Humour, power, and harm in workplace culture

Humour is woven into everyday working life. It helps people bond, cope with stress, and feel part of something bigger than their job description. But humour also has a target — someone or something we’re invited to laugh at. Sometimes that target is harmless, like shared frustrations or the quirks of office life. Other times, the target is a person or a group.

This raises a cultural question: When does humour help a workplace feel connected, and when does it quietly undermine it?

Punching down as a cultural signal

In workplaces, people often talk about “punching down.” The idea is that humour becomes uncomfortable when it mocks someone who has less influence, confidence, or belonging than the person making the joke.

This shows up in subtle, everyday ways:

joking about someone who’s new or still finding their feet
teasing someone who’s different from the dominant group
making light of roles that are undervalued or less visible
using humour to avoid saying something directly

These moments aren’t always malicious. But they shape the emotional climate of a team. They tell people who is “in,” who is “other,” and who gets to set the tone.

Why power still matters (Even when no one mentions it)

Philosophers like Hegel, Nietzsche, and Foucault have long argued that power sits inside ordinary interactions. You don’t need to read them to recognise this at work.

Power shows up when:

some people feel safe joking freely and others don’t
someone laughs along because they don’t want to stand out
humour becomes a way to avoid discomfort or maintain the status quo

Foucault would say humour is part of the “cultural machinery” that shapes what’s normal. In workplaces, this machinery is subtle: who gets teased, who gets protected, who gets listened to, and who gets dismissed with a laugh.

Humour becomes a cultural signal, a way of reinforcing who belongs and who doesn’t.

But culture isn’t only about power

There’s another way to think about humour: harm.

John Stuart Mill argued that actions become questionable when they cause harm - emotional, psychological, or relational. Modern psychology extends this to dignitary harm: injury to someone’s sense of worth or belonging.

Through this lens:

A joke is fine if it doesn’t harm anyone.
A joke becomes problematic when it does.
Intent matters less than the experience of the person on the receiving end.

This is useful because harm doesn’t always follow power lines neatly:

A “punching down” joke might land harmlessly in a close-knit group.
A “punching up” joke might genuinely wound someone who already feels exposed or under pressure.

Culture is messy. People are complex. Context matters.

Three ways to think about humour in workplace culture

1. Power-based view

Humour is shaped by:

who has influence
who feels safe
who is marginalised

Punching down is problematic because it reinforces cultural hierarchies.

2. Harm-based view

Humour is shaped by:

impact
emotional or relational harm
effects on trust and belonging

A joke is questionable if it damages connection.

3. Expressive view

Humour is simply part of being human, imperfect, spontaneous, and sometimes clumsy. Under this view, humour isn’t inherently moral or immoral; it’s the context that matters.

So what does this mean for workplace culture?

Humour can:

build connection
create shared identity
help people cope with stress

But it can also:

exclude
silence
reinforce subtle hierarchies
erode psychological safety

The question isn’t “Is this joke allowed?” It’s “What does this joke do to the culture we’re part of?”

Workplace culture is shaped less by big decisions and more by everyday interactions. Small moments that tell people whether they belong, whether they’re respected, and whether they’re safe to be themselves.

Humour is one of those moments.