Close Scrutiny of Books; Journal

¶ … close scrutiny of books; journal articles, and materials from internet sources on caring leadership, employee bereavement, and connections(s) between them, in six (6) key areas. These were: (1) bereavement and funeral policies and procedures that currently exist, for United States military personnel and their families (but not for personnel and/or families of other branches of U.S. government); (2) the history of military funeral honors practices, policies, and procedures (3) relationships between caring leadership and attitudes, practices, and policies concerning empathy and support for employees in general, and employee bereavement in particular; (4) caring leadership as demonstrated by managerial support of, and help for grieving employees; (5) workplace attitudes and best practices having to do with support for and management of bereaved employees; and (6) typical effects, on employees and those around them, of the deaths of loved ones and/or other serious losses, and how caring leaders can help at those times.

Upon comprehensive review, the available literature itself fell into five (5) categories. The first of these categories was primary and secondary source material pertinent to funeral benefits for military personnel and/or other government personnel, e.g., federal legislation and other published congressional proceedings, and related secondary source material. The second category was literature on caring leadership in general. Third category was literature on grief management in the workplace by caring leaders, particularly ways that caring leaders treat bereaved employees, and encourage others in the workplace to treat them; and on caring workplace attitudes in general toward employees' bereavement and grief. The fourth category focused on particular workplace funeral and bereavement policies of selected public and private organizations, including companies; colleges and universities, and churches, and compared and contrasted their respective bereavement policies, both among themselves and with United States military funeral policies and procedures. The fifth category focused on potential risks, drawbacks, and benefits of changing (or expanding) current workplace bereavement practices, policies, and procedures, within government and other workplaces, and on potentially granting funeral honors to government employees that would be equivalent, in appropriate ways, to military funeral honors.

Federal Legislation and Other Information on Military and Government Funerals, Funeral Leave, and Bereavement Leave

The literature survey first examined various United States legislative documents pertinent to: (1) military funerals; (2) entitlements to military funerals; (3) the history and protocol of military funeral honors within the United States; (4) funeral leave for military and non-military government personnel, and (5) funeral leave (or the lack thereof) for non-military United States government employees.

One such legislative document was the Report to Congress on Military Funeral Honors for Veterans (1999), "as required by Section 567 of the Strom Thurmond National Defense Authorization Act" (p. 1). This document explained the history, background, and protocol of United States military funerals today. It then summarized the proceedings of an earlier Congressional Executive Roundtable held on November 17, 1998.

According to that document, the roundtable was attended by "over 100 representatives, including included senior officials from the Departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs..." (Report to Congress on Military Funeral Honors for Veterans, 1999, p. 3). Moreover, according to that document, the present American tradition of giving military funeral honors to the fallen has evolved over a long period of time, and today incorporates both foreign military and American military historical elements; present military funeral protocol is rooted in both ancient foreign military protocols and past American military experiences.

Further, according to that document, ritual burial of fallen military soldiers originates from military funeral traditions of the ancient Greeks; the funeral oration of Pericles was, in fact, the model used that was used by President Lincoln for the Gettysburg Address. It was considered customary, at Roman military funerals, to call the name of the dead three times. More recently, however, in the early days of the American military, three musket volleys were substituted instead, which served both to announce the completion of the burial of the fallen soldier, and to signify that the burial party was now ready to resume battle.

During the early days of the United States, it was the practice for Army commanders to bury their dead troops, whenever possible, in cemetery plots that were within the confines of their particular military posts (Report to Congress on Military Funeral Honors for Veterans, 1999). Further, according to Congress on Military Funeral Honors for Veterans (1999) pp. 10-11:

In 1861, Army General Order #75 ordered the Quartermaster General to provide a registered headboard, which was to be secured at the head of each soldier's grave. In 1862, President Lincoln signed the Omnibus Act that established national [emphasis original] cemeteries for soldiers who die in the service of the country... The music we now use for Taps dates back to General Daniel Butterfield of the Army of the Potomac... He, together with the brigade bugler, composed the music we now know as Taps. Taps was first used in connection with military funerals during the Civil War... In 1918, the U.S. Army began the practice of placing a flag over the coffin and, following the funeral service, presenting the flag to the next of kin.

