CHAPTER 2

Defining Civility

What Is Civility?

To be meaningful in a workplace context, civility must be defined in a way that is comprehensive enough to make people think differently. And, at the same time, it must have immediate personal relevance for people, given whatever environment or situation they happen to be in. When a person hears the word, he or she needs to see the possibilities and imagine some of the outcomes of civility training (see the following list). The definition has to include elements that expand it from a vague, subjective notion of “niceness” to a practical, measurable concept with applications for skill development in a range of different contexts.

Dictionary Definitions of Civility

Oxford Dictionary Online: Civility—Formal politeness and courtesy in behavior or speech

Merriam Webster Online: Civility—Polite, reasonable, and respectful behavior

Dictionary.com: Civility—Courtesy; politeness

Cambridge Dictionary Online: Civility—the quality of being polite

None of these definitions captures the attitudinal and values components that are so important to the practical applications of civility. From a workplace training point of view, when civility is reduced to politeness, it is often categorized along with other social courtesies such as thank you notes, hygiene, eye contact, and handshakes—and in many organizational contexts, these are considered nice to have. Even if politeness is understood to be an important element of customer service, or maybe courtesy is recognized as one aspect of working well with others, it is still not usually deemed important enough as a standalone skill to warrant spending time, money, and energy on it.

This dismissal can have big consequences. In spite of the growing evidence that civility in the workplace can be a game-changer, if you are a training professional, a human resources manager, or even a gung-ho on-site supervisor who is excited about civility training, good luck selling it to the top brass if you (or they) are defining it as nice to have skills.

The fact is, words matter. And so, to ensure people recognize civility training as a real solution, I have found it helpful to define the term civility in a way that expands the thoughts and emotions that using the word typically conjures.

Civility must be defined in a way that is comprehensive enough to make people think differently. And, at the same time, it has to have immediate personal relevance for people, given whatever environment or situation they happen to be in. When a person hears the word, he or she needs to see the possibilities and imagine some of the outcomes that I have come to know are absolutely possible, for example, the long list at the beginning of this chapter. The definition has to include elements that expand it from a vague, subjective notion, to a practical, measurable concept with applications for skill development in a range of different contexts.

I am not alone in thinking that dictionary definitions of civility are not sufficient. Many civility advocates devise their own definitions of civility to make it meaningful for their specific application. As examples:

Gary Burgess, PhD, and Heidi Burgess, PhD Codirectors, Conflict Research Consortium, University of Colorado state,

Tomas Spath and Cassandra Dahnke, Founders of the Institute for Civility in Government state, “Civility is claiming and caring for one’s identity, needs and beliefs without degrading someone else’s in the process.” On the Institute’s webpage, you will find a notation explaining the definition:

Dr. Pier Forni, Johns Hopkins, considered the leading U.S. researcher and author on civility,

According to Stephen L. Carter, author of Civility: Manners, Morals, and the Etiquette of Democracy, “Civility is the sum of the many sacrifices we are called to make for the sake of living together.”

Dr. Cindy Clark, a Professor at Boise State who co-developed the Organizational Civility Scale^® defines civility as, “Authentic respect for others requiring time, presence, engagement, and an intention to seek common ground.”

And, from Kent Roberts and Jay Newman, cofounders of The National Civility Center, a not-for-profit organization established in 2000 to help people make their communities better places to live, “Civility build on the Golden Rule: Always treat others as you would like to be treated. When true civil dialogue takes place, a high-minded, self-sacrificing behavior often emerges. Those simple building blocks create positive relationships and raise levels of trust between people and institutions. And without trust, nothing of value can happen.”

As you can see in reviewing these examples, there are some reoccurring themes threaded through the definitions. And, while politeness and courtesy are included in most them, they are not the focus. Instead, the impact of civility is highlighted, references to: living together, creating positive relationships, building trust, well-being and happiness, taking responsibility, valuing worth and dignity, staying present, seeking common ground, starting point for dialogue, and constructive confrontation.

It is this same end in mind approach that we used at Civility Experts Worldwide when we worked to define the term. Some of the considerations we applied in devising our definition were: the definition would have practical applications for workplaces, generally, but that could be expanded or adapted to individual and/or specific workplaces as well. Because we have affiliates all over the world, we needed to have a definition that would be meaningful when translated and that would resonate with our affiliates, regardless of what culture they represented. We needed a definition that could inform our training and tie in to what we had come to understand as skills that underpinned overall civility competencies. We wanted to build on—and in some small way, offer tribute—to the good work of civility experts who had inspired and mentored us. For example, when I first started my civility journey, works by Dr. Pier Forni, Dr. Karl Albrecht, and Benet Davetian were top of my reading list. We wanted the definition to reflect our own personal values so that we could truly buy in and feel confident and comfortable that in choosing civility as our work, we could actually live our values.

