Search results

Researchers have conducted numerous studies on workplace bullying (Björkqvist, Österman, & Hjelt-Bäck, 1994; Branch, Ramsay, & Barker, 2013; Cowan, 2012; Duffy & Sperry, 2007; Fritz, 2014; Harvey, et al., 2006; Liefooghe, 2010; Matthiesen & Einarsen, 2007; Yamada, 2000; Zabrodska & Kveton, 2013). Other studies specifically examined the corporate sector, European trends, and the impact on health and wellness for staff facing workplace bullying (Constanti & Gibbs, 2004; Djurkovic, McCormack, & Casimir, 2008; Query & Hanely, 2010; Thomas, 2005); yet, few studies considered the impact of workplace bullying on American higher education. More specifically, no empirical studies considered the impact of workplace bullying in America’s community colleges. Consequently, Hollis has replicated her study of four-year colleges and universities (2015) and applied the procedures to the community college setting. Consistent with the findings from respondents at four-year colleges and universities (n = 401), this data set revealed that community college respondents (n = 200) proportionally face workplace bullying as well. Sixty-two percent of respondents of four-year colleges and universities reported being affected by workplace bullying, while 64% of community colleges participants reported being affected by workplace bullying. Arguably, the impact on the community college and the first-generation students who pursue a community college education might be more severe as community colleges have fewer resources than four-year colleges and universities to spend on employee disengagement.

The purpose of this qualitative, multiple-case study paper is to determine whether Irish universities have policies and procedures to address workplace bullying; to determine the views of HR leaders regarding the efficacy of such policies; to explore the experience of HR leaders in the application of such policies; and, to explore which cost-reduction strategies Irish university HR leaders utilized to manage the consequences of workplace bullying.

The participants for this multiple-case study consisted of senior manager grade staff with expertise in the area of study from all seven Irish universities. One on one interviews were conducted with participants to gain an understanding of their experience of dealing with workplace bullying. The analysis of their bullying policies and procedures provided insights about their experiences in the application of policy.

The findings of this study may offer university leaders and a wider audience of managers an understanding of the effect that workplace bullying has on employees and on their organizations.

This study may inform university and business leaders on how to address the problem of workplace bullying effectively.

The findings from this study contribute to the discourse on workplace bullying and may help leaders to understand a phenomenon that costs their institutions a substantial amount in human capital leading to positive social change in their organizations.

This paper aims to outline the financial and human cost of bullying in the workplace. The authors investigate how bullying is perpetrated so that management controls to prevent bullying can be put in place, reducing financial and human costs, and the risks posed to organisations by bullying.

The authors' study uses an exploratory on‐line survey, designed from a practice perspective. The instigator is an Australian management consultancy working on managing organisational risk. The study is based on sense‐making research using open‐ended questions, delving into life experiences to recall potential bullying incidences in their work life. The authors then develop hypotheses from their review of the literature and compare these to the results of their survey.

Most of the authors' findings contradict both academic and practitioner notions of bullying. They find that bullying happens mostly between peers rather than being perpetrated by people in positions of power over weaker colleagues, extends into all levels of the organisation, is perpetrated as part of the normal day‐to‐day interactions between people, rather than in special circumstances, and is often perpetrated between peers in the presence of other peers. To explain this behaviour the authors introduce the concept of “tournaments” from agency theory and the personal characteristics of perpetrators and victims.

From a management control and accounting perspective, managers controlling and accounting for bullying can also be the perpetrators and their participation in organisational politics and competitive tournaments may well be preventing the recognition and control of bullying, counter to what is good for the organisation.

This paper's risk management approach to understanding bullying in the workplace is novel; it outlines implications from a management control and accounting perspective. It also uses the concept of “tournaments” to propose why Australian managers tend to want to “sweep the issue under the carpet” and how the authors' research methodology offers a way forward to raise awareness so bullying can become an important part of management control in organisations.

Introduces workplace bullying and examines the nature of actions associated with it as well as recent UK data on incidence. Develops a cost‐benefit argument for organizations to deal with the issue and comments that despite the overwhelming benefits, few organizations appear to have workplace bullying on their agenda. Highlights evidence that bullying is the single largest category identified in employment litigation connected to stress at work ‐ even though it may not be specifically named. Concludes that more knowledge is needed in this area and that it is an ideal focus for academics and practitioners to investigate jointly.

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.

Workplace bullying has received increasing attention from researchers since the early 2000s. While the cost of disengagement and the impact on people of color have been considered (Hollis, 2012), this conceptual essay is a secondary analysis of data collected in Chapter 1 to reflect on the position of the target. Reflecting on the primary sample of 200 community college respondents, this analysis uses descriptive statistics to answer the question, “what is the extent of community college women affected by workplace bullying?” After it was determined that 32.5% of the general sample, primarily women, avoided bullying, the researcher developed a second question “who is not bullied in community colleges?” This secondary analysis shows that race, gender, and position are factors that seemingly contribute to who avoids bullying. Considering theories regarding social dominance (Pratto, Sidanius, Stallworth, & Malle, 1994; Sidanius, 1993) and constrained choice (Broadbridge, 2010; Hakim, 2002), the data revealed that those who are not bullied tend to be white, women, in middle management, without tenure. Further, only 6% of the people of color reported they were unaffected by workplace bullying. These respondents of color all held positions without power in the community college structure.

