In a re­cent con­ver­sa­tion with a col­league, he lament­ed the state of con­fu­sion in an or­gan­i­sa­tion he is as­so­ci­at­ed with. The dis­cus­sion that en­sued led to a deep­er con­ver­sa­tion about “commess” and how it ad­verse­ly af­fects or­gan­i­sa­tions in Trinidad and To­ba­go (T&T). The word commess, root­ed in the French-cre­ole lan­guage and pri­mar­i­ly used in T&T, is as­so­ci­at­ed with con­fu­sion, gos­sip, chaos, scan­dal, in­fight­ing and dis­or­der.

In an in­creas­ing­ly year-round, car­ni­va­lesque en­vi­ron­ment, where hu­mour and ban­ter­ing are so­cial­ly and cul­tur­al­ly em­braced, a mea­sure of commess seems ac­cept­able, as man­i­fest­ed by its pres­ence in dai­ly in­for­mal con­ver­sa­tions. How­ev­er, when commess takes root in or­gan­i­sa­tions, the ef­fects can be grave, neg­a­tive­ly af­fect­ing lead­er­ship ef­fec­tive­ness, em­ploy­ees’ well-be­ing, trust, pro­duc­tiv­i­ty and com­pet­i­tive­ness at the com­pa­ny and na­tion­al lev­els.

In an is­land-state like T&T, where pop­u­la­tion size is small, a cul­ture of commess can lead to on­go­ing con­flict, in­ter­per­son­al clash­es, cliques, group loy­al­ty as op­posed to com­pa­ny loy­al­ty, and over­all tox­i­c­i­ty. In such sit­u­a­tions valu­able time and re­sources are ex­pend­ed on non-val­ue en­hanc­ing ac­tiv­i­ties. A com­pa­ny can find it­self in a sit­u­a­tion where it spends less time fos­ter­ing in­no­va­tion, pur­su­ing ex­cel­lent cus­tomer ser­vice and in un­der­tak­ing the en­vi­ron­men­tal scan­ning that pro­vides mar­ket in­sights need­ed for agili­ty in an ever-chang­ing busi­ness en­vi­ron­ment. An or­gan­i­sa­tion or in­sti­tu­tion con­sumed by commess will not per­form at its best.

The man­i­fes­ta­tion of commess in the work­place

Commess in the work­place is man­i­fest­ed in di­verse ways:

* Per­sis­tent gos­sip;

* Ru­mour mon­ger­ing;

* The un­der­min­ing of work col­leagues;

* The for­ma­tion of cliques;

* Pow­er strug­gles;

* Vic­tim­i­sa­tion;

* Blame game;

* Non­ad­her­ence to poli­cies;

* So­cial and po­lit­i­cal ar­gu­ments; and

* Feuds among lead­ers and be­tween em­ploy­ees and lead­ers

The cost of a cul­ture of commess

Re­duced pro­duc­tiv­i­ty is deemed to be the great­est neg­a­tive im­pact of commess in the work­place. Commess leads to con­flicts which cause em­ploy­ee stress, dis­en­gage­ment, and ab­sen­teeism, all of which com­pro­mise the abil­i­ty of an or­gan­i­sa­tion to op­ti­mise the re­turn on its cap­i­tal. Re­duced pro­duc­tiv­i­ty by em­ploy­ees has im­pli­ca­tions for prof­itabil­i­ty, growth and com­pet­i­tive­ness.

Commess can lead to tal­ent­ed em­ploy­ees, frus­trat­ed by en­vi­ron­ments where mer­it and pro­fes­sion­al­ism are over­shad­owed by favouritism, leav­ing an or­gan­i­sa­tion to seek psy­cho­log­i­cal­ly safer spaces. Those who re­main dis­en­gage emo­tion­al­ly, present but emo­tion­al­ly ab­sent. In to­day’s en­vi­ron­ment where tal­ent is be­com­ing in­creas­ing­ly mo­bile and re­mote work is in­creas­ing­ly avail­able, un­healthy or tox­ic en­vi­ron­ments can in­crease the rate of em­ploy­ee dis­en­gage­ment and at­tri­tions. Or­gan­i­sa­tions are al­so like­ly to face chal­lenges to at­tract and re­tain new em­ploy­ees.

Con­flict and in­ter­nal dra­ma con­sume time, emo­tion­al en­er­gy, and blur or­gan­i­sa­tion­al fo­cus.

When or­gan­i­sa­tions be­come en­trapped in a cul­ture of commess, com­mu­ni­ca­tion is opaque, de­ci­sion-mak­ing is slowed, poli­cies and pro­ce­dures are re­ac­tionary and there is mis­align­ment be­tween in­di­vid­ual and or­gan­i­sa­tion­al ob­jec­tives as per­son­al agen­das be­come pri­ori­tised. Anen­vi­ron­ment of con­fu­sion makes it dif­fi­cult for an or­gan­i­sa­tion to pur­sue its long-term strate­gic agen­da.

Ab­sen­teeism, con­sid­er­able time over­runs, and time spent “fight­ing fires” in­crease the cost of busi­ness. While the im­pact of commess is like­ly to vary based on the pe­cu­liar­i­ties of the or­gan­i­sa­tion, in all cas­es the cost is hid­den, and dif­fi­cult to quan­ti­fy.

The men­tal health im­pact

When commess per­sists in or­gan­i­sa­tions, the men­tal health of em­ploy­ees can be af­fect­ed, adding an­oth­er di­men­sion of cost. Psy­cho­log­i­cal cost in­creas­es as em­ploy­ees strug­gle to nav­i­gate en­vi­ron­ments char­ac­terised by burnout, anx­i­ety, emo­tion­al ex­haus­tion, and stress.