Civility Experts Worldwide Definition of Civility

At Civility Experts Worldwide, we define civility as:

In our definition, conscious awareness is intended to make the point that it is not enough to extend courtesy out of habit, and it is not a good enough excuse when you do not extend appropriate consideration to say you were not aware, or were not paying attention. When we are conscious of the impact of our thoughts and words and actions, when we focus and attend to our surroundings, we are reminded that we have the power to impact people and situations and communications. In attending, we become thoughtful, and when we are thoughtful, we become thinkers, As Dr. Forni says in his latest book, The Thinking Life-How to Thrive in the Age of Distraction, “You are thoughtful if you are a thinker, but you are also thoughtful if you are considerate. To be considerate you need first of all, to pay attention to other people…you need to think about them and their well-being.” Very few could argue that we do not live in an age of distraction. As such, that someone is deliberate in thinking before he or she acts or speaks, and that he or she then intentionally chooses a civil action, even when it may not be comfortable, cost-free, or convenient to do so, speaks volumes about that individual’s character. Sadly, many of us are too caught up in ourselves to look up and attend to what is going on around us. And, when we do have occasion to look up, many of us are distracted and often not present to, or caring about anyone. To me, the breadth of incivility we experience every day is a good indication that thinking is not as common a pursuit as it once was.

When we talk about a “continuous acknowledgement of one’s responsibility,” we are referencing ethics and the inherent human dignity of others. Easing the experience of others echoes the do no harm principle that has been the bedrock of Eastern and Western religious traditions alike. In the workplace, this responsibility ties to accountability and includes obligations related to common courtesy, nonjudgment, and restraint, regardless of whether they are written into a job description or code of conduct.

Consistent effort relates to the point that when standards are at issue, as happens in most workplaces, being civil some of the time is not enough. Civility must be an everyday, all-day endeavor. This is essential to building trust. Choosing civility has to become our default thinking pattern. It must become imbedded in the workplace culture such that it becomes a key part of the character of the organization and a reflection of the character of the people who make up the organization. This element of our definition also suggests the ongoing hard work and commitment that is required to build a culture of civility. Truly, if it were easy to choose civility, wouldn’t everyone would be doing it?

From a leadership and/or individual perspective, choosing civility means that when interacting with others, you do so with purpose and have an understanding of the value of the written and unwritten rules beyond mere social requirements. For example, encouraging all levels of the work team to sit together at lunch and breaks is not so much about acting civilized, as it is about choosing to take time to be together, to laugh, to tell stories, to connect in some small way.

Outcomes of Civility Training

The outcomes of civility initiatives generally and civility training specifically are as follows:

You will see that having a clear definition of civility for application in a specific context will help get the change makers and leadership on board. The definition will also set the groundwork for achieving some of those positive outcomes we introduced you to at the beginning of this chapter.

Before we move on to how to assess and how to build civility in your workplace, let us briefly discuss civility relative to some other terms and concepts that are closely related and will likely come up in your civility conversations and training.

What Is the Difference Between Civility, Etiquette, Courtesy, and Manners?

Etiquette guidelines, which incorporate manners, represent the rules or conventions that apply to a situation, a time, a culture, or a country. Courtesy represents a demeanor, an attitude of respectful or reverence for a specific set of social rules. And, manners are the polite behaviors we use to express courtesy. Manners are frequently dictated by etiquette rules and relate to what is expected for a given situation, for example, wedding etiquette, funeral etiquette, dining etiquette, golf etiquette. I believe you do not have to know or follow etiquette rules to be civil. And, following prescribed social conventions out of some sense of obligation, or being courteous just because you are directed to do so by some person or circumstance, without some measure of understanding and good intention, is not nearly the same as choosing and practicing civility.

Put simply, courtesy is about convention, and civility is about conscience.

Etiquette helps us get along better together, and manners foster social decorum, so there is that. But, in the grand scheme of things, I personally care more about you paying me some focused attention and making me feel valued in your presence, than I care about which fork you use or whether you wear white after Labor Day. Regarding the relationship between incivility and rudeness, rudeness is certainly uncivil, but it relates more to a behavior that breaches a known rule. Incivility is more about behaviors that breach values and/or ethics and these are, so incivility incorporates both behavior and intention or attitude.

