So, in summary, what do the results of the research funding initiative and the general knowledge situation tell us about preventing sexual harassment in Nordic workplaces? What does well functioning and effective prevention look like and who does it protect? And how do we obtain the knowledge we need to shift preventive efforts forward?
To answer these questions, we also need to ask questions about what needs to be prevented and what preventive measures should consist of. Opinions on that are numerous and wide ranging, not least about the scope and the boundaries of such efforts and what preventive work is able to achieve. One important guiding insight on sexual harassment and preventive measures is that if the description of the problem is a) based on the experiences of people who have experienced sexual harassment and b) based on the sector-specific or regional context, there is a greater likelihood that the preventive measures will hit the right spot. Or to put it another way, there is not just one way of experiencing sexual harassment and so nor is there only one way of preventing it. There is no one method that everyone can use.
Consequently, the somewhat contradictory answer is: Take on board the general knowledge of what sexual harassment is and how it can be prevented. Make use of shared lessons learned but don’t stop there. Also explore what the risks look like in every sector and in every workplace.
Research studies describe common underlying factors to draw on, such as the fact that harassment has to do with power, and with hierarchies and inequality. What these hierarchies look like in different sectors and workplaces and how they can be linked to positions within and between occupational groups will differ, however. Therefore, it is also important to draw attention to how vulnerabilities interact, giving rise to shifting types of harassment and their subsequent consequences. The risk factors differ, which means that studies of the specific context are needed in order to develop knowledge and an understanding of how the specific risk factors can be tackled to achieve the best possible preventive effect.
The research under the research funding initiative on sexual harassment at work clearly shows that the hierarchies look different in the different contexts studied. For example, the projects show how the strong care ethic among staff in the care sector can lead to sexual harassment at work being unreported or normalised. Vulnerability to sexual harassment among retail staff can vary depending on factors such as working alone, age or job security. Industry-specific and local circumstances all add to the problem scenario, making which measures are needed clearer. One lesson learned across the projects is that information about sexual harassment needs to be available in languages that the staff understand and spread in channels where the target groups are. That said, which languages and which channels are relevant in which context varies, although there can also be similarities within sectors. A sector with many young employees – who may also be in managerial roles – faces many challenges. When the work revolves around keeping customers or users happy, other questions arise. And if the likelihood of having their contract extended is determined based on a member of staff’s most recent performance, that employee may be very vulnerable.
The Nordic focus of the research initiative shows that definitions and concepts cannot be taken for granted. They may need to both be clarified and problematised in all workplaces, in all research projects and in all collaborative dialogues. This knowledge is general. But how these conversations can and should be organised will differ depending on the context, as will the expectations that exist about what they should contain, involve and culminate in. The same applies to the need for conversations, discussion and reflection on concepts, definitions and understandings of sexual harassment. One common, clear definition is needed to gather comparative data from several different countries. At the same time, there is a need for a more open-ended definition and understanding so that a particular workplace can conduct conversations about norms, organisation and preventive measures.
Effectively preventing sexual harassment at work seems therefore to require a balancing act. We need to absorb knowledge from people who experience sexual harassment and its consequences, the risk factors that exist and lessons learned about preventive strategies and methods. At the same time, we need to investigate what all this consists of in the specific industry and in the specific workplace. To pull off this balancing act, we also need safe conditions in the workplace, for people who experience sexual harassment and everyone around them, so that they can talk about their experiences. Local circumstances need to be allowed to serve as a concrete guide in implementing work environment management to combat sexual harassment. When lessons are learned from previous cases and put to good use in preventive efforts, there are also real opportunities for positive change.