors have the power to actually influence the traumatic experience of workers by paying close attention to their overall work process, outcomes from work functions, and eventual changes in attitude towards designated functions. From such an analysis, the supervisors stand a better chance of developing the right remedies for workers to avert and reverse organizational trauma as well as the associated effects from such an experience.

• Self-care resources

Organizations need to make available counseling materials for all of their staff, especially those that interact with traumatic materials in the workplace (Regehr & Cadell, 1999; Wade et al., 1996). If there are many staff interacting with the same type of traumatic materials within the workplace, then there is a need to form peer group support based on earlier discussions. Additionally, workers need health insurance that provides mental health coverage (Rosenbloom et al., 1995). In critical moments, what workers have at their disposal is what they will use to fight traumatic experiences; thus, it is necessary that counseling materials related to different traumatic situations be made easily available for the workers.

Wade et al. (1996) also recommended that, in addition to the need to provide resources for therapy, organizations also need to provide workers with necessary opportunities for structured stress management and physical activities. Companies with limited resources also need to consider training in their areas of expertise with other companies or agencies that boost experts in the area of stress management. Also, one staff member could be sent to learn stress management and how to deal with organizational trauma in workshops. The staff will then teach others based on what he or she has acquired during the training process. As an addition to this, companies can also set up reflection centers or get-together units where staff can take necessary time off to reflect on their overall performance, share and process cases of organizational trauma, and help each other where necessary.

Future Research Prospects

From the discussions presented, it can easily be deduced that this research has done a great job of expanding existing understandings in the area of organizational trauma and how it can be averted and deterred within the corporate setting. However, a number of key issues still remain unanswered with respect to specific elements developed in this research. Therefore, future research should look into focusing on the effectiveness of the recommended approaches for deterring and averting organizational culture. The essence is that it will help to determine the most effective of the approaches recommended and further provide corporations with a fighting advantage when it comes to combating organizational trauma.

CONCLUSION

Overall, this book can be described as a success with respect to understanding organizational trauma, how it is created, its causes, and relevant ways to either avert or reverse it. This is based on the idea that it has successfully touched all these areas and expanded the overall understanding of the subject. Organizational trauma was defined from the start as any type of negative action within the organizational setting that has an impact on workers' overall ability to effectively and efficiently deliver their designated duties.

However, the most striking thing from this paper is that organizational trauma is not new to the corporate unit, as it is in fact a common phenomenon within organizations across the globe. Therefore, understanding it is not only critical but very crucial to the overall sustainability of any given corporate unit. Despite the necessity, the majority of discussions on the subject have focused solely on organizational trauma, without taking into account its causal factors or preventive measures.This book has helped expand that area.

In conclusion, it is very clear from the ideas presented in this book that "corporate culture" represents a critical element when it comes to either enhancing or reversing organizational trauma. The reason being that culture defines what is obtainable within a given locality, and if what is obtainable enhances trauma, then the staff will be victimized in the process, and vice versa. Therefore, companies are advised to watch over their corporate culture in order to ensure it doesn’t enhance trauma but instead reverts and averts it. This will ensure that productivity is continually enhanced and growth remains highly feasible for such companies.

REFERENCES

Appelbaum, S.H., et al., (2000). Anatomy of a merger: behavior of organizational factors and processes throughout the pre- during and post-stages (part 2). Management Decision, p. 674-684.

Arches, J. (1991). Social structure, burnout, and job satisfaction. Social Work, 36, 202–206.

Beaton, R. D., & Murphy, S. A. (1995). Working with people in crisis: Research implications. In C. Figley (Ed.), Compassion fatigue: Coping with secondary traumatic stress disorder in those who treat the traumatized (pp. 51–81). New York: Brunner/Mazel.

Beck, D. F. (1987). Counselor burnout in family service agencies. Social Casework, 68, 3–15.

Bell, H. (1998). [The impact of counseling battered women on the mental health of counselors.] Unpublished raw data.

Bell, H. (1999). The impact of counseling battered women on the mental health of counselors. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Texas at Austin.