In Choose Civility, Dr. Forni, describes rudeness as follows:

As a side note, protocol is an assigned process, approach, or procedure, for a specific context. Protocol is often dictated by regulated or written rules, and these are more rigid than etiquette rules, which really function as guidelines. Protocol is to be followed without deviation, sometimes for safety reasons, for example, military protocol or medical protocol. But, when following etiquette guidelines, you are expected to consider the circumstances, and sometimes, it is appropriate to break the rule. As an example, in North America, it is considered good business etiquette to extend your hand for a handshake when you first meet someone. However, if you note that a person has his or her hands full, or that he or she does not appear comfortable with a handshake, you would be expected to know that breaking the etiquette rule to ensure the other party is not embarrassed or uncomfortable is the courteous thing to do.

How Does Civility Relate to Values?

Civility is a values proposition. Choosing civility means that civility (defined however you prefer) represents a personal principle or value. A value is a standard or code that we, as individuals and/or as a collective (may be a family and organization or a community), live by. Our values impact how we make decisions, and how we determine what is important to us. When groups of individuals share the same core values, those values create the character or culture of a family, an organization, and even a nation. When you do not have clearly defined values, it is difficult to establish personal standards, and so it is easier to choose popular actions based on convenience rather than choose civility based on conscience. The end result is incivility.

Is Civility not the Same Thing as Character?

Allan Greenspan, Former Chairman, U.S. Federal Reserve said, “Rules cannot take the place of character.” I agree. Following this line of thought, if you are defining civility as etiquette, following these mannerly rules is not the same as having character. Choosing the right action, weighing the potential impact of choices against one’s own values, and being accountable for the outcomes of those choices are what build a character. And, it is the character that distinguishes mannerly actions from civility.

In his new book Return on Character, Fred Kiel, defines character as “An individual’s unique combination of beliefs and character habits that motivate and shape how he or she relates to others. Our character is defined by out behavior- the way we treat others is character in action.” Kiel goes on to suggest that there are four keystone character habits: integrity, responsibility, forgiveness, and compassion. According to Kiel, these character habits are the direct expression of our innate moral intuitions. These intuitions not only make us uniquely human, but the habitual demonstration of the principles they foster is essential to the kind of strong, principled character we associate with what he calls Virtuoso leadership.

Abraham Lincoln said, “Reputation is the shadow. Character is the tree.” Civility, as an element of character, is what compels you to do the right thing just because it is right to do what is right. This belief is an aspect of your true self, part of your character, whereas manners can easily and often be exhibited simply as a means of sending a positive impression or appearing to be good.

How Is Being Civil Different From Showing Respect?

In my mind, being civil is not exactly the same as showing respect. However, the two are very closely related. The difference is most easily explained in saying that civility is perceived as a gesture or communication that is meaningful to someone else. And so, to be civil, there is usually some consciousness or awareness of what the other person might need or want. And so, to be civil is usually something intentional. For example, in speaking of civility, many people have adopted what is described as “The Platinum Rule” over “The Golden Rule.” Where the Golden Rule says that we should do unto others as we would have done to us (this means assuming others want what we want or expect), the Platinum Rule, according to Tony Alessandra, says that we should treat someone as he or she wishes to be treated. To follow the Platinum Rule, you have to set assumptions aside and consider the perspectives of others. In doing so, you adopt an other-focus, and in this way, I believe that to be civil, one necessarily conveys a service orientation. I believe that showing respect is a way of honoring someone’s humanness. And, you should not have to know that person or share his or her perspective, or understand what he or she wants or believes or feels, to respect him or her. Respect is something that should be automatically, spontaneously, and easily given. Put simply, respect is something you feel toward someone, and this is often unconscious. Where civility is something you consciously choose—this is one of the reasons I believe you can teach civility, but it is much harder to teach respect. Sure I can explain what respect looks like, but that is now the same as teaching how to truly feel respect in one’s heart. This requires setting aside bias and prejudice for example, and this can be a difficult endeavor.

The reality is that someone could perceive him or herself as being treated in a respectful way or see him or herself having been treated civilly merely as a result of someone else extending a courtesy—and this can be a mistake. In actuality, that someone says something kind or does what the rules say he or she should do, for example, gives a gift, sends a thank you note, and shows up on time, does not mean that this person is civil. And, it does not necessarily mean that the person respects us. Frequently, people can have respect for the rules and so exhibit them, and still not have respect for the people they are following the rules for.

