Search results

A number of theoretical frameworks exist to explain perpetrators’ motivation for workplace aggression. Most of them consider these behaviors as retaliatory actions from individuals who experience triggering events in their workplaces. The current chapter describes a model that focuses on the motivations underlying proactive workplace aggression, and identifies situations where perpetrators consider their aggressive behaviors as morally justifiable. In particular, we argue that depending on the targets’ in- versus out-group membership and higher- versus lower-status in the hierarchy, aggressive behaviors may be viewed as acceptable to achieve perpetrators’ goals of forcing compliance or managing identity. The model extends the current literature by considering non-retaliatory workplace aggression, and by identifying potential avenues for future research and intervention to reduce proactive workplace aggression.

This paper aims to investigate the socio-psychological systems in organizations that structurally support workplace aggression.

Using both a structural and contextual model of intimate partner violence (IPV), the factors supporting workplace aggression were analyzed. The narratives were provided from the participants’ lived experiences of workplace aggression, producing clear indications of where formal and informal power reside.

The methods of power and control used by workplace perpetrators parallel those illustrated in IPV. The inaction of management and the lack of social support enabled informal power asymmetries and the organizational norm of silence. The findings have implications for how workplaces view and intervene in relationship-based violence.

Workplace aggression has been studied from a conflict management perspective, without exploring the components that enable and support organizational abuse. As a result, organizational responses to workplace aggression have failed to address the complex relationship-based components and consequences. The primary contribution of this study is the disruption of the conflict-based perspective of workplace aggression into a more appropriate framework of violence, power and control.

This study aims to investigate the crossover of workplace aggression experienced by members of dual‐earner couples on alcohol intake of the partner

Cross‐sectional community data come from the 1998 Quebec Health and Social Survey containing a sub‐sample of 5,778 individuals nested in 2,889 dual‐earner couples. Data on alcohol intake, workplace aggression (physical, psychological, sexual), decision authority, working hours, irregular work schedule, marital strains, gender and age are gathered from self‐report questionnaires. Each member of the couple will answer the questionnaire.

The results show that being the target of workplace aggression is associated with low‐risk (OR=1.27, 95%CI=1.10‐1.46) and high‐risk drinking (OR=1.78, 95%CI=1.44‐2.20). Indicative of a crossover effect, partner workplace aggression victimization (OR=1.30, 95%CI=1.05‐1.62) is associated with high‐risk drinking

Victims of workplace aggression and their immediate relatives might be supported to avoid adverse alcohol‐related problems. Organizations need to pay more attention to the problem of workplace aggression in their occupational health and safety programs

Using multilevel multinomial regression models, this study highlights the complexities of work‐family dynamics and of the crossover effect of workplace aggression into the lives and alcohol intake behavior of dual‐earner partners.

We review past research on the relationship between attributional perceptions, emotions, and workplace aggression and develop a conceptual model that extends this research in two ways. First, we consider the influence of controllability attributions on the type (otherdirected, self-directed, hostile, non-hostile) and likelihood of aggressive responses to negative workplace outcomes and situations. Second, we consider the extent to which discrete negative emotions might mediate these attribution-aggression relationships. Implications for anticipating and preventing workplace aggression based on this conceptual model are discussed.

By applying displaced aggression and conservation of resource theory, this paper aims to investigate the effect of supervisors’ workplace stress over subordinates' unethical behavior through displaced aggression as an underlying mechanism. Moreover, it tests the moderating effect of despotic leadership between supervisors’ workplace stress and displaced aggression.

The data consists of three hierarchy levels: despotic leadership (top manager), supervisor’s (immediate supervisor/middle manager) workplace stress and displaced aggression and subordinates’ unethical behavior. The data was collected from 80 managers about their workplace stress and displaced aggression besides perceived unethical behavior of their 240 subordinates.

The data analysis of 80 bank managers of Pakistan about their perception of top managers’ despotic behavior and unethical behavior of their 240 subordinates shows the support for all hypothesized relationships. Supervisors’ workplace stress positively affected their displaced aggression over their subordinates, which motivated subordinates to engage in unethical behavior. Moreover, the findings supported the moderating effect of despotic leadership in the relationship between supervisors’ workplace stress and displaced aggression.

This study contributes to the limited studies on the trickledown displaced aggression phenomenon in the service (banking) sector. Moreover, the manager’s despotic leadership role as a higher-level negative supervisory behavior in increasing the supervisors’ displaced aggression shows the critical aspect in such a stressful workplace situation.

This chapter examines aggression at work perpetrated by individual insiders by bringing together streams of research that have often been examined separately. A comparison of the similarities and differences of aggression toward individuals, such as verbal abuse or physical attack, and aggression toward organizations, such as embezzlement or work slowdowns, is shown to provide important insights about the causes and consequences of workplace aggression. We propose a comprehensive model based on the integration of prior theoretical treatments and empirical findings. The model attempts to offer a framework to systematically examine psychological and organizational mechanisms underlying workplace aggression, and to explain the reasons why workplace violence policies and procedures sometimes fail. A set of research propositions is also suggested to assist in achieving this end in future research.

