Search results

This research examined some personal characteristics of victims of bullying in residential care for youth. The paper aims to discuss these issues.

A total of 601 young people aged 11-21 from 22 residential facilities in Croatia completed an anonymous self-reported bullying questionnaire, the Big Five Personality Inventory, the Basic Empathy Scale and the Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale.

The results demonstrated that male and female victims lacked self-esteem, presented with neurotic personality traits and were likely to believe that bullying was just part of life in residential care. Female victims also presented with lower levels of agreeableness and conscientiousness, while male victims were young and had a history of victimisation during their previous placement, in school and at the beginning of their current placements.

Victims in care might benefit from programmes addressing their low self-esteem, high neuroticism and attitudes approving of bullying. Male residential groups should not accommodate young boys together with older boys. New residents who have a history of victimisation during their previous placement and in school should be supervised more intensively but in a manner that does not increase their perception of being victimised.

The present study is the first work that examines individual characteristics of bullying victims in care institutions for young people. As such, the study offers some insights on how to protect residential care bullying victims.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the direct and buffering effects of three workplace contextual factors – constructive leadership, perceived organizational support, and organizational anti‐bullying initiatives – on bullying and its relationships with relevant criteria. Further, the paper aims to investigate the effectiveness of organizational initiatives against bullying as perceived by targets and non‐targets.

Data were collected from 727 employees in nine New Zealand healthcare organizations. Of these, 133 employees were classified as bullied, as they had experienced at least two negative acts per week over the last six months.

Correlations revealed negative relationships between the three contextual work factors and bullying. Moderated regression showed that perceived organizational support buffered the relationship of bullying with self‐rated job performance, and that organizational initiatives against bullying buffered the relationship of bullying with both wellbeing and organizational commitment. Targets consistently gave lower ratings than non‐targets of the effectiveness of organizational initiatives to address bullying.

There is scant research on workplace factors that may reduce bullying and buffer its negative effects. This paper makes an original contribution in providing evidence of the importance of three contextual factors, and of buffering effects for perceived organizational support and organizational initiatives against bullying.

Bullying affects at least one-third of the workers through either direct exposure or witnessing, both of which lead to compromised health, and as a result, reduced organizational effectiveness or productivity. However, there is very little evidence that organisations provide effective protection from bullying, and in fact, the converse appears to the case. The purpose of this paper to explore the role of both individual and organisational power in the creation and maintenance of the problem. Such an approach moves away from the specific practice of identifying “bullying” that typically engages targets and perpetrators in a dance that is really just around the edges (Sullivan, 2008) of a larger problem; a culture that permits the abuse of power and ill-treatment of workers, in both practices and through organisational politics.

This paper elucidates key problems with organisational response as identified in the literature and critically examines weak organisational response to workplace bullying using the power theory, arguing that while overt approaches to addressing bullying appear to be underpinned by a simplistic, functionalist understanding of power, practices on the ground are better explained by more sophisticated “second-dimension” theorists.

There is a need for organisations to move beyond the current individualistic understanding of bullying towards a more nuanced understanding of how anti-bullying policies and procedures are themselves an exercise in institutional power protecting and reinforcing dominant power structures.

The literature from which this paper is drawn is limited to studies published in English.

The authors advocate a realistic assessment of the role of both individual and organisational power in the creation and maintenance of workplace bullying, as a way forward to plan appropriate intervention.

Workplace bullying is problematic for organisations at several levels, and therefore for society.

That power is relevant to workplace bullying has been apparent since the work of Brodsky in 1976 and Einarsen's early work, this paper builds on a the more nuanced work of McKay (2014), D'Cruz and Noronha (2009), Liefooghe and MacDavey's (2010) and Hutchinson et al. (2010), exploring the organisational response to the raising of bullying issues by individual employees as an exercise of power.

The purpose of this study was to explore the relationship between higher educational institution bullying policies and the subsequent cultural impact to determine the effectiveness of policy in ameliorating bullying within the university culture.