Respectfulness is absolutely a part of being civil. When a person is truly civil, he or she understands that respect is something that should be given with no expectation of return. Respecting others just because they are human, and in being human they are deserving of our respect, and deserving of their dignity, shows a civil attitude. This civil attitude is an indication that we are not judgmental, and that we recognize everyone as equal. That I would say, or think, that someone needs to earn my respect for example, suggests that I am not civil. I would argue that often when we say we do not respect someone, we actually mean we do not trust him or her. Similarly, when someone does not seem to give us respect without measuring our value, we do not trust that person.

When you explain respect as aforementioned, it is easier to understand how someone could respect the rules, but not trust the person making them. Or, how you can respect someone on a basic human level, and at the same time, be discourteous (break a social rule) to that person. I can respect myself, but not trust myself. I can respect you, but not trust you.

I can be civil, that is, choose not to judge you, and be courteous (be polite) and respect you (accept you for who you are and treat you as equal), and at the same time, have different views, live differently, and potentially behave in a way that you perceive as rude. Maybe you call this rudeness disrespectful, and maybe you do not trust me as a result of it. But, even when you are rude, while I do not appreciate your behavior, I can still respect you as a person. And, if you are civil, you will still respect me too, even if you behave rudely toward me. The fact that I breached a rule that you adhere value to does not make me an uncivil person. Rude, maybe. Impolite, sure. But, not uncivil.

What Is the Difference Between Civility and Ethics?

Mostly, everyone in the civility training field would agree that civility is closely aligned with ethics. But, this debate can get messy. Much depends on how you define ethics. Another example of how words matter. Dr. Forni, in Choosing Civility, developed four principles about civility: (1) civility is complex; (2) civility is good; (3) whatever civility might be, it has to do with courtesy, politeness, and manners; and (4) civility belongs in the realm of ethics. And, he goes on to say,

In his book, Ethical Intelligence, Bruce Weinstein describes five simple principles that help us make the best decisions—no matter who is looking at a problem. I am hard pressed to think of a civility training session where some or all of these terms did not enter in, they are:

Weinstein suggests that we know these principles already, they are the basis of both religious traditions and secular societies, and they are tremendously hard to live by. Further, he states, “…all five principles mentioned above provide excellent guidelines for making the best possible decisions in every area of your life. These principles have legal, financial, and psychological implications; but they are first and foremost principles of ethics and they form the core of what I call ethical intelligence.” There is no question that alignment between civility and these five principles, for example, Mr. Weinstein states in his book that do no harm is largely a principle of restraint. And, restraint is a notion that comes up frequently in civility conversations. For example, Dr. Pier Forni, considered one of the leading scholars in the field, suggests that the three key tenants of civility are: respect, restraint, and responsibility.

Additionally, when discussing Principle #3—respect others, Weinstein explains that,

In my view, ethics relate to what is right and wrong, independent of what regulations, workplace codes of conduct, or legislations might state. This is where conversations about moral conduct and human rights begin. While some people have an absolute personal line in terms of what is ethical, there are many influencing, and ever-changing, factors and, sometimes, culture, religion, law, and context come into play. Ongoing debates about abortion, assisted suicide, and human cloning, for example, represent ethical questions that are not likely to be resolved any time soon. Over the years I have come to understand that what is civil is frequently ethical, but not always. And, being ethical does not always include being civil, at least not the way I define it. It occurs to me that in determining what is ethical, we look inward and rely on conscience. Whereas, in determining what is civil, we tend to look outward and rely more on the expectations of our community and society. I am also inclined to say that civility is the kind thing—regardless of the rules, whereas ethics is the right thing—with a direct correlation to inherent human dignity (for some people, this dignity and rights extend to all living things). With regard to the questions about whether I think rampant permissive incivility enables moral turpitude—my view is that where there is no conscience, there are likely no ethics, and so it is a lack of conscience that enables evil in the form of moral turpitude and not permissible incivility that causes it.

Civility and Emotional Intelligence

In 1995, Daniel Goleman wrote a book on emotional intelligence or EQ. Ground-breaking at the time, Goleman suggested that the ability to discern how you and others feel (and what might be the root cause of those feelings) regardless of what you may be outwardly presenting to the world, for example, through your demeanor or body language, was essential to building relationships and a key component of success. The essential premise of EQ is that, to be successful requires the effective awareness, control and management of one’s own emotions, and those of other people. According to Goleman, EQ embraces two aspects of intelligence:

While I agree with the esteemed Dr. Goleman that there is tremendous value in knowing oneself, and that having the ability to be aware of, control, and manage one’s own emotions and the emotions of others, I am not convinced that building emotional intelligence is the most important intelligence for workplace.