This study examines the impact of interpersonal conflict on workplace aggression. Moreover, the moderating role in the association between interpersonal conflict and workplace aggression has been examined.

The research is grounded on the cognitive appraisal theory, which posits that interpersonal conflict contributes to aggression in the workplace. A sample of n = 250 employees from the steel industry in India was selected in two waves. The authors utilized Hayes' PROCESS macro v4.1 for path analysis.

The research reveals that interpersonal conflict is positively and significantly related to workplace aggression. Moreover, organizational climate is negatively associated with workplace aggression. The moderation analysis has revealed that organizational climate negatively moderates the relationship between interpersonal conflict and workplace aggression.

This study suggests that recognizing the significance of the organizational climate, companies can proactively curtail the progression of disputes into hostile behaviors. Nurturing a positive workplace climate becomes paramount, as it acts as a buffer against conflict escalation. Educating both staff and managers about the diverse forms of aggression and implementing appropriate protocols to address such behaviors are crucial steps toward fostering a positive climate.

This study provides new insights into the existing literature on workplace aggression, interpersonal conflict and organizational climate for future research.

This study divulges the new concept of employees' withdrawal behavior during the global pandemic (COVID-19). The study's purpose is to draw new insights into workplace stressors and employee withdrawal behavior. The study also considers the mediating role of aggression and the moderating role of COVID-19 worry and cyberloafing.

The study's statistical population consists of 384 frontline hotel employees from Pakistan's hospitality industry. Statistical analysis SPSS and AMOS were utilized to conduct Pearson's correlation and multilevel regression analysis. A Hayes process technique has been used for moderation and mediation analysis.

The results demonstrated that COVID-19 has a psychological effect on the employee's mental health and higher turnover intention during the current pandemic. Workplace stressor is significantly related to aggression and employee withdrawal behavior. Aggression mediates the relationship between workplace stressors and withdrawal behavior. The study results show that COVID-19 worry moderates between workplace stressors and aggression – notably, cyberloafing moderate aggression and withdrawal behavior.

The government and hospitality organizations need to implement crisis management strategies in response to COVID-19. This research can help management in coping with employees' mental and psychological challenges. Employees' mental health has been affected during the current global health crises. Firms should encourage their employees psychologically while going for downsizing.

This study enhances the existing literature on the COVID-19 crisis in Pakistan's hospitality industry. This study contributes to new understandings of employees' withdrawal behavior in the hospitality industry. The research shows how COVID-19 affects employees' turnover, mental health and job performance in the hospitality industry. Employees are facing mental and physiological challenges during COVID-19. The study fills a considerable gap in the hospitality industry by exploring the role organization's crisis management during a global pandemic.

Although researchers have suggested that aggression is multiply determined, most studies examine only a small set of predictors, focusing on either situational or individual or reciprocal motives. Research has not studied extensively the relative strength of multiple antecedent sets. Using questionnaire data (n = 366), the current study examines eleven antecedents of employees engaging in aggression: situational antecedents (i.e., procedural, distributive, and interpersonal justice; organizational, work group, and job related stress), individual difference antecedents (i.e., Type A behavior, trait anger, reactions to anger), and reciprocal effects (i.e., being the target of aggression). Individual difference antecedents and being the target of aggression influence the frequency with which employees report engaging in aggression. Situational antecedents are not significant predictors once other antecedents are taken into account.

The purpose of this paper is to examine how job engagement affects the experience of workplace aggression and the related outcomes. Job engagement is introduced as a context variable for the stressor-strain model to explain differences for targets of workplace aggression.

A survey was conducted with a sample of 492 North American working adults from a large variety of industries and jobs.

Consistent with the hypotheses, fear and anger mediate the relationship between workplace aggression and strain. Job engagement moderated the relationship between workplace aggression and anger, such that aggression related to anger only for those employees who were engaged in their job. These data are consistent with the suggestion that engagement may create vulnerability for employees.

In this study, the authors highlight the need to include contextual factors that may explain differences in impact of workplace aggression and employee wellness.

While practitioners may seek to increase job engagement, there appears to be a greater cost should there be workplace aggression. Thus, the key implication for practitioners is the importance of prevention of workplace aggression.

With this study, the authors illustrate how job engagement may have a “dark side” for individuals. While previous research has shown that job engagement helps protect employee wellness, others show engagement decreases after incidents of workplace aggression. The authors suggest those who are engaged and targeted will experience worse outcomes. Also, the authors examine the role of anger for targets of workplace aggression as it relates to fear and strain in this study.