The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Census of Fatal Occupational Injuries reported that 11,613 workplace homicides occurred in the United States between 1992 and 2006 and averaged about 800 per year. The on-the-job homicide toll amounts to more than 10 percent of all fatal work injuries. There are many theories about why there is so much violence, but it is difficult to acquire an accurate and worthwhile prescription of how to stop the violence.

An example of the difficulty faced by managers involves the case of software tester Michael McDermott, who killed seven people at a Wakefield, Massachusetts, Internet consulting company, Edgewater Technology, Inc. He is now serving a sentence of life without parole.

According to eyewitnesses, McDermott arrived at the Wakefield office of Edgewater Technology armed with a semiautomatic assault rifle, a 12-gauge shotgun, and a pistol. By the time the police captured him in the reception area, seven employees lay dead from gunfire.

What could have caused McDermott to “go crazy,” as one witness described his behavior? What could have made him snap? Or did he snap?

The widespread belief that gunmen, like McDermott, erupt suddenly into an uncontrollable, murderous rage is deeply grounded in the popular vernacular often used to characterize these events:

expressions like “going berserk,” “going ballistic,” or even “going postal” (a code word for workplace massacres coined after a string of post office shootings in the mid-1980s and early 1990s). The prevailing view is that mass killers are totally out of touch with reality

(that is, psychotic) and select their victims randomly.

On the contrary, however, most workplace avengers do not just explode and start shooting spontaneously at anything that moves. Typically, these murderers act with calm deliberation, often planning their assault for days, if not weeks or months. Their preparations involve assembling the arsenal of weaponry as well as determining the most effective means of attack.

In his exit interview from Edgewater Technology, McDermott was assured that if he ever wanted to return, a position would be made for him. It was clear that he was held in high regard by management and staff alike. A huge party was thrown to send him off.

In addition, workplace mass murderers tend to be quite selective in targeting their victims. Rather than an act of sheer insanity, their homicide is an act of controlled revenge. Victims are chosen specifically because of the perceived harm that they have caused the perpetrator, who may himself feel like a victim of injustice.

It may be difficult to consider many of the slain employees of the Wakefield massacre to be in any way responsible for McDermott’s adversities, no matter how paranoid his perceptions may have been.

But if McDermott’s motive was to strike back at Edgewater Technology, then executing anyone employed there would have fulfilled his mission.

In many instances, profoundly disgruntled workers imagine a wide-ranging network of unfairness on the job implicating nearly everyone. In effect, they seek to kill the company to harm the organization for not being fair, honest, and communicative.

Innocent workers, although uninvolved with the killer’s grievance, may be targeted as proxies for the corporate enterprise.

While still employed at the firm, McDermott was upset that Edgewater Technology was about to garnish his wages to pay back taxes he owed to the IRS.

In his mind, conceivably, the company had gone from ally to enemy, joining hands with the federal government to ruin him financially. He apparently saw in mass murder his opportunity to make a preemptive strike against the firm.

Typically, the workplace avenger is a middle-aged white male who feels his job and financial well-being are in jeopardy. Facing yet another disappointment or failure at work, he senses that his career is slipping away. He also believes that he is not to blame for his employment troubles. Rather, it’s the manager who gave him poor assignments or doesn’t appreciate his hard work; it’s his co-workers who get all the credit when profits go up; it’s the human resources staff that is out to get him.

In support of his conspiratorial thinking, the workplace avenger before his deadly rampage typically suffers a catastrophic event, which, in his mind, represents the final straw.

For McDermott, the triggering episode may have involved the scheduled reduction in his take-home check for payment of back taxes as well as the news that his automobile was about to be repossessed.

His financial woes had apparently grown too large for him to tolerate.

Reports from neighbors describe McDermott as a loner. Most mass killers are indeed isolated, socially and psychologically. Importantly, they lack the companionship of friends and family who might help ease them through the hard times and place employment troubles in perspective. Holidays like Christmas can sometimes intensify feelings of loneliness, especially for those individuals who lack support systems the rest of the year.

Unfortunately, the grieving families of the Edgewater Technology victims share a tragedy that too many others have suffered. For every incident of workplace homicide, thousands of workers are assaulted or threatened by an associate. When middleaged workers face downsizing or major changes that disrupt their security, confidence, and routine, there is an increased probability that violence will be considered as a means to correct the wrong, the pain, and the perceived unfairness.

In response to rising levels of workplace violence, a wide range of books, seminars, and consultants have surfaced to help companies cope with the fearful threat of violence on the job. Some specialists focus on security concerns, others on promoting effective employee screening techniques or channels of communication to alert management to troublesome workers.

The term profiling has become a catchword for those who would search for telltale clues for identifying potential murderers before they strike. If there is indeed a profile of typical workplace avengers, can we spot them before they take matters and guns into their own hands? Regrettably, such prediction strategies are not very effective. There are likely tens of thousands of disgruntled employees in workplaces large and small who are frustrated, never smile, and live alone, yet very few will ever translate their inner feelings of anger into outward expressions of violence.

Yet in the aftermath of a mass killing, everyone becomes a psychologist when it comes to identifying murderous behavior. With the benefit of hindsight, neighbors and co-workers suddenly find all of the warning signs that they ignored beforehand—when they might have used such information possibly to prevent a massacre. As one of McDermott’s coworkers suggested upon hearing about the shooting in Wakefield: “I knew right away it was McDermott.”

Of course, just like everybody else, the co-worker

“knew” only after the tragic act had occurred.

Moreover, if management is too proactive and aggressive in trying to spot the so-called “ticking time bomb,” they may do much more harm than good. If this employee perceives that he is being singled out in a negative way—even if it is to coerce him into counseling—his resentment and feelings of persecution can actually intensify. Although managers may not be able to predict the next Michael McDermott, they can strive to enhance the workplace climate for everyone.

If human assets are the major element in an organization’s life, managers need to manage employee misbehavior promptly and in a calm, professional manner. Did McDermott display the “ticking time bomb” signs that co-workers identified? Retrospectively analyzing what occurred and what managers did or didn’t do may have to become a top priority until worker rage, revenge, and violence are better understood and coped with as a part of management’s responsibility.

Questions 1. Should managers be held accountable and liable for workplace violence such as what occurred at Edgewater Technology? Why or why not?

2. Why is it so difficult to develop a precise “profiling”

strategy and approach to pinpoint violent employees like Michael McDermott before they commit such tragic, violent acts?

3. What should managers do if they suspect an employee has the potential to become violent?