Center for Institutional Courage

Two new podcast series grapple with real experiences of institutional betrayal and the promise of institutional courage. Both series offer brave and deep analyses of these concepts and discuss real life experiences. Links and more here: https://lnkd.in/gzfEx6Fe

Courage has announced a new round of research grants, notable this year for an important focus on betrayal and courage in religious institutions. https://lnkd.in/e5zP2xw6

I recently had the opportunity to address the graduates of Claremont Graduate University at their commencement which had the theme "Having the Courage." https://lnkd.in/gB5dKcJ2

Good to talk with Sandra Bloom Bloom and Sarah Yanosy about betrayal trauma, institutional betrayal, and institutional courage in the workplace. Center for Institutional Courage

Is there research on institutional betrayal in religious organizations? What about criminal justice systems? Does moral injury have anything to do with institutional betrayal? What can be done about institutional betrayal in health care? https://lnkd.in/g9hb7x57

Institutional courage, an idea developed by Jennifer Freyd, is a leadership commitment to seek the truth and to take action on behalf of those who trust or depend on the institution—even when it’s unpleasant, difficult, and costly. Institutional courage requires proactive action (e.g., creating systems by which employees can raise concerns without fear of being punished) as well as responsive action (e.g., responding to reports of harm forthrightly, thoroughly, and fairly). These efforts can help prevent future incidents, allow people harmed to recover more quickly, increase trust between employees and leaders, and enhance the institution’s overall reputation. On the other hand, institutional betrayal (i.e., when an institution mistreats those who trust or depend on it) only compounds the harm to all involved. Some common forms of institutional betrayal are victim blaming, sweeping incidents un- der the rug, and the like. It can be tempting to engage in these behaviors to limit legal exposure. Ultimately, though, institu- tional betrayal harms people all over again and will harm your organization’s reputation in the long run. Institutional betrayal is often cheaper in the short run but devastatingly expensive or even deadly to the institution in the long run. To demonstrate institutional courage, it’s not enough to demonstrate personal courage as a leader. You’re human. Sometimes your courage and energy will falter or fail. Ditto for the people who work for you. And, you’re only one person. You’re not omnipresent. You need to develop systems that will hold you and others accountable. Excerpted from Radical Respect: https://lnkd.in/gbixJMn8

In a new essay, Kathryn Becker Blease and I discuss the problem of institutional betrayal in education and what to do about it: "The antidote to institutional betrayal is institutional courage. Good leaders must personally care and be sure survivors feel they are cared for. Great leaders go beyond that; they institutionalize courage through specific, tangible actions. They create a culture through enduring practices, policies, models, and language that give members of the community the power to respond in ways that meet the courage of abuse survivors and whistle-blowers with the institutional courage to act. In this essay, we describe eleven key actions to promote institutional courage, with key examples of how higher education leaders have empowered their institutions to act with integrity and courage to protect their most vulnerable members for the long-term good of the institution." Read more at the Center for Institutional Courage blog Courage in Action: https://lnkd.in/ejx_8wzY

Published today: the October Center for Institutional Courage Courage-in-Action newsletter. https://lnkd.in/gs2MzKHh

Sarah Harsey and I wrote about the harm of DARVO in an op-ed in USA Today. "DARVO . . . [is] an acronym that stands for deny, attack, reverse victim and offender. Perpetrators of wrongdoing – especially those who commit sexual misconduct – often use it to deflect blame and responsibility." We also noted that: "Tucker didn’t have to resort to DARVO to defend himself; he might have easily offered that, from his perspective, he did not engage in sexually harassing behaviors – and he could have left it at that. The attacks and attempts to portray himself as the victim of malicious false allegations were a toxic and unnecessary addition." And we wrote about the power of education: "Research tells us that DARVO is less likely to influence observers’ perceptions when they are educated about this tactic. . . "DARVO has always been bad for victims, and it has always been counter to the prevention of sexual violence. But, with enough awareness and education about this destructive tactic, its power and frequent use can be curbed. " https://lnkd.in/gwjmnUyP