Catherall, D. (1995). Coping with secondary traumatic stress: The importance of the professional peer group. In B. H. Stamm (Ed.), Secondary traumatic stress: Self-care issues for clinicians, researchers, and educators (pp. 80–92). Lutherville, MD: Sidran.

Chrestman, K. R. (1995). Secondary exposure to trauma and self reported distress among therapists. In B. H. Stamm (Ed.), Secondary traumatic stress: Self-care issues for clinicians, researchers, and educators (pp. 29–36). Lutherville, MD: Sidran.

Cooper, C.L., P.J. Dewe, & M.P. O'Driscoll. (2001). Organizational Stress: A Review and Critique of Theory, Research and Applications. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Cornille, T. A., & Meyers, T. W. (1999). Secondary traumatic stress among child protective service workers: Prevalence, severity and predictive factors. Traumatology, 5, 1–17.

Cunningham, M. (1999). The impact of sexual abuse treatment on the social work clinician. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 16, 277–290.

Dalton, L. E. (2001). Secondary traumatic stress and Texas social workers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University of Texas at Arlington.

Davies, R. L. (1998). Stress in social work. London: Athenaeum.

deKlerk, M., (2007). Healing Emotional Trauma in Organizations: An O.D. Framework and Case Study. Organization Development Journal, 25(1), pp. 49-54.

Dutton, M., & Rubinstein, F. (1995). Working with people with PTSD: Research implications. In C. Figley (Ed.), Compassion fatigue: Coping with secondary traumatic stress disorder in those who treat the traumatized (pp. 82–100). New York: Brunner/Mazel.

Figley, C. R. (Ed.). (1995). Compassion fatigue: Coping with secondary traumatic stress disorder in those who treat the traumatized. New York: Brunner/ Mazel.

Follette, V. M., Polusny, M. M., & Milbeck, K. (1994). Mental health and law enforcement professionals: Trauma history, psychological symptoms, and impact of providing services to child sexual abuse survivors. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 25, 275–282.

Geisler, D. (2005). Meaning From Media: The Power of Organizational Culture. Organization Development Journal, p. 81.

Gibson, F., McGrath, A., & Reid, N. (1989). Occupational stress in social work. British Journal of Social Work, 19, 1–16.

Himle, D. P., Jayaratne, S. D., & Thyness, P. A. (1986). Predictors of job satisfaction, burnout and turnover among social workers in Norway and the USA: A cross cultural study. International Social Work, 29, 323–334.

Hopper, E. (2012). The theory of Incohesion: Aggregation/massification as the fourth basic assumption in the unconsious life of groups and group-like social systems. In: E. Hopper, ed. Trauma in organizations. London: Karnac Books, pp. xxxi-li.

Hormann, S. D. L. (2007). Organizational Trauma: A phenomenological study of leaders in traumatized organizations, Culver City: Antioch University.

Horwitz, M. (1998). Social worker trauma: Building resilience in child protection social workers. Smith College Studies in Social Work, 68, 363–377.

Jenkins, R. & P. Elliott. (2004). Stressors, burnout and social support: nurses in acute mental health settings. Journal of Advanced Nursing, p. 622-631.

Kahn, W. A. (2003). The Revelation of Organizational Trauma. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 39(4), pp. 364-380.

Kahn, W., Barton, M. & Fellows, S. (2013). Organizational crises and the disturbance of relational systems. Acedemy of management review, 38(3), pp. 377-396.

Kassam-Adams, N. (1995). The risks of treating sexual trauma: Stress and secondary trauma in psychotherapists. In B. H. Stamm (Ed.), Secondary traumatic stress: Self-care issues for clinicians, researchers, and educators (pp. 37–48). Lutherville, MD: Sidran.

Luthans, F. & S. Sommer (1999). The impact of downsizing on workplace attitudes: Differing reactions of managers and staff in a health care organization. Group and Organization Management, p. 46-70.

