Workplace bullying:

1
Workplace bullying

• What we know and what we can do about it
• Dr Paul Naylor
• p.b.naylor_at_sheffield.ac.uk
• School of Health Related Research (ScHARR),
  University of Sheffield
• With grateful thanks to
• Dr Iain Coyne
• iain.coyne_at_nottingham.ac.uk
• Institute of Work, Health Organisations
  (I-WHO), University of Nottingham

2
Bullying - terms
Bullying UK, some other European countries,
Australia, New Zealand, increasingly the
US Mobbing Scandinavia Harassment US,
Canada Victimisation US, Canada
3
Workplace bullying is

• threatening professional status (e.g.,
  belittling, humiliation, accusation
• regarding lack of effort)
• threatening personal standing (e.g.,
  name-calling, insults, intimidation,
• ageism/sexism/racism)
• isolation (e.g., preventing access to
  opportunities, physical/social
• isolation, withholding information)

4
WP bullying is (continued)

• overwork (e.g., undue pressure, impossible
  deadlines, unnecessary
• disruption)
• destabilization (e.g., failure to give credit
  when due, meaningless tasks,
• removal of responsibility, repeated reminders
  of blunders, setting-up to fail)

5

• Media
• Verbally (face-to-face, phone)
• In writing
• hard-copy (e.g., memo)
• electronically cyber-bullying (e.g., e-mail,
  text message)

6
Bullying often summed-up as the persistent
abuse of power BUT can one-off events be
considered bullying? ALSO, what is the
distinction between strong management
bullying?
7
How common is traditional bullying?

• Surveys
• 53 of 1137 part-time students (Rayner, 1997)
• 38 of 1100 workers (Quine, 1999)
• 10.6 over past 6 months,
• 1.4 weekly/daily of 5288 workers (Hoel et al,
  2001)
• 37 of 594 workers given definition (Quine,
  2004)
• 39 of 512 managers (CMI, 2005)

8
How common is cyber-bullying? Study 1 9 of
649 UK employees reported receiving abusive
e- mail (Baruch, 2005) Study 2 3 of over
1400 online surveyed teachers reported
bullying on the Internet 6 by
e-mail 2.5 by mobile phone texts 6 by
mobile ( other) phone calls (National
Association of Schoolmasters Union of Women
Teachers, 2008) Study 3 17 of 379 teachers
reported bullying by mobile phone, e-mail or
the Internet by managers, co-workers, pupils
(Association of Teachers Lecturers, 2007)
9
Study of 288 fire-fighters in 36 teams (Coyne et
al, 2004)

• Self- peer-reported levels of victimisation
  bullying
• Each rank ordered 3 team members most preferred
  working with self-reported perceptions of team
  effectiveness
• Results
• 1. People preferred working with victims
• 2. Bullies were least preferred work mates
• 3. Bully/targets most isolated group
• 4. Group cohesion higher but success perceived
  lower in teams with
• high levels of victimisation

10

• But measurement problems
• how are victims non-victims classed?
• how is bullying defined, who by?
• claims usually based on uncorroborated
  self-report (Cowie, Naylor, Rivers,
• Smith, Pereira, 2002)
• So, Coyne, Chong, Seigne, Randall (2003) found
• victims ranged from 4-40
• bullies from 3-19
• depending on whether by self-report,
  peer-report or both! 

11
What we know about victims

• low in independence, extraversion mental
  stability (Coyne et al, 2000)
• lose confidence, physically ill, unable to cope
  (Edelmann Woodall, 1997)
• show high anxiety, depression, job-related stress
  (Quine, 1999) PTSD
• symptoms (e.g., Matthiesen Einarsen, 2004
  Tehrani, 2004)
• take sick leave (ATL, 2007)
• cyber-bullying may be psychologically more
  harmful than traditional bullying (Slonje
  Smith, 2008)
• but know little about their help seeking
  behaviour (Slonje Smith, 2008)

12
What we know about bullies

• Rationale protect self-esteem - inflated or
  unstable view of self
• Characteristics violent (Leather et al., 1990),
  tyrannical (Ashforth, 1994), hostile (Baron
  Neuman, 1996), aggressive (Seigne et al., in
  press), lack emotional/self-control awareness
  of impact
• Conversely, highly skilled social manipulators
  (Sutton)
• Micro-political behaviour in group/organisation
  encourages competitiveness, assertiveness,
  dominance
• Been suggested that known bullies appointed to
  get the job done

13
Effects on the organisation

• Lower productivity staff morale (Coyne et al,
  2004)
• Absenteeism
• Hoel Cooper (2000) victims took 7 days more
  sick leave on average than others
• Quine (2001) 8 taken time-off
• Turnover
• Rayner (1997) 1 in 4 left job due to bullying
• Coyne also notes
• - risks of litigation industrial action
• - costs of finding training replacement staff

14
Work climate Human interaction conditions
in organisations
Causes of workplace bullying?
Change (redundancy/position) Work organisation
(Role conflict, strained stressful, lack of
autonomy) Culture Climate Poor Leadership
Conflict is inevitable. Can be win-win but
win-lose may lead to bullying culture
15
What can we do about it?
Prevention Support/ intervention Reaction
Organisation Change work/culture Train leader training Have a policy Bullying surveys Support for change from senior managers Monitor absences Use sanctions Monitor/change culture
Group Foster positive group behaviour Train all Regularly meet group Monitor group network Group skills development Team-building Change team
Individual Training e.g., assertiveness, social skills for victims bullies Contact person, buddy/peer support system Informal support (friend) Re-define problem Formal counselling support for victims bullies Use grievance procedures
16
Thanks Any questions? Contact
p.b.naylor_at_sheffield.ac.uk