Other documents on military funerals, history, protocol, employee leave, and entitlements surveyed for the study included: Military funerals - A brief history (2005); History of Taps (2005); Funeral leave (2005); Military funeral support (2004); Funeral honors ceremony (2005); Banusiewics (2004), and Military funerals (2002). All of these sources contained also information on military funeral protocol, including the facts that: the military has a litany of regulations regarding its funeral procedures. When military personnel pass, there are federal laws and formal procedures in place to acknowledge them, based on Title 38 of the United States Code, Section 112. Military funeral protocols spelled out by federal law include: (1) At least two military personnel being sent to the funeral; (2) Taps being played by a bugler, if available, and if not, a recording of Taps being played; (3) a 21-gun salute being given to honor a fallen soldier, under particular circumstances;(4) an American flag being first folded thirteen (13) times by the military detail conducting the ceremony, and the folded flag then being given, by the military detail leader, to the next-of kin; (4) special words of condolence being spoken, by the detail leader, to the next-of-kin; and (5) a Certificate of Honor, signed by the current President of the United States, being made available, upon request, to the next of kin.

Also, according to that document:

Section 1482 of title 10 authorizes the Secretaries of the Military Services to pay for the necessary expenses of...Presentation of a flag of the United

States to the person designated to direct disposition of remains...' Of active duty members and eligible reservists. Section 2301 of title 38 requires that The Secretary [of Veteran Affairs] shall furnish a flag to drape the casket of each deceased veteran... ' (includes retirees). 'After the burial... The flag... shall be given to the veteran's next of kin.. The Secretary shall furnish flag to the next of kin (of those who were on active duty) after May 27, 1941.' [emphasis original] (p. 11)

Moreover, according to Military funeral support (2004); Funeral honors ceremony (2005); Banusiewics (2004), and Military funerals (2002), military funerals for active fallen United States military personnel are paid for in full by the U.S. Department of Defense.

The United States Code Title 38 (Veterans' Benefits), Part II, Chapter 23 "Burial Benefits" (2004) covers current federal law on military burial protocol, burial honors, rights and entitlements to military funerals, and some survivor benefits. Specifically these sections of Title 38 are: are (1) Sec. 2301. Flags (2); Sec.2302. Funeral Expenses; (3) Sec. 2303. Death in Department facility; plot allowance; (4) Sec. 2304. Claims for reimbursement; (5) Sec. 2305. Persons eligible under prior law; (6) Sec. 2306. Headstones, markers, and burial receptacles; (7) Sec. 2307. Death from service-connected disability, and (8) Sec. 2308. Transportation of deceased veteran to a national cemetery.

Further, H.R 4954, the Military Families Bereavement Leave Act (2004), was introduced into the United States House of Representatives on July 22, 2004 passed by House of Representatives; passed by the United States Senate; and signed into law by the president, shortly thereafter. This recently-made law serves to authorize leave for the immediate family members of a member of the uniformed services who dies in the line of duty to facilitate the attendance of immediate family members at the burial ceremony of the member, and for other purposes. (p. 1)

According to Paragraph 5 of Section 2 of HR 4954:

The immense grief felt by the families of these members who have made the ultimate sacrifice on behalf of the United States is compounded by the need of family members to miss work and other responsibilities in order to attend to burial duties, funeral services, and related family concerns, causing additional economic and personal hardship. (p. 2)

Additionally, as Section 3 (DEATH OF MEMBER OF UNIFORMED SERVICES IN LINE OF DUTY - (A) IN GENERAL - states (Military families bereavement leave act (2004) p. 2) states:

An eligible employee shall be entitled to a total of seven days of leave because of the death of a parent, spouse, son, daughter, or person for whom the employee serves as designated representative... If the deceased died in the line of duty as a member of the uniformed services. Such leave is intended to permit the employee to prepare for or attend the burial ceremony of the deceased member of the uniformed services and may be paid or unpaid leave.

Conversely, however, the United States Federal government presently has no laws in place to similarly (or otherwise, in comparable and appropriate ways) formally acknowledge and honor the passing of federal government personnel other than military personnel.

