What we need to know about workplace bullying

IF 5.6 2区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED Work and Stress Pub Date : 2022-04-03 DOI:10.1080/02678373.2022.2093517
T. Taris
{"title":"What we need to know about workplace bullying","authors":"T. Taris","doi":"10.1080/02678373.2022.2093517","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"According to a 2019 external review, bullying and harassment are “systemic” in the New Zealand parliamentary workplace (Francis, 2019). Its culture is “toxic,” involving “harmful behaviour by and between staff, managers, members, media and the public,” and “unacceptable behaviour is too often tolerated or normalised.” Destructive gossip, undermining, lack of cooperation and support, aggressive behaviour and demeaning language are common. Although there is “a majority of absolutely lovely MPs and Ministers,” others engage in “frequent shouting, abuse calls or texts, character assassination... or ‘just continually being aggressive and shouting... ’.” One staff member said “I was warned... But I just couldn’t cope with it. It shocked me. It’s taken me years to recover.” The review concludes with a list of 85 recommendations to improve matters, including the development of training programmes on combating bullying, a zero-tolerance approach to bullying and harassment, leadership development programmes, and providing access to the services of accredited social workers or psychologists. Is the New Zealand parliamentary workplace a rare bad apple among an unspoilt bunch? I doubt it. The prevalence of bullying, mobbing, harassment, emotional abuse, and mistreatment (to name just a few very similar terms, Einarsen, 1999) is high. In an 86-sample review study, Nielsen et al. (2010) found that on average 14.6% – 1 out of 7 – of the participants in these samples was bullied. This implies that most of us have experience with this type of behaviour; as a (colleague of a) victim, a witness, but perhaps also as a perpetrator. In his seminal paper on workplace bullying, Heinz Leymann (1990) defined mobbing as “hostile and unethical communication which is directed in a systematic way by one or a number of persons mainly toward one individual... These actions take place often... and over a long period... and... result in considerable psychic, psychosomatic and social misery” (p. 120). Other definitions (notably that of Einarsen & Skogstad, 1996) emphasise that bullying is subjectively experienced by a victim, that bullying not only concerns communication issues but negative acts in general (e.g. physical violence or changing work tasks), and that victims should have difficulties in defending themselves against these acts (Nielsen et al., 2010). Several reviews on the antecedents and outcomes of bullying have been conducted, identifying among others perpetrator characteristics, victim characteristics, work design problems, deficiencies in leadership behaviour, and organisational characteristics (such as a low moral standard, bad leadership, or a toxic culture) as possible antecedents (Cao et al., in press; Einarsen, 1999; Einarsen et al., 2002; Van den Brande et al., 2016). Outcomes of bullying include physical health problems, depression, posttraumatic stress, burnout, and strain in general (Boudrias et al., 2021; Nielsen & Einarsen, 2012). Overall, it is fair to say that the antecedents and outcomes of bullying in the workplace have been addressed in a large body of research. Yet, when by chanceWork & Stress recently received five papers on bullying, we decided to use these as the basis for the present special edition. Apart from their subject, these papers have in common that they go beyond current insights on the predictors and consequences","PeriodicalId":48199,"journal":{"name":"Work and Stress","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Work and Stress","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02678373.2022.2093517","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

