One bad apple? That old chestnut

networks that protect them from sanction and enable their behaviour to continue unchecked”. In the organisations they studied, they found that these networks “metastasised and caused lasting harm to victims, other employees and the organisation as a whole”. Perhaps the scholars’ most disturbing conclusion was that these networks can survive and thrive even if the original perpetrator is removed.

So there we have it. Removing the “one bad apple” is never enough to stop the rot.

The carefully-worded statements drafted by PRS and lawyers would have us believe that a public scalp draws the matter to a close (“Move on! There’s nothing more to see here!”). But it is rarely the case because the damage is often systemic and deep-rooted.

The research concluded that “formal and informal ties among network of complicity members must also be weakened or broken and victims must be integrated into networks of support. Bystanders must be trained and activated to take positive action and power must be diffused through egalitarian leadership”. Another way the bad apple analogy breaks down is the suggestion that the rot is always visible. Because it really isn’t. Often, it takes too many ruined lives before the behaviour is called out. And, even then, there’s no guarantee victims will be taken seriously or that justice will be served.

Anyone on the receiving end of toxic sexual behaviour in the workplace will have heard one of the following justifications: “But they’re happily married!” “It’s just harmless banter!”

“It was just a bit of fun that went too