According to U.S. Code Title 5, Part III; Subpart E; Chapter 63; Subchapter II (2005), the federal government does in fact authorize, according to three separate sections of Title 5: (1) Sec. 6321, "Absence of veterans to attend funeral services; (2) Sec. 6326, "Absence in connection with funerals of immediate relatives in the Armed Forces," and (3) Sec. 6328, "Absence in connection with funerals of fellow Federal law enforcement officers." Title 5, therefore, authorizes the use of sick leave to attend a family member's funeral, and within Title 5, various procedures and rights to leave, paid or unpaid, for immediate survivors, are delineated for: (1) funerals of law enforcement officers; (2) funerals of relatives in the Armed forces, and (3) funerals of veterans (2005).

However, no other branches of United States government service are mentioned, in terms of funeral protocols, survivors' rights, or leaves of absence for survivors, anywhere within Title 5 of the U.S. Code. In fact, within the two agencies of U.S. government service whose work is very often, arguably, equally as dangerous as active military service (and in some cases, more so), the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), no similar or equivalent funeral benefits or honors are offered in honor of fallen members of those agencies, their spouses or other immediate survivors, as they are for military personnel and their families. The FBI, for example, offers annual leave; sick leave; family medical leave; maternity leave; paternity leave, and family friendly leave, which includes:

up to 40 hours (5 days) of sick leave in a leave year to care for a family member or to arrange or attend an immediate family member's funeral. In addition to the 40 hours of sick leave allowed, an employee may use an additional 64 hours under certain circumstances [emphasis added]. (Benefits, 2005, p. 2).

The CIA's leave policies are very similar to those of the FBI (Sunoo & Solomon, 1996): no specific funeral leave or funeral honors are granted to CIA personnel, or immediate relatives of CIA personnel, killed in the line of duty (p. 8). However, according to one CIA employee, whose 33-year-old husband was presented with a diagnosis of lung cancer and died two months later (p. 8), additional benefits were in fact forthcoming from the agency when she most needed them (but only due to an internal pool of donated annual leave, and the compassion and generosity of her peers):

Thank goodness the agency maintains a pool of annual leave donated by other employees. People who have excess leave time can donate it to the pool. It's so helpful for those involved in catastrophic situations... I never had to take a leave without pay...My office gave me a week off after he died.

Like many employees of many workplaces nationwide then, according to Sunoo & Solomon, 1996; Grief in the workplace (April 2003); to Bereavement in the workplace (2005) and Tyler (2003), CIA employees, like the vast majority of other U.S. government employees (not to mention employees of most other public and private entities) depend, following the death of a loved one, on workplace kindness rather than on a governmental guarantee (like that given, uniquely, to U.S. Armed Services members and their families) of up to seven days of federally-protected funeral and/or bereavement leave time.

In summary, then, the United States federal government currently has no laws equivalent to either Title 38 or to HR 4954 in place to similarly acknowledge the passing of non-military federal personnel, or the effects of their passing upon their loved ones. The federal government currently authorizes only the use of previously-accrued sick leave to attend a family member's funeral. Separate procedures are also spelled out, within Title 5, for leave that may be taken for funerals of law enforcement officers; funerals of relatives in the Armed forces, and funerals of veterans. However, no other branch of government service is covered, in terms of funeral leave protected by law, much less funeral honors for other than military personnel, anywhere within either Title 5 or Title 38.

Literature on Caring Leadership

The second category of available literature examined for the study was literature on caring leadership: both caring leadership in general, and caring leadership as it related to deaths; illnesses, or other serious personal setbacks of employees and/or their loved ones, and the management and support of bereaved employees. That literature included books; articles from academic and other journals, and various materials (e.g., company, government, or other websites; policies and procedures information) from various Internet sources.

In the course of reviewing available literature on caring leadership, the author discovered that none of the private companies researched, including several of those best-known for their overall benevolence toward employees (e.g., Southwest Airlines; General Electric, Pitney Bowes (Yukl & Lepsinger, 2004)) had any Internet-posted or otherwise publicly-available funeral and/or bereavement policies. Therefore, the author was unable to compare the funeral and bereavement leave policies of Southwest Airlines; General Electric, Pitney Bowes (Yukl & Lepsinger, 2004) with those of other public and private entities that did make that information available.

