Employees often complain of a hostile or intimidating work environment based on their supervisor’s behaviour, often described as verbal harassment which consists of, inter alia, unnecessary criticism, negative judgment, sidelining them from work, and verbal abuse.
The line is easily blurred with the supervisor seeing it as constructive criticism and the employee viewing it as harassment. With the introduction of the Code of Good Practice on the Prevention and Elimination of Harassment in the Workplace (the Code), the line between constructive criticism and harassment is clearer than ever.
The Code describes harassment as follows:
The Code recognises that harassment can either be physical, verbal or psychological (emotional) conduct.
Constructive criticism is valid and considered opinions or advice, which could include negative comments.
The Code encourages feedback that is respectful, proportionate, and aligned with performance goals. It warns against feedback that is demeaning, persistent, or delivered in a hostile tone, which may constitute harassment.
The conduct that the employee complains of must be weighed against supervisory duties. Supervisors play a crucial role in the development and delivery of work of employee under their supervision.
According to the Code, harassment includes:
The Code also recognises power dynamics. Criticism from a superior carries more weight and potential for harm, especially if repeated or unsubstantiated.
The distinction between constructive criticism and harassment is both conceptually and practically significant, particularly within professional, educational, and organisational contexts. While both involve interpersonal communication, they differ fundamentally in intent, delivery, and impact.
Constructive criticism is a form of feedback that is purposefully designed to support the improvement of an individual’s performance or behaviour. It is typically delivered in a respectful, objective, and solution-oriented manner, with the aim of fostering personal or professional development.
Harassment, by contrast, involves conduct that is unwelcome, inappropriate, and often demeaning, with the effect – whether intended or not – of undermining an individual’s dignity and contributing to a hostile or intimidating environment.
Constructive criticism is characterised by its specificity, relevance, and focus on actionable suggestions. It is grounded in a genuine desire to assist the recipient in achieving better outcomes, whether in terms of work performance, academic achievement, or interpersonal conduct.
Importantly, it is communicated in a way that maintains the recipient’s self-respect and avoids personal attacks or generalisations. The feedback is typically framed within the context of shared goals or institutional standards, and it encourages reflection, learning, and growth. In this way, constructive criticism plays a vital role in continuous improvement and capacity-building within organisations and educational institutions.
In contrast, harassment lacks this developmental intent. It often manifests as repeated or severe behaviour that is offensive, belittling, or coercive. Harassment may be verbal, non-verbal, physical, or psychological, and it frequently involves an abuse of power or authority.
Unlike constructive criticism, which seeks to uplift and support, harassment serves to intimidate, isolate, or control. The consequences of harassment can be severe, including emotional distress, decreased productivity, and long-term damage to an individual’s mental health and professional reputation.
Employers must:
Failure to comply can result in liability under Section 60 of the Employment Equity Act, which holds employers accountable for failing to act on known harassment.
For employers and managers:
For employees:
Both constructive criticism and harassment involve evaluative communication, they are distinguished by their intent, tone, and consequences.
Constructive criticism is a valuable tool for development and learning, whereas harassment constitutes a violation of personal dignity and professional ethics. Understanding this distinction is essential for fostering respectful, inclusive, and high-performing environments.
From a legal and policy perspective, South African labour frameworks draw a clear line between acceptable feedback and unlawful conduct.
The law is clear: feedback must be fair, respectful, and constructive.
The Code is not just a guideline; it’s a legal tool to ensure dignity and equality in the workplace. Constructive criticism builds people up; harassment tears them down. Knowing the difference is not just smart, it’s essential.