As was included in our definition of civility, awareness of the impact of your thoughts, feelings, words, and actions on others is important for civility in the workplace. My opinion is that focus on internal drivers and feelings end up putting more importance on the intent and motivation for doing and feeling, and this is contrary to the other focus we need to build civility in the workplace. Further, my view is that this self-development and reflective work is what the individual should take responsibility for, independent of the workplace. I do not believe that beyond the regulated psychological safety elements, it should be the employer’s responsibility to delve into each employees’ emotional issues and sort out what makes him or her tick. As an employer, this is not where I would put my training dollars. Some exceptions would be if we are working in a sector where empathy and emotion are an important part of the job, such as healthcare or childcare. In Chapter 7, we are going to discuss how another type of intelligence—social intelligence—may, in fact, be more useful in building civility as a core competence.

Civility and Positive Psychology

There has been a lot of buzz lately about positive psychology. Positive psychology is the study of happiness. Martin Seligman and Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi describe this term in the following way: “We believe that a psychology of positive human functioning will arise that achieves a scientific understanding and effective interventions to build thriving in individuals, families, and communities.” Positive psychology is tied to civility, in that the research shows positive psychology promotes character development, positive interactions, stress reduction, gratitude, and altruism. These outcomes echo what we see when there is a culture of civility imbedded in workplaces. A related term is positive intelligence. Positive intelligence can be measured as the percentage of the time your mind works for you instead of against you. There is a tug of war constantly raging inside your mind between your saboteurs—the mental patterns that sabotage your success and well-being—and your sage—the mental patterns that serve positive intelligence is the groundbreaking new science and practice of stress-free peak performance. The scientific foundation of positive intelligence is a synthesis of breakthrough break through original research by Shirzad Chamine. The greatest differentiators in performance and achievement are soft skills and mindset, such as emotional intelligence. Positive intelligence builds on the principles of emotional intelligence and goes a step further by addressing a missing component of emotional intelligence training—mastery over the internal saboteurs. Recent scientific studies have established that positive intelligence is a significant determinant of how much of your potential for both happiness and professional success you actually achieve. Positive intelligence has been directly linked to a wide range of measurable benefits:

Civility and Being Nice or Being Kind

Renowned Lebanese Poet Kahil Gilbran said, “Tenderness and kindness are not signs of weakness and despair, but manifestations of strength and resolution.” Based on the Civility Experts Worldwide definition of civility, kindness is one of the ways we can ease the experience of others. Kindness often takes planning, and sometimes discipline. Additionally, being kind frequently requires restraint. Further, I believe kindness is a precursor to generosity. True, heartfelt, spontaneous kindness is given as civility, should be with no expectation of return. Getting to the point where you can give your time, money, energy, or attention, without monitoring the cost of doing same is very difficult to achieve.

It is not easy to be kind, especially when you are surrounded by unkind. Indeed, these days, choosing civility takes courage, strength, and resolution.

In her book, Saving Civility; 52 Ways to Tame Rude, Crude and Attitude for a Polite Planet, Sarah Hacala describes kindness as, “…charity, generosity, compassion, and empathy…as it applies to good behavior, it is an almost inclusive antidote to disrespect, inconsideration and rudeness. If we were simply kind to everyone, a host of other negative behaviors would fall by the wayside”.

Recommended Homework

Respectful Workplace Policy

Training activity purpose: To make your own respectful workplace policy.

Application: As soon as you are comfortable that you understand the importance of civility in the workplace, please complete this exercise. The goal is to envision a kind of perfect world scenario, which can then be boiled down, so to speak, into a more realistic and actionable plan.

Outcome: A draft workplace policy built by consensus, applying concepts learned to date.

From the Field—Tools you can use: Sample template for a respectful workplace policy created by the Petroleum Human Resources Council of Canada http://petrohrsc.ca/media/15025/Respectfulpercent20Workplacepercent20Policypercent20Template.pdf.

Respectful workplace policy template: This template on respectful workplace policy can be used by any company operating within Canada to prevent and deal with discrimination and harassment in the workplace. Aside from adopting this policy, companies are encouraged to provide education and training for their employees and contractors, whenever applicable, on the following key topics: human rights in the workplace, managing diversity, and the company’s respectful workplace policy and procedures.

Test Yourself