Most available literature on caring leadership focused more caring leadership in general; not all touched specifically on caring leadership during times of employee bereavement, although a great deal of what was said on caring leadership in general could be easily applied to such situations. Among literature reviewed on caring leadership in general, Flexible leadership: Creating value by balancing multiple challenges and choices (Yukl & Lepsinger (2004) focused on key characteristics of caring leadership, including: empathy; caring; good listening skills, and the ability to set high standards while still practicing empathy toward one's peers and employees. That book also challenged "the myth of easy leadership" (p. 10), and the idea that 'one minute' actions or a list of 'leadership secrets' could create caring leadership. The authors argued, instead, that: "...there are few, if any, easy answers. Leadership is difficult and demanding, and leaders need to be flexible because the situation is constantly changing" p. 11).

Being a flexible leader meant acting decisively when necessary, but also acting (and reacting) with flexibility and kindness. The book also offered a model of flexible leadership based on various situational factors and conditions, including: (1) "People-oriented Leadership Behavior"; (2) "Programs and Systems for Adaptation"; (3) "Change-Oriented Leadership Behaviors; and (4) "Program and Systems for Human Relations" (p. 13).

Yukl & Lepsinger (2004), in Flexible leadership: Creating value by balancing multiple challenges and choices, also focused on the importance, to flexible leadership, of supporting and recognizing others, by "giving praise and showing appreciation to others for effective performance, significant achievements, and special contributions" (p. 158). As they also state about supportive leadership:

good measure of supportive leadership is how you react when a colleague or direct report is upset or worried... By listening attentively, and trying to show that you understand what a person is saying and feeling, you communicate strong concern and the desire to be helpful.

Supportive leadership is also relevant when a personal problem is adversely affecting job performance. (p. 157)

Such ideas on recognizing peers and employees as individual human beings; taking an active interest in them, and being supportive and empathetic when they have problems that interfere with work, are all also applicable to the management and support of grieving individuals within the workplace, although, the authors do not specifically address that issue in the book.

Values-Based Leadership (Kuczmarski & Kuczmarski, 1995) focused on the loss of positive values in business and in society in general, due to anomie (feelings of norm-less-ness and space-less-ness that have set into American society in recent decades due to an overemphasis on the self, on personal pleasure, on immediate gratification, and on acquiring material possessions). Such less-than-positive or constructive values, argue the authors, produce cynicism about leadership, and authority in general, leading, within company employees and society in general, to an overall disregard for fair play, and an feeling that everyone, including leaders, are only out for themselves, rather than for their companies or individual employees. As the authors further stated:

We need to undergo a fundamental shift that reestablishes values and beliefs in our personal and professional lives.... A set of values that enables us to once again believe in our jobs, companies, and organizations; to believe in our families, churches, and communities; to believe in our government.... More than ever before, we live in an age that necessitates our need to find reasons to believe. (p. 9)

The authors also suggested five steps today's leaders might take, to counteract the pervasive effects of anomie within today's companies, and begin instead to put positive values and forward-looking leadership back into the workplace. These were: (1) "Pluralize the workplace," that is, honor employees of all backgrounds, viewpoints, and "Expressions of diversity"; (2) "Serve as employee advocates," that is, "establish a mindset of serving employees rather than employees serving their organizations' leaders"; (3) "Be a socratic [sic] teacher," by "asking questions to elicit understanding"; (4) "Bridge people to a mission," that is, help employees to "design and build a bridge from their values to the organization"; and (5) "Evoke professional passion," that is, "help employees get excited about their work, take pride in their jobs, and feel emotionally committed to their colleagues" (pp. 11-14). Values-Based Leadership though it does not explicitly discuss employee bereavement issues, does implicitly suggest that, because effective leaders must take an interest in their employees as individuals and not just as workers, they must also be supportive and helpful in their attitudes toward, and management of, employees during times of personal loss, sadness, or crisis.