A ma­jor dri­ver of per­for­mance in or­gan­i­sa­tions is the well-be­ing of em­ploy­ees. Ac­cord­ing to Gallup’s State of the Glob­al Work­place Study (2026), well-be­ing is con­nect­ed to per­for­mance. The re­search al­so in­di­cat­ed that em­ploy­ee en­gage­ment in­creas­es by 56 per cent when em­ploy­ees be­lieve that their or­gan­i­sa­tions care about their well-be­ing.

When commess per­vades, anx­i­ety, de­pres­sion, sleep­less nights, and feel­ings of un­hap­pi­ness af­fect em­ploy­ees men­tal well-be­ing. The sit­u­a­tion is com­pound­ed, giv­en the ease of ac­cess to mind-al­ter­ing sub­stances like al­co­hol and oth­er drugs. This leads to more prob­lems, as em­ploy­ees chal­lenged by tox­ic en­vi­ron­ments of­ten find it dif­fi­cult to seek help for fear of be­ing stig­ma­tized. Ac­cord­ing­ly, the work­place be­comes psy­cho­log­i­cal­ly un­safe.

Lead­er­ship and a cul­ture of commess

Lead­er­ship plays a key role in de­ter­min­ing whether or not commess thrives with­in or­gan­i­sa­tions. There are how­ev­er sit­u­a­tions where lead­ers’ ac­tions con­tribute to the dys­func­tion.

* With­hold­ing or be­ing se­lec­tive with in­for­ma­tion;

* Tol­er­at­ing tox­ic be­hav­iour;

* Par­tic­i­pa­tion in gos­sip mon­ger­ing;

* Pref­er­en­tial treat­ment for per­sons loy­al to the leader;

* Man­ag­ing by in­still­ing fear; and

* Lever­ag­ing the tox­ic en­vi­ron­ment for per­son­al gain;

Em­ploy­ees lose trust in lead­ers who fail to ad­dress a cul­ture of commess. Be­ing in­sen­si­tive to sit­u­a­tions that neg­a­tive­ly af­fect the lives of em­ploy­ees, and the health of the or­gan­i­sa­tion, is an in­di­ca­tion of in­ef­fec­tive lead­er­ship. On the con­trary, emo­tion­al­ly-in­tel­li­gent lead­er­ship cre­ates en­vi­ron­ments where all em­ploy­ees feel a sense of be­long­ing and ex­pe­ri­ence healthyteam col­lab­o­ra­tion.

Mov­ing be­yond commess

What is re­quired in T&T is for em­ploy­ees to re­tain the warmth and hu­mour that the coun­try is known for. Cul­tur­al vi­bran­cy can be re­tained while con­cert­ed ef­forts are made to en­sure that work en­vi­ron­ments are safe spaces, where there is eq­ui­ty, fair­ness, ac­count­abil­i­ty and re­spect ex­ist for all. Emo­tion­al­ly-in­tel­li­gent lead­ers fos­ter and main­tain such en­vi­ron­ments.

* Eth­i­cal lead­er­ship- Lead­ers must mod­el the type of be­hav­iour de­sired and ar­tic­u­late those that are not tol­er­at­ed;

* In­vest in emo­tion­al in­tel­li­gence- un­der­take lead­er­ship de­vel­op­ment, con­flict res­o­lu­tion, and in­ter­per­son­al com­mu­ni­ca­tion skills train­ing;

* De­vel­op poli­cies- In or­der to dis­pel no­tions of favouritism, poli­cies on hir­ing, fir­ing, per­for­mance man­age­ment, pro­mo­tion, and time off etc. should be clear­ly com­mu­ni­cat­ed;

* Es­tab­lish com­mu­ni­ca­tion chan­nels- con­sis­tent, clear, and open com­mu­ni­ca­tion re­duces spec­u­la­tion and mis­trust;

* Cre­ate psy­cho­log­i­cal­ly safe en­vi­ron­ments- em­ploy­ees must feel at ease to raise con­cerns and to share ideas; and

* Team cul­ture- Or­gan­i­sa­tions should en­cour­age team­work, par­tic­i­pa­to­ry prob­lem-solv­ing and oth­er ini­tia­tives that re­quire col­lab­o­ra­tion.

Con­clu­sion

The tal­ent, cre­ativ­i­ty, and sense of hu­mour of the peo­ple of T&T have the po­ten­tial to con­tribute to­wards the growth, com­pet­i­tive­ness, and sus­tain­abil­i­ty of the coun­try.

The pen­chant for commess how­ev­er, can re­tard na­tion­al progress. While in in­for­mal set­tings commess may be seen as fun, in the work­place, the con­se­quences of an unchecked cul­ture or nor­mal­i­sa­tion can be dis­as­trous. No or­gan­i­sa­tion can sus­tain long-term com­pet­i­tive­ness while in­ter­nal­ly con­sumed by dys­func­tion.

For T&T to strength­en its com­pet­i­tive­ness in a com­plex glob­al econ­o­my, cul­tur­al ma­tu­ri­ty is need­ed. Or­gan­i­sa­tions must move be­yond cul­tures of con­fu­sion, con­flict, and di­vi­sion to­ward cul­tures ground­ed in pro­fes­sion­al­ism, trans­paren­cy, re­spect, trust, and pur­pose. The re­duc­tion and ul­ti­mate re­moval of commess at or­gan­i­sa­tions will au­gur well for the cre­ation of a coun­try equipped to face cur­rent and fu­ture chal­lenges.