This study consisted of two separate but related case studies at two universities in different countries, focussing on university staff. The field work gathered data about existing anti-bullying policy, the extent to which it was part of the organisational culture for staff, and the levels of staff bullying experienced or seen within the organisation. Both qualitative and quantitative data were collected.

The study found that despite one university having significant policy and the other having very little policy, the knowledge of policy in both universities was and subsequent experience of bullying for staff were very similar.

The findings indicate that anti-bullying policy alone appears to have a limited impact on organisational behaviour. This suggests that the entrenched and historical master/servant relations of academia enable such practices to continue. Policy implementation is insufficient and training and development to generate more inclusive, people-focussed management cultures is necessary to ameliorate bullying behaviour.

The paper draws on the experiences, critique and suggestions of the study participants to prepare a possible agenda for cultural change that human resource (HR) managers could develop in association with academic and professional managers within their institution.

The findings suggest that in any social setting or organisational structure where strong historical patterns of master/servant endure, the opportunity for bullying behaviours to grow and flourish is fertile and that policy statements alone may have little impact on curtailing such behaviour.

This study makes two contributions to existing knowledge. First, it provides evidence that anti-bullying policy is alone unlikely to have an effective impact on instances of bullying within the culture. Second, the case study contrast displays that unacceptable levels of bullying exist in two very different institutions in two very different cultures. Whilst one country has a war-torn history and the other exists in splendid isolation, the same patterns persist, indicating that universities have structured cultural issues that are difficult to change.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the perspectives of human resource professionals (HRPs) and employee representatives (ERs) on the role of HRPs in managing workplace bullying.

Individual interviews were conducted with 12 HRPs and five ERs from a wide range of industries. Interview questions were open-ended and sought to gain insight on the views of the individual interviewees.

The findings address the role of HRPs in bullying scenarios and in the prevention of bullying. Regarding the role of HRPs in bullying, the responses of the participants suggest confusion and ambiguity, with a variety of roles being described ranging from a support-based role through to a protector of management. The participants also noted the importance of the HRP task of policy development, while a distrust of HRPs in bullying scenarios was mentioned. Regarding the effective management and prevention of bullying, the findings demonstrate that HRPs are viewed as having a central role through their particular responsibilities of creating and nurturing a positive organisational culture, as well as through engaging employees in the development of anti-bullying policies.

HRPs believe that they can contribute significantly to reducing workplace bullying through organisational culture (including educating staff and as role models of behaviour) and by engaging staff in the design of anti-bullying policies.

This paper contributes to the literature on workplace bullying by examining within the Australian context the perspectives of HRPs and ERs on how HRPs can prevent and manage workplace bullying.

This paper aims to investigate employee reports of workplace bullying in which participants argue that poor management of bullying led to a range of health problems, both physical and mental.

A constructivist approach is adopted to develop an understanding of individual experiences of bullying. Qualitative research interviews are used as the method of data collection and focus is on individual participants as the unit of analysis. Data are analyzed using thematic analysis in which both deductive and inductive themes are developed.

Findings suggest that lack of or poor workplace bullying policies impacts are used negatively on employee health. Specifically, analysis of employee reports suggest that the inability to successfully report bullying, or have bullying complaints taken seriously leads to ongoing implications for the individual.

Future research needs to focus further on examining reasons why some organizations do not develop and implement anti‐bullying policies, as well as further investigate the characteristics of bullying cultures so that effective interventions can be developed and health issues associated with bullying minimized.