Wren (1998), in Management innovators: the people and ideas that have shaped modern business, traced the evolution of business practices as they exist today, by profiling key leaders in eleven key management-related categories: (1) Inventors (Eli Whitney; Thomas Alva Edison); (2) Makers (Cyrus H. McCormick; Alexander Graham Bell; Edward H. Harriman; Andrew Carnegie; Henry Ford; (3) Sellers (Alexander T. Stewart; Richard W. Sears); (4) Movers (James J. Hill); (5) Communicators (Samuel Finley Breese Morse); (6) Financiers (Jay Gould; J. Pierpont Morgan);(7) Working Smarter (Lillian and Frank Gilbreth; Frederick W. Taylor; Yoichi Ueno); (8) Organizers (William C. Durant);(9) Motivators (Elton Mayo; Abraham H. Maslow); (10) Leaders (Nicolo [sic] Machiavelli; Mary Parker Follett; Douglas M. McGregor); (11) Quality Seekers (W. Edwards Deming; Joseph Moses; Juran Taiichi Ohno, and (12) Guru (Peter F. Drucker). In this work, the material most applicable to caring leadership and caring management of grieving employees, is the chapter on Motivators (Chapter 9), which discusses the importance, to the overall success of a company or organization, of leaders' understanding their employees as individuals, and their needs as people, rather than simply as workers, and of leaders' serving consistently as reliable sources of support.

The relationship edge in business: Connecting with customers and colleagues when it counts (Acuff, c2004) focused on the importance, to caring leaders, of building strong, trusting, enduring relationships with employees, through empathetic understanding, constructive actions, and meaningful communication. Subjects explored within the book included (1) "Climbing the Relationship Pyramid," or what is required, step-by-step, to foster strong workplace employee and peer relationships; (2) "What Strong Relationships Require," or the necessary emotional ingredients of lasting relationship with employees and peers (honesty, trustworthiness, reliability, and empathy); (3) "Good Questions Promote Meaningful Dialogue," or asking the right questions of employees, in terms of both their work and themselves, and listening carefully to the answers in order to build meaningful relationships, and (4) "It's Not What You Know; It's What You Do," or, in essence, actions speak louder than words in the workplace, and are also remembered, and emulated, longer and more often. Management and support of grieving employees was not explicitly covered in this book, although the section called "Good Questions Promote Meaningful Dialogue," which discussed the importance of asking the right questions of employees, in terms of both their work and themselves, and listening carefully to the answers in order to build meaningful relationships, implied that when leaders understand and support their employees, including understanding and supporting them in terms of what is happening in their personal lives, they are also more able to help guide employees through tough times personally, while remaining professionally productive.

Kouzes (2000), in The five practices of exemplary leadership: when leaders are at their best, outlined and explained five practices of which, as he suggests, exemplary leadership consists. These were (1) "Challenging the Process," or finding new and innovative ways to reach goals, inspire others, or accomplish tasks; (2) "Inspiring a Shared Vision," or encouraging company unity through shared values, goals, and a shared commitment and outlook; (3) "Enabling Others to Act," or encouraging and promoting the ideas, efforts, and initiative of others, rather than being close-minded, or discouraging or sabotaging the efforts of others; (4) "Modeling the Way," or setting a good example for others to follow, through one's own words, attitudes, and actions, and (5) "Encouraging the Heart," or understanding people and their heartfelt motivations, and then encouraging those motivations in order to help bring out the best in them. The author suggested that "Encouraging the Heart" also involves showing empathy toward one's employees, and sharing their joys and sorrows, both professionally and personally.

Encouraging the heart (Kouzes & Posner, 1999) focused on the idea of caring leadership as being strong, rather than "soft" leadership, as is often believed, and on how the word "encourage" contains within it the word "courage." Further, the root of the word "courage," "cor," actually means "heart," in Latin and several other languages. Therefore, suggested the authors, to "encourage the heart" is actually to offer strong, courageous leadership that is in no way "soft" (an adjective many of today's leaders apparently fear, due to their desire not to seem weak or overly emotional). The authors further suggested that one important way of encouraging the heart is to "Put Others First" (p. 78), which involves paying close attention to what others say, and focusing on others, not oneself, in order to build trust. As they stated: "Central to putting others first is the capacity to walk in their shoes. Learning to understand and see things from another's perspective is absolutely crucial to building trusting relations and to career success" (p. 79). The authors also noted that effective caring leaders celebrated events or milestones together with their employees, since celebrations promoted good feelings, bonding, a caring attitude, and company loyalty. Moreover, it is important for caring leaders to initiate such celebrations, not only of happy occasions, such as holidays, company anniversaries, or occasions of having met goals or deadlines, but also occasions noting "Loss: of old procedures, financial opportunities, contracts, a job, status, a colleague who has just died... " [emphasis added] (p. 122). The authors stated, in summary: "It's all about caring" (p. 148).

