I'm their coworker and this is what I'm afraid of. I am haunted by the question "what if it has been our work environment that caused the move?"
I don't suppose toxic people think/know that they are toxic, so how do I find out if we are?
I don't suppose toxic people think/know that they are toxic, so how do I find out if we are?
Those two things make me think your management either sucks, or fucked up and wants to know what your coworker will say.
If you had a good relationship w/ this person already, you could take them out to coffee and pretty much ask, "so, what happened?". Since you don't, and since your coworker is presumably not stupid, you're probably going to get the same answer that your management team would get.
Which brings me to my next point: your management team should know. If this person's boss isn't doing weekly 1-1s and closely monitoring this person's enthusiasm for the job and company, then they're an incompetent boss. That's table stakes for competent management.
Particularly when a coworker quits over an "I'm not a good fit", that means (1) there's a problem, and (2) I don't trust management. Acting as an agent of management isn't going to get the answer.
You can sit and worry all day, every day about whether or not you're toxic in the eyes of someone else. I wouldn't be surprised if there are specific instances you can think of where you had an interaction with this person that didn't go the way you wanted it to and now you're worried you're the reason they're leaving. It's very unlikely.
Some people will always just interpret your actions / words in a way you didn't intend. This, in my opinion, is why it's so important to be true to yourself. Live your life by your principles and the way you think is right. If someone thinks you're toxic, and you're confident you're not, then it's fine. You're not going to get along with all 7 billion people on earth.
>I am haunted by the question "what if it has been our work environment that caused the move?"
What's haunting about it? They say "yes," you guys are toxic. Okay. You find out what it is they thought was toxic. You evaluate it within your framework of right and wrong. And you either say, "yep, I was toxic. I'm sorry. Whoops, better do better next time," or you say, "I don't think I was toxic, but I can see how you'd think that. I'm sorry about that, thank you for telling me," or you say, "this guy is a nutjob if he thinks that is toxicity. Good luck in your next role," and you move on and live your life.
It sounds to me like you're not confident in your interpersonal interactions, and you're worried that you're coming off as toxic. And that if someone thinks you were acting toxically, that it's some kind of life sentence that will stay on your Permanent Record. Don't sweat it. We're all trying to figure out how to act with people. Some people are much better at it than others. People make mistakes, and people move on.
If the resignation caught you by surprise, it's unlikely he/she will tell you the real motivation. People often start the contemplation long before they decide to leave. IMO.
If it was a surprise, there's also a non-zero chance they were fired. "Not a good fit" is vague enough to not really mean anything, but good enough to be able to move on with.
Besides that, OP is going to have a very short question if their idea of speaking to their colleague is to interrogate them, and what the OP is thinking about feels very official.
To add a little from my perspective, one good way to find out if you are toxic is to speak to some psychologists. Either industrial organizational psychologists for the business or a traditional therapist for the individual.
Alternatively, if there is enough data, some metric comparing rates of resignations over time to your industry norm may be instructive.
Meanwhile some answers in this thread are inadvertently confirming that the theSage actually has a problem they need to deal with and might actually be toxic, with practically zero evidence to support it.
theSage sounds like he's worried about being the reason his colleague left; that it's his fault. We've all had that kind of worry sometimes when something unexpected has happened, and we think it's because of us for some reason.
And in that case, what theSage needs isn't someone to confirm or deny his so-called toxicity, it's a close friend they can confide in over a beer or whatever. They can talk about what work has been like and how someone quit and how they feel about it without involving their ex-colleague.
More directly to your reply, toxicity is certainly something worth discussing with a professional. Not everyone has close friends that they can rely on and using friends as an echo chamber can be detrimental to growth.
The worry that you noted can often indeed be normal but it is also absolutely within the scope of a counseling psychologist to consider for treatment if it is a pervasive, detrimental thing.
Similarly, worrying excessively about the departure of a colleague can be abnormal in some situations. I understand the normal reaction to generally be along the lines of wishing the best for the person, rather than to perform an inquiry (nigh investigation) into the full details of the matter. Granted, if this were a departure along the lines of a foundational employee, then some inquiry would be appropriate, and generally so for any random employee, of course. But the choice of language, at the least, does seem to imply a concern beyond the norm. Not having details, perhaps it is entirely justified. At the same time, if theSage (hi you), is concerned about worrying too much, dismissing that out of hand as something that can be solved over a beer may not be sufficient advice either.
To your point about diagnosing toxicity, there are indeed conditions, both organizationally speaking and individually speaking, that overlap with “toxicity” as a symptom. There are a number of personality issues that can give rise to behavior that would be considered to be toxic to healthy people. Similarly, industrial organizational psychology does include organizational dysfunction within its scope of inquiry. For example, what traits, beliefs, and attitudes, when held by management, are toxic to the health of an organization?
Perhaps an IO psychologist could be consulted by theSage to provide a checklist of organizational traits to be marked as observed or not observed, by the departing colleague. Such a thing is a practice performed during exit interviews for large enterprises.
The conditions that can be identified and diagnosed might have deeper roots so, yes, it’s better to take that to a professional than to hash it out on a forum. But it should not have been framed as being toxic - that just adds another layer of complexity to the situation.
> a toxic worker is defined as a worker that engages in behavior that is harmful to an organization, including either its property or people.
By that definition, you become toxic when you introduce a bug. You become toxic when you make a mistake.
For example, if it read “engages in unethical behavior that is harmful”, you then need an operational definition of either ethical or unethical behaviors. It’d be an understatement to call that a difficult thing to define.
Maybe there’s some way they could have incorporated intentionality into the operational definition, but I suspect that it would introduce some gaps as a model of reality.
I’d argue that an intentional pattern of creating bugs would be the toxic thing whereas a pattern of accidentally creating bugs would be incompetence. Isolated or routine cases of bugs being introduced would be the normal course of software implementation.
Business processes and development techniques would be the organizational defense against the introduction of bugs and would probably be the source of the dividing line between when a worker toxically creates bugs and when not toxic.
Friends are people who are cool with you, by definition. Even if you are toxic.
You are toxic is also meaningless. Professional can tell you more exactly what is problem and help you solve it.