Workplace bullyingWorkplace bullying

1110 www.iirsm.org | 08/201608/2016 | www.iirsm.org

Whose responsibility is it anyway?

Findings suggest that those adopting passive, autocratic, authoritarian, laissez-faire styles are more likely to perpetrate or accept workplace bullying.”

Health and safety managers face many challenges. For some of these challenges, well established best practice and interventions are available. But for

issues such as bullying there is relatively little guidance out there, and health and safety practitioners must first spend considerable time collating and evaluating the information available – which can often be disjointed or inconsistent.

The term ‘workplace bullying’ refers to negative behaviours targeted at an employee. A wide range of behaviours may therefore constitute bullying – such as personal insults, withholding information, asking a person to complete low status work, allocating unfair workloads and social exclusion. There is no single definition of workplace bullying, but there is widespread agreement that behaviour must occur more than once in order to be classified as bullying. Researchers often describe the frequency and duration of the negative behaviours experienced. Demonstrating the complexity (and often disjointed nature) of the area, despite agreement that the behaviour must occur repeatedly, researchers differ with regard to the timeframe adopted, with studies measuring the number of acts experienced weekly, monthly, or during the entire career. Furthermore, many researchers and practitioners do not use the term ‘workplace bullying’ and instead refer to mobbing, aggression, emotional abuse, harassment or inappropriate behaviour. The lack of consistency has undermined our understanding – for example impeded comparisons between prevalence rates across sectors.

The behaviours which constitute workplace bullying are often subtle and confusing. For example, the perpetrator may roll their eyes or smirk when the victim speaks, fail to include them in discussions about an important project, or deny the

Bullying has long been seen as a human resources issue – but the same risk management techniques should be applied to workplace bullies that you would to any inanimate hazard. We consider the issues most pertinent to health and safety practitioners.

ReferencesBaillien, E., Neyens, I., & De Witte, H. (2008) Organisational, team-related and job-related risk factors for bullying, violence and sexual harassment in the workplace: a qualitative studyInternational Journal of Organizational Behavior

Brewer, G. (2015) Workplace bullying in healthcare professionsInternational Journal of Occupational Health and Public Health Nursing

Brewer, G., & Whiteside, E. (2012) Workplace bullying and stress within the prison serviceJournal of Aggression, Peace and Conflict

De Cuyper, N., Baillien, E., & De Witte, H. (2009) Job insecurity and workplace bullying among targets and perpetrators: moderation by employabilityWork and Stress

Glaso, L., & Matthiesen, S.B., Nielsen, M.B., & Einarsen, S. (2007) Do targets of workplace bullying portray a general victim personality profile? Scandinavian Journal of Psychology

Kivimaki, M., Elovainio, M., & Vahtera, J. (2000) Workplace bullying and sickness absence in hospital staffOccupational and Environmental Medicine

Kivimaki, M., Virtanen, M., Vartia, M., Elovainio, M., Vahtera, J., & Keltikangas-Jarvinen, L. (2003) Workplace bullying and the risk of cardiovascular disease and depressionOccupational & Environmental Medicine

Laschinger, H.K.S. (2012) Job and career satisfaction and turnover intentions of newly graduated nursesJournal of Nursing Management

Laschinger, H.K.S., Wong, C.A., & Grau, A.L. (2012)The influence of authentic leadership on newly graduated nurses’ experiences of workplace bullying, burnout and retention outcomes: a cross-sectional studyInternational Journal of Nursing Studies

Lewis, D., & Gunn, R. (2007) Workplace bullying in the public sector: understanding the racial dimension Public Administration

Nielsen, M.B. (2013) Bullying in work groups: the impact of leadershipScandinavian Journal of Psychology

Normandale, S., & Davies, J. (2002) Bullying at workCommunity Practitioner

Reknes, I., Pallesen, S., Mageroy, N., Moen, B.E., Bjorvatn, B., & Einarsen, S. (2014) Exposure to bullying behaviors as a predictor of mental health problems among Norwegian nurses: results from the prospective SUSSH-survey. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 51, 479-487.

Salin, D. (2001). Prevalence and forms of bullying among business professionals: A comparison of two different strategies for measuring bullying. European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology, 10, 425-441.

Skogstad, A., Einarsen, S., Torsheim, T., Aasland, M.S., & Hetland, H. (2007). The destructiveness of laissez-faire leadership behaviour. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 12, 80-92.

Skogstad, A., Matthiesen, S.B., & Einarsen, S. (2007). Organizational changes: A precursor of bullying at work? International Journal of Organization Theory and Behavior, 10, 58-94.

www.iirsm.org | 08/201608/2016 | www.iirsm.org 1312

Workplace bullyingWorkplace bullying

victim opportunities for professional development. It can therefore be difficult for both victims and other employees to identify that bullying is taking place. Indeed, when victimised employees describe their experiences, they are often perceived to be petty and their complaints are dismissed. This is particularly likely to occur if the victim describes a series of events (for example not receiving a promotion or being asked to complete low level work) which do not fully convey the duration, frequency, or intensity of the bullying experience, unless these are documented in a comprehensive and systematic manner. It is also important for the employee to demonstrate that the incident differs from that of other employees, for example their experience does not simply reflect the fact that there are no development opportunities available.

Reflecting the nature of workplace bullying, which often begins with subtle behaviours that the victim may believe are a consequence of their own poor performance, many victimised employees do not label themselves as a target of bullying. For example, in one study 24.1% of employees were classified as victims according to objective criteria, whereas only 8.8% identified themselves as a victim.