Maslach, C. (1993). Burnout: A multidimensional perspective. In W. B. Schaufeli, C. Maslach, & T. Marek (Eds.), Professional burnout: Recent developments in theory and research. Washington, DC: Taylor & Francis.

McCann, I., & Pearlman, L. (1990). Vicarious traumatization: A framework for understanding the psychological effects of working with victims. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 3, 131–149.

McCann, I., & Pearlman, L. (1990b). Vicarious traumatization: A framework for understanding the psychological effects of working with victims. Journal of Traumatic Stress, 3, 131–149.

Munroe, J., Shay, J., Fisher, L., Makary, C., Rapperport, K., & Zimering, R. (1995). Preventing compassion fatigue: A team treatment model. In C. Figley (Ed.), Compassion fatigue: Coping with secondary traumatic stress disorder in those who treat the traumatized (pp. 209–231). New York: Bruner/Mazel.

Neumann, D. A., & Gamble, S. J. (1995). Issues in the professional development of psychotherapists: Counter-transference and vicarious traumatization in the new trauma therapist. Psychotherapy, 32, 341–347.

Pearlman, L. A., & Mac Ian, P. S. (1995). Vicarious traumatization: An empirical study of the effects of trauma work on trauma therapists. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 26, 558–565.

Pearlman, L. A., & Saakvitne, K. W. (1995a). Trauma and the therapist: Countertransference and vicarious traumatization in psychotherapy with incest survivors. New York: Norton.

Pearlman, L. A., & Saakvitne, K. W. (1995b). Treating therapists with vicarious traumatization and secondary traumatic stress disorders. In C. Figley (Ed.), Compassion fatigue: Coping with secondary traumatic stress disorder in those who treat the traumatized (pp. 150–177). New York: Brunner/Mazel.

Regehr, C., & Cadell, S. (1999). Secondary trauma in sexual assault crisis work: Implications for therapists and therapy. Canadian Social Work, 1, 56–70.

Rosenbloom, D., Pratt, A., & Pearlman, L. A. (1995). Helpers’ responses to trauma work: Understanding and intervening in an organization. In B. Stamm (Ed.), Secondary traumatic stress: Self-care issues for clinicians, researchers, and educators (pp. 65–79). Lutherville, MD: Sidran.

Schauben, L. J., & Frazier, P. A. (1995). Vicarious trauma: The effects on female counselors of working with sexual violence survivors. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 19, 49–64.

Söderfeldt, M., Söderfeldt, B., & Warg, L. E. (1995). Burnout in social work. Social Work, 40, 638–646

Stamm, B. H. (Ed.). (1995). Secondary traumatic stress: Self-care issues for clinicians, researchers, and educators. Lutherville, MD: Sidran.

Sze, W.C., & Ivker, B. (1986). Stress in social workers: The impact of setting and role. Social Casework, 67, 141–148.

Urquiza, A. J., Wyatt, G. E., & Goodlin-Jones, B. L. (1997). Clinical interviewing with trauma victims: Managing interviewer risk. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 12, 759–772.

Vahtera, J., et al., (2004). Organisational downsizing, sickness absence, and mortality: 10-town prospective cohort study. British Medical Journal. 328(7439): p. 555-end.

Välikangas, L., Hoegl, M. & Michael , G. (2009). Why learning from failure isn't easy (and what to do about it): Innovation trauma at Sun Microsystems. European Management Journal, Issue 27, pp. 225-223.

Wade, K., Beckerman, N., & Stein, E. J. (1996). Risk of posttraumatic stress disorder among AIDS social workers: Implications for organizational response. The Clinical Supervisor, 14, 85–97

Welfel, E. R. (1998). Ethics in counseling and psychotherapy. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Wollman, D. (1993). Critical incident stress debriefing and crisis groups: A review of the literature. Group, 17, 71–83.

Yassen, J. (1995). Preventing secondary traumatic stress disorder. In C. Figley (Ed.), Compassion fatigue: Coping with secondary traumatic stress disorder in those who treat the traumatized (pp. 178–208). New York: Brunner/Mazel.