Workplace bullying is an emerging topic for researchers considering the impact of abusive behavior on employees (Björkqvist, Österman, & Hjelt-Bäck, 1994; Branch, Ramsay, & Barker, 2007; Cowan, 2012; Duffy & Sperry, 2007; Fritz, 2014; Harvey, Heames, Richey, & Leonard, 2006; Liefooghe & Mackenzie, 2010; Matthiesen & Einarsen, 2007; Yamada, 2000; Zabrodska & Kveton, 2013). European trends, corporate cultures, and the target’s wellness have also been the focus of other studies on workplace bullying (Constanti & Gibbs, 2004; Djurkovic, McCormack, & Casimir, 2008; Query & Hanely, 2010; Thomas, 2005); yet as was stated in the initial chapter, few studies considered the impact of workplace bullying on American higher education. More specifically, no empirical studies considered the impact of workplace bullying in America’s community colleges or the people of color who work at community colleges. Consequently, Hollis has replicated her study of four-year colleges and universities (2015) and applied the procedures to the community college sector. This analysis specifically reflecting on people of color at community colleges utilizes the data set, which was the subject of analysis in Chapter 1. Within the community college sample, 26% were people of color. Further, 73% of the respondents of color reported being affected by workplace bullying. Therefore, this study may be of interest to diversity officers or any personnel interested in creating and maintaining a healthy work environment for all community college staff, regardless of color.

The purpose of this paper is to explore the intersection of competency and bullying behaviors, not yet reported in the literature.

The approach is an examination of the literature available on both topics, and development of a framework related to both.

The theory is that there is a strong mediating relationship between the victim’s self-perception of competency and outcomes (the victim’s reactions) to bullying behaviors. There are multiple impacts of bullying behaviors, but the authors believe this mediation action of competency might be crucial. There is little research on competency or expertise in terms of behaviors resulting from these self-assessments. Future research should seek to examine the link empirically, and there are implications about the competency levels of bullies themselves that might arise.

As this is a newly developed research stream, the authors plan to continue with work on the topic.

By developing competency, individuals may develop some protection or coping mechanisms when confronted by bullying behaviors. Managers need to be aware of the need to allow employee development to reduce the incidence of such behaviors.

Bullying behaviors have become rampant in society. In trying to determine where the problem might be best addressed, the authors feel that they have made a significant impact to allow managers to address competency among those victimized by these behaviors. This should have a flow-on effect for organizational and societal culture.

This is an intersection that has not been explored but holds significant explanatory power in the area. These bullying behaviors are on the rise; therefore, it is an exceptional opportunity to present new ideas in a forum that is well read by both academics and practitioners.

This paper aims to explore the phenomenon of workplace bullying – its nature, antecedents, direct and indirect effects – from victim’s perspective.

The study adopted grounded theory approach and centered on the participants experiences and interpretations of bullying. A total of 23 self-reported victims formed the sample of our study. Data from interviews were analyzed using the coding procedure of grounded theory methodology. To enhance validity of results, in addition to interviews, creative drawings were used for triangulation.

The study reveals some similarities and culturally relevant variation in the sources and outcomes of bullying. The role of culture on bullying is visible. The study also adds to the limited literature on underlying and intervening factors in bullying–outcome relationship.

The study examined bullying from the victim’s perspective. Perpetrator and bystander’s perspectives would have added interesting insights into the findings.

Effective identification of, prevention of and intervention in workplace bullying are imperative for individuals and organizations. Rich descriptions from victims on enablers of bullying and how these events have affected their everyday experiences may also boost practitioners’ and policymakers’ willingness to rectify the potential issues leading to bullying in organizations.

The present study contributes to the workplace bullying research in general and Indian context in particular by examining contextually relevant antecedents, consequences as well as underlying and intervening factors.

The impact of bullying and undermining behaviours on the National Health Service on costs, patient safety and retention of staff was well understood even before the Illing report, published in 2013, that reviewed the efficacy of training interventions designed to reduce bullying and harassment in the outputs. The purpose of this paper is to provide an example of a good programme well evaluated.

The methodology follows a broad realist approach, by specifying the underlying programme assumptions and intention of the designers. Three months after the event, Q-sort methodology was employed to group participants into one of three contexts – mechanism – output groups. Interviews were then undertaken with members of two of these groups, to evaluate how the programme had influenced each.

Q-sort identified a typology of three beneficiaries from the Stopit! workshops, characterised as professionals, colleagues and victims. Each group had acted upon different parts of the programme, depending chiefly upon their current and past experiences of bullying in hospitals.

The paper demonstrates the effectiveness of using Q-sort method to identify relevant CMOs in a realist evaluation framework.

The paper considers the effectiveness of the programme to reduce bullying, rather than teach victims to cope, and how it may be strengthened based upon the research findings and Illing recommendations.

Workplace bullying is invariably implicated in scandals concerning poor hospital practice, poor patient outcomes and staff illness. All too frequently, the sector responds by offering training in resilience, which though helpful, places the onus on the victim to cope rather than the employer to reduce or eliminate the practice. This paper documents and evaluates an attempt to change workplace practices to directly address bullying and undermining.

The paper describes a new programme broadly consistent with Illing report endorsements. Second, it illustrates a novel evaluation method that highlights rigorously the contexts, mechanisms and outcomes at the pilot stage of an intervention identifies contexts and mechanisms via factor analysis using Q-sort methodology.