Protecting the vulnerableThose experiencing workplace bullying may suffer a range of physical and psychological consequences. These include anxiety and depression, sleep disorders, cardiovascular disease, chronic pain and post-traumatic stress disorder. Victims also often doubt their own competence, leading to low self-esteem and feelings of powerlessness. These feelings reduce the likelihood that the victim will challenge the perpetrator, retaliate, or inform the appropriate authority.

Research studies investigating the consequences of workplace bullying are often cross-sectional, with employees reporting their experiences of workplace bullying and physical health at one time only. While informative, this research cannot establish whether poor physical and mental health precedes or follows workplace bullying. Prospective studies suggest that while workplace bullying does lead to fatigue and anxiety, those suffering from anxiety and depression are more likely to be exposed to workplace bullying. These findings highlight the importance of protecting the most vulnerable employees.

Understandably, workplace bullying impacts on the manner in which the victimised employees perform. These workers typically report low levels of

job satisfaction, commitment to the organisation, poor productivity, and intentions to leave the organisation or sector. Consequently, workplace bullying is associated with absenteeism, presenteeism and staff turnover. It is therefore important for organisations that do not recognise their moral or legal obligation to address workplace bullying to acknowledge the financial implications of this. Indeed, damage to the organisation (such as low productivity and staff turnover) may be exacerbated by reputational damage which compromises the recruitment of new staff and costs associated with investigation, litigation, and compensation.

It is also important for health and safety practitioners to recognise that the impact of workplace bullying is not restricted to those directly victimised. Employees witnessing workplace bullying also display stress, poor physical and psychological health, low productivity and intentions to leave. The experiences of those witnessing workplace bullying (though not directly targeted) may reflect distress while observing these interactions, fear that they themselves may be victimised, or dissatisfaction with the response of the organisation. Interventions should therefore address the impact of workplace bullying beyond the initial victim.

Culture changeA range of organisational factors may contribute to the incidence of workplace bullying, including job insecurity, lack of resource and restructuring. Those considering substantial changes to the organisation should consider the manner in which these may influence the likelihood of workplace bullying. Employees based in large organisations, masculine professions or harsh environments (such as extreme temperatures) are most likely to experience workplace bullying and health and safety professionals should consider the existence of workplace bullying in their own sector – it’s particularly prevalent in the healthcare sector.

Employees are most commonly bullied by supervisors and least frequently bullied by a subordinate; it is therefore important to ensure that employees are able to raise concerns with those other than their immediate supervisor. Reflecting the greater perpetration by supervisors, researchers have investigated the relationship between workplace bullying and leadership styles. Findings suggest that those adopting passive, autocratic, authoritarian, laissez-faire styles are more likely to perpetrate or accept workplace bullying. Those adopting an authentic leadership style, characterised by honesty, integrity and consistency, or a transformational leadership style in which leaders become role models to encourage and inspire, employees are less likely to engage in workplace bullying. So it is important to support leaders and provide effective leadership training.

Researchers have sought to identify the employees most at risk from workplace bullying. Women, ethnic minorities, and those who are new to their profession are typically more likely to experience bullying. With regards to professional role, employees experiencing low levels of autonomy and stress are at greater risk of bullying. It is therefore important to ensure that all members of staff are aware of behaviour which is and isn’t accepted and this should be incorporated into induction training material.

Programmes intended to improve confidence and assertiveness may lower vulnerability or promote resilience. In comparison, relatively few studies have examined the individual factors associated with perpetration, though men and those in high stress positions or with low self-esteem are more likely to engage in this behaviour.

Managing conflictThe adoption of a formal policy represents one of the most common measures adopted to address workplace bullying. The absence of a workplace bullying policy may be interpreted as institutional acceptance of the behaviour. Policies should emphasise the organisational commitment to a bullying free environment, definitions of both appropriate and inappropriate behaviours, the responsibilities and roles of specific individuals, and a clear statement of consequences for those engaging in workplace bullying. It is important to involve staff from all levels and union representatives when developing and implementing the policy which should be communicated to employees and regularly monitored. The most effective policies should also support supervisors wishing to identify and respond to workplace bullying.

Employees should be provided with training on how to recognise and cope with bullying. Victims and witnesses should be encouraged to document all incidences of workplace bullying in order to establish the duration, frequency and intensity of the bullying. Supervisors should be provided with additional support related to effective leadership. Support should be provided to victims and witnesses. Organisations should also consider providing support to perpetrators of workplace bullying in order to fully resolve the conflict, ensure the pattern of behaviour is not repeated and identify whether perpetrators have also been victim to workplace bullying.

It is really important for those responsible for employee health and safety to consider the impact of workplace bullying. This behaviour has important consequences for the health and wellbeing of victims and those witnessing workplace bullying. Organisations should implement a suitable workplace bullying policy which clearly describes the consequences of this perpetration together with the behaviours which are or are not appropriate. But the introduction of a workplace bullying policy is not sufficient – additional training or interventions should also be adopted.

With thanks to IIRSM Technical Committee Member Dr Gayle Brewer SIIRSM, a Senior Lecturer in Psychology at the University of Central Lancashire, for providing this article.

29%34%

34%72%

36%

Nearly a third of people have been

bullied at work

Women are more likely to be

victims of bullying than men

The highest prevalence of

workplace bullying is among 40 to 59

year olds

In nearly three-quarters of cases the

bullying is carried out by a manager

More than one in three people who

report being bullied at work leave their

job because of it

The full picture

Source: Trades Union Congress