In this interview hosted by Boaz Fischer for the Australian Institute of Insider Trade (GITIM), Peter Natterer explores how betrayal manifests through language in organizations. They define betrayal as the deliberate creation of conditions that harm the environment, and distinguish it from the "language of betrayal," which is the subtle, low‑visibility verbal and tonal cues used to manipulate or alienate others. The conversation maps specific linguistic patterns—such as secretive phrasing, "between you and me," "don't take this the wrong way," and "let's keep this amongst ourselves"—to underlying dynamics like gossip, cliques, and passive‑aggressive control. Natterer highlights behavioral indicators, noting that shifts from an employee’s baseline personality (e.g., sudden quietness, secretive group talk) signal emerging betrayal. They discuss how venting can be both a release and a warning sign, while passive‑aggressive behavior and gossip amplify fear‑based silos. Leadership faces the challenge of differentiating normal frustration from toxic betrayal, especially when such patterns become contagious across the organization. A toxic culture emboldens betrayal language, creating a contagion that spreads from top‑down. To counteract this, organizations need self‑analysis, clarity of purpose and language, and cross‑functional cohesion that breaks down siloed mindsets. Practical steps include fostering trust through micro‑level actions, transparent data sharing, shared consequences, and modeling the desired communication style. Monitoring the language of betrayal must balance safety with privacy, using inclusive communication and empathy. The key takeaway is that language is a powerful builder and destructor; mindful, empathetic, and inclusive communication can prevent betrayal from taking root.
Chapters
Hello and welcome to the Australian Institute of Insider Trade. My name is Boaz Fischer.
And I'm Peter Natterer.
Welcome. Today we are diving into a topic that's often overlooked but really critical. The language of betrayal in the workplace. Betrayal isn't about dramatic acts. It's often subtle in words, tone, and behaviors that signal deeper frustration and disengagement. So in this interview, as part of GITIM, we'll unpack what it looks like, how it manifests in communications, and why understanding the cues is essential for fostering a culture of trust and accountability.
Yes.
So let's go and get stuck into it.
Let's do it.
What do we mean by betrayal? And the second part of it, what difference is it between betrayal and the language of betrayal?
Absolutely. Betrayal is the deliberate setting up of circumstances so that you can take advantage of the environment to the ultimate detriment of the environment.
Yep.
Absolutely. The language of betrayal is often more an internal thing because obviously if you are walking into an organization that you do want to betray, you take the least, you attract the least possible attention to yourself.
Yes. Okay. So how does it manifest in an organization?
Yes. Yeah. So we're talking specifically about language and how language can be used in terms of betrayal inside of the organization. So that's a very interesting point. Oftentimes, the betrayal is essentially a deliberate weaponization or misuse of trust or access or vulnerability.
Yep.
And literally, there's somebody taking the ability to turn somebody that is in their influence against other parts of the organization or the organization itself and recruit them into a worldview that this particular person is trying to bring about. Okay.
So what are the— let's talk about tones or patterns or phrases that might indicate that employees are being or feeling that they are being betrayed.
Yes. So one of the interesting things is that the language of betrayal and the language of gossip are very close neighbors.
Correct.
One can lead into the other and it's an engagement. It's a process whereby you engage people to bring them into a worldview. It's almost a process of mentoring them into the The clique, if you like. And look, things like overt things like, you know, between you and me, that would be for me a red flag. Or the other one that's really interesting is, don't take this the wrong way. So I'm about to, that says I'm about to tell you something that you're not going to like to hear.
Yes, correct.
But if you follow me and if you take my advice, you'll be part of the clan, you'll be part of the group. The other one is also, let's just keep this amongst ourselves. So all of a sudden what you're finding is you're creating like a little cell.
Yeah, I was just gonna say like a bubble. Yeah, absolutely. Let's talk about communication styles because every, you know, different people have different communication styles. How would you know that the communication is basically signals that that person is frustrated because they're being betrayed or the language betrayal is frustrating them?
So with most people, you find that they have what's, I guess, what you could call a baseline personality. And if over time and in the presence of certain people, that baseline personality changes, they either become overly overly gregarious or they become introverted or their behavior changes away from who they normally are, that would be a really big indicator. A lot of times, most of the times, if people are being engaged into something, they become very, very, very quiet and very secretive and only talk within their own clan.
So what What role does, and I'll go back again to gossip, venting, passive-aggressive behavior could either amplify or signal that things are not working?
So venting can be both positive and negative. There are times when venting is positive and you just move along, but you've got to see it in the greater context. Passive-aggressive is definitely a control form and it creates that fear. And one of the things that you find is that a lot of these systems work on a fear base. First of all, you get engaged into the group, which then creates a group value. But you're always going to have that fear of being on the outside of the group. So there is that as well too. Gossip is a really interesting way to engage people emotionally, but it is a very slippery slope. It'll lead into— it'll lead into this clannishness, which is where a lot of this manipulation starts to happen. When we talk about the language of betrayal, the betrayal is actually of the person that's being manipulated more than anything else. There's usually somebody who is the king, the top dog, and then around them, their power base is accumulated with people that they keep under control.