This paper contributes to workplace health practice by providing insight into the risks that poor bullying management can have on the health of employees. It is proposed that such consequences could lead to an increase in litigations in the event that employees demonstrate that organizations have not provided a duty of care. Finally, the paper argues that organizations that do not attempt to prevent bullying may inadvertently contribute to the long‐term development of organizational cultures that tolerate harassment and abuse.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the leadership practice of an 11-member district team of educators assembled to respond to one of the most comprehensive bullying laws in the nation – the Massachusetts Anti-Bullying Law of 2010. This three-year case study provides school leaders and legislators with an in-depth, fine-grained analysis of how leadership was practiced by a district team of de facto leaders charged with implementing mandatory legislative policy throughout a six-school, 5,000-student, K-12 public school district.

This three-year case study employed an analytical, distributed leadership framework to identify, categorize, and analyze key artifacts used by a team to design and implement system-wide the comprehensive requirements of legislation. Using Weft qualitative data analysis software and the open, axial, and selective coding guidelines of Strauss and Corbin, data from semi-structured interviews and document analysis revealed a number of hidden structural considerations exerting significant influence on the leadership practice of the team.

Findings from this study suggest that leadership is perhaps more fluid than previously theorized. Defining leadership as a force that moves between and among organizational stakeholders (as opposed to a person or position), this study identified a number of structural considerations exerting influence on the leadership practice of a team. Furthermore, this study suggests that foreknowledge of these structural considerations may help to foster organizational learning, to leverage preexisting social and intellectual capital, and to more successfully navigate the requirements of complex organizational change such as legislative mandates and standards-based reform.

Because of the chosen research approach, the research results may lack generalizability. Therefore, researchers are encouraged to replicate this study in other school districts or large organizations who are responding to state or federal legislation.

The paper includes implications for state and local educational leaders as they struggle with the increased demands of standards-based educational reform.

This study has implications for those seeking to understand how legislation is received and assimilated by schools as well as those seeking a greater understanding of formal and informal leadership.

This paper fulfills an identified need to study how leadership is practiced in response to standards-based state and federal legislation.

While many problems of behaviour that are manifested in the school have their origins elsewhere, the school can represent a key point of entry for professionals to develop preventive strategies. This article examines the influence of the school upon the prevention of offending by children and young people and explores the effective dynamics of anti‐bullying initiatives and ‘optimal social work’ in the school.

The purpose of this paper is to clarify how human resource professionals (HRPs) in the United States (US) understand their roles in bullying situations and how they perceive others (targeted employees and senior management) understand their roles. It is important to understand these role expectations as HRPs are integral actors in bullying situations and are often evaluated negatively by those in bullying situations.

Strauss & Corbin’s grounded theory approach was used to uncover HRPs role perceptions. Narrative and respondent in-depth interviews were conducted with HRPs and revealed an evolving HR role that clashed with perceived target and senior management role expectations.

This research has revealed a theoretical model of the progressive role HRPs play in bullying situations. The authors discovered HRPs play several important roles in bullying situations and they link these roles in a temporal and situational manner. They first play the role of first, a trust listener; second, an objective, neutral third-party investigator; third, a management advisor; and fourth, a mediator/trainer/coach. Throughout this role execution they also became an emotional laborer. This model was often in contention with the HRP’s perceptions of targets and senior management expectations in bullying situations.

This research revealed a more detailed, nuanced view of the roles HRPs play in bullying situations and called existing research on US HRPs and their roles in bullying situations into question. How HRPs view their roles and role expectations is revealing of why and how they deal with allegations of bullying the way they do. This research has practical value for HR, management, targets, and organizations in general.

This paper presents the findings of an investigation into a mental health promotion initiative in young offender institutions across England. The study involved a survey of staff attitudes towards mental health promotion, and surveyed practice run by these staff. Analysis of staff descriptions of mental health promotion revealed a degree of confusion and a lack of clarity over the definition of mental health and mental health promotion. The concept of a mental health promotion initiative which aimed to improve the well‐being of the general inmate and staff population was not a shared vision and not part of the core work of either health care staff or prison officers. It is recommended that any future campaigns on mental health or health promotion should have a central lead, with some flexibility to allow for the development of local initiatives, fostering local relationships and partnerships.