Credibility: How leaders gain and lose it, Why people demand it (Kouzes & Pozner, 2003, focused on issues of leadership credibility, such as trustworthiness, integrity, honesty, and integrity toward employees. Caring leadership, suggested the authors, is based on trust, understanding, straightforward communication, empathy, and most of all, credibility. As the authors stated, "Leaders...need understanding. Responding to the demands of highly diverse populations is a social challenge and a personal struggle: "Respect must run both ways." (p. xxiv).

The leadership challenge: How to get extraordinary things done in organizations (Kouzes & Pozner, 1987) focused on knowing what leadership was really about: encouraging, motivating, energizing, and unifying people rather than simply being an authority figure; when leaders are at their best; what followers typically expect of leaders; and enlisting the support of others through caring, empathy, and through discovering a common purpose, finding a shared vision, and helping to set and articulate goals that can be shared by all. Organizational behavior and personnel psychology (Wexley & Yukl 1984), examined dynamics of typical organizational behavior, and of what commonly makes organizations either succeed or fail. The subjects covered included: (1) what personally motivates employees to work; (2) employee attitudes and job satisfaction; (3) communication processes; (4) leadership; (5) conflict management; and (6) the work environment overall, and how effective leadership helps to create a positive working environment for all.

In the article Creating caring leadership for the 21st century Spears (2005) suggested that caring leadership began with the desire to serve others, or 'servant leadership'. Similarly, Feldman, in the article Getting to the heart of leadership (2002) suggested that leadership is not so much about control as it is about caring; that leadership is not about being a boss, but about building a community, and that leaders do not 'hold' territory, but instead 'co-create it' by letting go of their own ego involvement, for the greater good of the company and others within the company. Sheldrake (1999) in his article The changing leadership agenda, suggested that "caring for others, seeking to ensure their needs are met, and seeking to ensure that others grow and benefit are the criteria of effective leadership - not goals and profits" (p. 6).

Clayton (2004) suggested, in his article Side-door leadership, that the nature and definition of leadership itself is now changing. "In the postmodern milieu, people value following those worth being followed over pursuing those with the right titles. If you think you can lead just because you're the boss, you have no clue what leadership really means... "(p. 1). Additionally, as Clayton noted, entire structures and traditional hierarchies of leadership are presently shifting, toward the kind of leadership where one exhibits empathy, compassion, and a caring heart:

Structures and systems no longer hold the validity they once did... The traditional models are holding less and less water... The leader of the future will be skilled at observing and utilizing gifted leaders all around her, not only that society identifies as the best and the brightest... The new breed of leader will listen with a caring heart and respond in humility to all those in the community... [emphasis added] (pp. 1-2)

Statistics on caring leadership as a value. Studies have proven that caring leadership is not only preferred by employees, but that it boosts productivity as well. According to Yukl & Lepsinger (2004):

There is... hard evidence that the development and motivation of an organization's 'human capital' has a tangible impact on business results.

A study of three thousand companies conducted at the University of Pennsylvania found that spending 10% of revenue on capital improvements boosted productivity by 3.9%; a similar investment in human capital increased productivity by 8.5% -- "more than twice as much. (p. 143)

Further, "Research at Sears found that a five-point improvement in employee

Attitudes about their job and about the company at a given store led to a 1.3 unit increase in customer impressions, which yielded a 0.5% increase in revenue growth (Yukl&Lepsinger, 2004, pp. 143-4).

In their book The leadership challenge: How to get extraordinary things done in organizations Kouzes & Posner (1987) pointed out that, in a survey they conducted of attributes that company employees valued most in a leader, 'caring leadership' adjectives, such as: honest; inspiring; caring; fair-minded; broad-minded; supportive; imaginative; courageous; cooperative; dependable; and straightforward, consistently headed the list.

As Kouzes & Posner further pointed out in their book Encouraging the heart: A leader's guide to rewarding and recognizing others (1999), in a study conducted by the Center for Creative Leadership (CCL):

Using a battery of measurement instruments, CCL researchers looked at a number of factors that could account for a manager's success. CCL found that one, and only one, factor significantly differentiated the top quartile of managers from the bottom quartile..., the single factor that differentiated the top from the bottom was higher scores on affection both expressed and wanted. Contrary to the myth of the cold-hearted boss... The highest-performing managers show more warmth and fondness toward others than do the bottom 25%. (p. 9)

Clearly, then, caring leadership is not only a desirable qualitative value in management and leadership, but also a key factor in a leader's (and a company's) success and profitability.