Yeah. How do then leaders distinguish between what is deemed as normal workplace, maybe frustration or disengagement to something that's been more toxic?
So a lot of this, a lot of this is contagious inside of a workplace. So if you find that there is one group that's an isolated incidence, then it's much more easy to spot because it becomes the outlier, it becomes the highlight point. However, if you now have that in the context of a larger organization where that's just the norm, it doesn't speak, it's not seen to be anything other than normal. So it really needs to be looked at. There is almost like a contagion that happens from the top down. And I keep talking about the leadership. If the leadership tolerates it, it'll proliferate.
Yeah. So it sort of leads me to the next question, which is Imagine an organization which is a toxic environment. How much does that amplify the language of betrayal?
It emboldens it. It emboldens it. This will, it's like any recruitment process. You start off by creating a generalized environment. And then you, what's the best way to describe it? You amp up the heat. And at one point in time, you'll have somebody completely engaged or that person will then exit stage left.
Yeah. What can organizations do about it?
Be aware of it. And there's almost a self-analysis that has to happen. for an organization to say, how are we dealing? How are we as an organization? How do we— how is our structure working internally? Do we have groups of heroes that have their acolytes?
Yeah.
Or do we have everybody's working on the same goal and everybody's, what do you call it, working on the same piece of string? These are the kinds of And it's really hard to do actually, because if somebody is in an organization and they've grown up through the organization, that's the way the organization is. It sometimes takes a person from the outside to say, hey, did you know that this was happening? It's a very, and can be a very painful analysis as well too. But it's something that will just bring people head and shoulders into productivity that you have no idea.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. What are the downsides or what are the risks if, organizations sort of dismiss it
or
bury it?
You'll find that each group will start to hoard the information. They won't share it. It's like, no, you're not part of my group, so I won't share you with that information, which is a problem in itself. You need to have information flow across the organization. The other thing is that you find there's a lot of fear-based silence going on inside of the groups.
Yep.
And people will be afraid to stick up their hand and say, we have a problem here, or if we continue down this path, that will happen. It's much easier to just be stum
and
say nothing.
And that's gonna be one of my following up questions. But first up, I want to talk about how different teams within an organization like human resource, security, risk, and various other teams can actually engender the practice of language so people don't feel betrayed.
Clarity. It has to do with clarity and clarity of purpose as well as clarity of language.
And I suppose what I was trying to emphasize here, it's a lot of organizations are very much siloed. into various bits. You've got your IT team or your cybersecurity team, you've got your legal, your finance, and human resource.
Yes.
But I suppose the question what I'm trying to raise is more about how can the cohesion of all parties work to address the language of betrayal before it starts to escalate?
Yes, absolutely. And you'll find that those silos will create that That isolationism there by itself because, look, you know, we're the IT people, without us you wouldn't be able to function. And the HR people are saying, well, without us you wouldn't
get paid.
So what needs to happen is that a perception or an understanding of how the organization hangs together as a whole is something that needs to be brought out into the sunlight, I guess, more than anything else.
Yes, and importantly for them to work together and saying, this is what is deemed as acceptable or not.
Exactly.
Which then leads me to the next question is how do we create a culture of safety so that people can openly express their dissatisfaction or frustrations and so forth?
Yeah, it's an environment of trust which needs to be earned by the organization. There are some organizations that have a really great culture of trust already in them. So that's That's a huge bonus for them. Assuming that we're starting off on a toxic basis, you really have to build that trust and it has to be done micro by micro, little bit by little bit. Focus on the team, not on the individual. Have all of your data open or your activities visible. Consequences are shared, not individualized. So you don't say Joe did it.
Yeah. So what are the sort of steps that organizations can take to monitor the language of betrayal while at the same time ensuring people's safety but also their privacy? Because a lot of it tends to be quite personal. Yes. And then engender a positive working environment.
Model what it is that you want.
Yes, that's a good response.
You, you, what I said before that, you know, this sort of thing, it's a, It's a contagion, but a contagion can also work in the right direction. So if you model what it is that you want and you treat everybody in that environment in the way that you would like that to happen, all of a sudden those single points of control, those single points of toxicity or betrayal become highlighted because everybody says, well, I'm gonna work at— I'm gonna work in HR. Yes,
correct, correct.
'Cause they've got it going.
Correct, yeah, yeah, that's true. So bringing this all together, what is the key takeaway when we're talking about language of betrayal?
So language is one of the most powerful builders and the most powerful destructors in any system. Language is about creating an empowerment in the people that are receiving it and the ability to show them that, hey, you're valued. You are allowed to say what your opinion is, especially in your area of expertise and create the trust based out of that. So we don't create closed loops by huddling together and saying, well, we're going to do this, but everybody else can stay on the side. Create an inclusive communication.
Yeah. All right. Any last words?
Yeah, be very mindful that your words have an impact. And again, it gets back to something we've been talking about before is about empathy.
Correct.
Be very empathetic to the way that your words land because sometimes it can be unexpected.
Great. Thanks, Peter. Much appreciated. Thanks, Boaz. Thank you for watching and stay tuned for the next video. Thank you.