Literature on Caring Leadership and Grief Management in the Workplace

According to the Jenna Druck Foundation (2003) website, a compassionate workplace is one that supports grieving employees in many ways. These ways included (1) Understanding the need for grief support services and making them available to employees; (2) extending customary 3-day bereavement leave; (3) lightening an employee's workload to facilitate gradual re-entry; encouraging "flexible hours," "job sharing" and other temporary accommodations, and (4)extending bereavement leave to "special friends" whose loss is equally devastating (The compassionate workplace).

In the book Leading in times of trauma (2002) Dutton, Frost, Worline, Lilius, & Kanov suggested that today's leaders can help their employees, and also their companies to recover from severe, uncontrollable trauma, such as accidents, disasters (like September 11) and unforeseen economic downturns and personal tragedies, such as the deaths of loved ones, or the deaths of fellow employees within an organization. An attitude of caring leadership facilitates healing among employees who are grieving the loss of a loved one.

Caring and compassionate leaders may model compassionate responses to company and personal setbacks, big and small, by being first to display caring and compassion toward others, and thereby setting a positive example for others in their companies to demonstrate caring. The authors further suggested that a leader's being willing to publicly express grief and sadness, emotionally as well as physically, such as delivering bad news in person, enables others to feel more comfortable with their own grief and sadness.

In Leading in times of trauma (2002), the authors further suggested that today's leaders, are in a position to encourage, and to set themselves positive examples of, forward-looking action, even in the face of personal or company tragedy, and to help those they lead by encouraging them to connect, while grieving or otherwise recovering from personal or company setbacks, with an organization's larger purpose, and with their own previous commitment to personal workplace excellence (e.g., by continuing to honor the company's overall commitment to producing, or offering, the best-quality goods or services). This commitment to a higher purpose, in and of itself, the authors suggested, encourages the healing process, both individual employees and the company during times of sadness.

In The toxic handler: Organizational hero -- "and casualty (Frost & Robinson, 2002), the authors noted the increased importance of leaders' endeavoring, during times of stress, crisis, or trauma in the workplace, to show compassion and encourage demonstrations of compassion in others, as an inherent leadership trait. Following that lead, employees in supporting positions within a company or organization (e.g., human resources personnel, managers, and other employees), can and will assist with healing from personal losses such as the death of a family member, an illness, or other types of personal setbacks. The authors referred to lower-level employees who customarily handle such situations as 'unsung heroes' as "toxic handlers," that is, those who can and will help workplace peers cope with internal traumas. '

Toxic handlers," however, since they do so often absorb, and even internalize, painful feelings of others, are very susceptible to burnout. Caring leaders may help minimize or prevent burnout among 'toxic handlers', the authors suggest, by publicly acknowledging their value, commitment, and contribution; by providing them opportunities to rest and rejuvenate, and regularly rotating them into less stressful positions. Caring leaders should also strongly encourage 'toxic handlers' to balance work and personal life, in order to be less overwhelmed by work responsibilities, and more focused, when away from work, on their personal well-being.

Friedman, Christensen, & DeGroot, in Work and life: The end of the zero-sum game (2002) suggested that when employees are encouraged to balance work with personal life during non-traumatic times, they may more easily do so when unexpected traumas or setbacks, such as the loss of a loved one; an illness; or a professional or personal disappointment occur. If company leaders treat work and personal life as complementary interests rather than as competing ones, workers may even endeavor to achieve personal happiness and fulfillment in ways that benefit their organizations. The authors gave examples like fulfilling the dream of competing in the Olympics by training mornings and working later in the evenings, and suggest that caring leaders who realize that employee achievement of such goals benefits the company, should show flexibility and support, whenever possible, for such personal goals of employees. Therefore, caring leaders should learn as much as possible about employees' priorities, objectives, and problems; clarify job priorities but let employees determine how to address them, and, when appropriate, refine and customize employees' work methods and processes in order to facilitate optimal job performance while simultaneously helping ease an employee's individual stress (e.g., giving an employee extra time off to prepare for the funeral of a loved one and to grieve, or making it possible for an employee to continue working full time, but from home, while caring for a sick child, spouse, or parent).

The article Bereavement in the workplace (2000) offered strategies for helping bereaved workers. As this article stated, a 1994 study indicated that "illness or a death in the family are the second most common problems affecting workplace performance" (Naiderman, 1996, p. 20, qtd. In Bereavement in the workplace, 2000, p. 1). This article further suggested that newly bereaved employees may be too overwhelmed to know what they need; that they may require information on bereavement leave and benefit entitles, and that employers should be flexible about time-off, especially in the initial year following death of a loved one.

Also, according to this article, some employees may wish to return to work too early, in order to avoid having to deal with their overwhelming feelings of grief, but according to Eyetsman, (n.d., p. 472), qtd. In Bereavement in the workplace, 2000) this coping method has been found to be, in the long-run, counter-productive, both to optimal professional performance and to optimal personal healing. Following a death of a company employee, particularly a suicide, other employees may experience feelings of guilt or regret about what they perceive to be their own insufficient caring or concern for the deceased colleague.

Further, according to Sunoo & Solomon, in Facing grief: How and why to help people heal (1996):

most workplaces... deny the emotional realities of death and grief...87% of companies surveyed by the Los Angeles-based Employers

Group...have formal bereavement and funeral leave-with-pay policy for immediate family members, about 80% have a maximum of three days. That doesn't include part-time workers. Only 40% include part-timers... according to the Bureau of National Affairs, while funeral leave policies acknowledge spouse, children, parents and siblings... other family members (and significant others) aren't so uniformly treated. About 60% cover grandchildren and step-parent relationships. (p. 7). Similar articles on grief in the workplace include: Dyer, 2002; Kodanz, 2003; Tippy, 2003; Transitions (April 2003); Tyler (September 2003), and Andrus, 2005.

Funeral and Bereavement Leave Policies of Specific Organizations

As part of the literature survey, the author also researched available Internet sources in order to learn more about specific funeral and/or bereavement leave policies of selected public and private institutions, and about how funeral and bereavement policies within those various entities compared with government funeral and bereavement policies for military personnel and their survivors.

General findings of that research were that no present federal law spelled out funeral policies; procedures; leave benefits, or honors for employees of any branch of U.S. government besides the military. Also, employees of none of the institutions researched were eligible for more than five (5) days of paid funeral leave, and most organizations offered only three (3) paid days of paid funeral leave, if even that. Currently, under federal law, however, relatives of armed services personnel killed in the line of duty receive up to seven (7) days of paid or unpaid funeral leave.

The eight public and private companies or organizations whose funeral and bereavement leave policies were scrutinized for this study included: (1) Johns Hopkins (University) Hospital; (2) ICANN Corporation; (3) El Camino Real (Catholic) Diocese; (4) the State of Utah; (5) the Tennessee Board of Regents of the State University and Community College System of Tennessee; (6) CHPA Corporation; (7) the Manual first Baptist Church; and (8) the University of Pennsylvania. These eight organizations differed among themselves as to how much paid funeral or bereavement leave they offered employees. One of them gave no designated funeral or bereavement leave to employees at all. In all eight cases, however, the author found that funeral and/or bereavement leave benefits for employees and/or their families were substantially less than those legally awarded survivors of active duty U.S. military personnel.

At Johns Hopkins (University) Hospital, employees were granted up to three (3) days maximum of paid funeral leave (JHHSC / JHH human resources policy and procedures manual (20 Jun 2002). In the State of Utah, according to The Governor's office and GOPB policy and procedures manual index (January 1, 1999) employees were also granted up to three (3) days paid funeral leave.

According to ICANN's Policies and procedures (January 1, 2002), however, there was no specific mention of funeral or bereavement leave, paid or unpaid. Sick leave; military leave; holiday leave, and time off to vote or to perform jury duty were all specifically mentioned in the company policies on leaves. Also included in the company's leave policy was the stated ability of employees to use accrued sick leave to care for an ailing child, spouse, or relative.

According to the CHPA company policy maunal [sic](n.d.):

Office policy regarding time off for funerals is as follows: Up to 2 days may be taken, if needed, and charged to personal business with pay. If a greater amount of time is required, accrued sick time may be debited. In the absence of any accrued sick time, accrued vacation time must be debited.