According to a 2019 external review, bullying and harassment are “systemic” in the New Zealand parliamentary workplace (Francis, 2019). Its culture is “toxic,” involving “harmful behaviour by and between staff, managers, members, media and the public,” and “unacceptable behaviour is too often tolerated or normalised.” Destructive gossip, undermining, lack of cooperation and support, aggressive behaviour and demeaning language are common. Although there is “a majority of absolutely lovely MPs and Ministers,” others engage in “frequent shouting, abuse calls or texts, character assassination... or ‘just continually being aggressive and shouting... ’.” One staff member said “I was warned... But I just couldn’t cope with it. It shocked me. It’s taken me years to recover.” The review concludes with a list of 85 recommendations to improve matters, including the development of training programmes on combating bullying, a zero-tolerance approach to bullying and harassment, leadership development programmes, and providing access to the services of accredited social workers or psychologists. Is the New Zealand parliamentary workplace a rare bad apple among an unspoilt bunch? I doubt it. The prevalence of bullying, mobbing, harassment, emotional abuse, and mistreatment (to name just a few very similar terms, Einarsen, 1999) is high. In an 86-sample review study, Nielsen et al. (2010) found that on average 14.6% – 1 out of 7 – of the participants in these samples was bullied. This implies that most of us have experience with this type of behaviour; as a (colleague of a) victim, a witness, but perhaps also as a perpetrator. In his seminal paper on workplace bullying, Heinz Leymann (1990) defined mobbing as “hostile and unethical communication which is directed in a systematic way by one or a number of persons mainly toward one individual... These actions take place often... and over a long period... and... result in considerable psychic, psychosomatic and social misery” (p. 120). Other definitions (notably that of Einarsen & Skogstad, 1996) emphasise that bullying is subjectively experienced by a victim, that bullying not only concerns communication issues but negative acts in general (e.g. physical violence or changing work tasks), and that victims should have difficulties in defending themselves against these acts (Nielsen et al., 2010). Several reviews on the antecedents and outcomes of bullying have been conducted, identifying among others perpetrator characteristics, victim characteristics, work design problems, deficiencies in leadership behaviour, and organisational characteristics (such as a low moral standard, bad leadership, or a toxic culture) as possible antecedents (Cao et al., in press; Einarsen, 1999; Einarsen et al., 2002; Van den Brande et al., 2016). Outcomes of bullying include physical health problems, depression, posttraumatic stress, burnout, and strain in general (Boudrias et al., 2021; Nielsen & Einarsen, 2012). Overall, it is fair to say that the antecedents and outcomes of bullying in the workplace have been addressed in a large body of research. Yet, when by chanceWork & Stress recently received five papers on bullying, we decided to use these as the basis for the present special edition. Apart from their subject, these papers have in common that they go beyond current insights on the predictors and consequences
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
我们需要了解的关于职场欺凌的信息
根据2019年的一项外部审查,欺凌和骚扰在新西兰议会工作场所是“系统性的”(Francis,2019)。它的文化是“有毒的”,涉及“员工、经理、成员、媒体和公众之间的有害行为”,“不可接受的行为往往被容忍或正常化”。破坏性的流言蜚语、破坏、缺乏合作和支持、攻击性行为和有辱人格的语言很常见。尽管有“大多数绝对可爱的议员和部长”,但其他人“经常大喊大叫、辱骂电话或短信、人格暗杀……或者‘只是不断地咄咄逼人和大喊大叫……’。”一名工作人员说:“我被警告了……但我就是无法应对。这让我很震惊。我花了很多年才恢复过来。”。“审查最后提出了85项改进建议,包括制定打击欺凌的培训计划、对欺凌和骚扰采取零容忍态度、领导力发展计划,以及提供获得认可的社会工作者或心理学家服务的机会。新西兰议会工作场所是一群未受破坏的人中罕见的害群之马吗?我对此表示怀疑。欺凌、聚众斗殴、骚扰、情感虐待和虐待(仅举几个非常相似的术语,Einarsen,1999)的普遍性很高。在一项86个样本的回顾研究中,Nielsen等人(2010)发现,在这些样本中,平均14.6%(七分之一)的参与者受到了欺凌。这意味着我们大多数人都有这种行为的经验;作为受害者的同事,证人,但也可能是犯罪者。Heinz Leymann(1990)在其关于职场欺凌的开创性论文中,将聚众斗殴定义为“一个人或多个人以系统的方式主要针对一个人的敌对和不道德的交流……这些行为经常发生……而且持续很长时间……导致相当大的心理、身心和社会痛苦”(第120页)。其他定义(尤其是Einarsen和Skogstad,1996年的定义)强调,欺凌是受害者主观经历的,欺凌不仅涉及沟通问题,还涉及一般的负面行为(如身体暴力或改变工作任务),受害者在保护自己免受这些行为侵害方面应该有困难(Nielsen等人,2010)。已经对欺凌的前因和结果进行了几次审查,确定了施暴者特征、受害者特征、工作设计问题、领导行为缺陷、,以及组织特征(如低道德标准、糟糕的领导或有毒的文化)作为可能的前因(Cao等人,出版;埃纳森,1999年;埃纳尔森等人,2002年;Van den Brande等人,2016年)。欺凌的结果包括身体健康问题、抑郁、创伤后压力、倦怠和一般压力(Boudrias等人,2021;Nielsen和Einarsen,2012年)。总的来说,可以公平地说,工作场所欺凌的前因和结果已经在大量研究中得到了解决。然而,当《工作与压力》杂志最近收到五篇关于欺凌的论文时,我们决定将其作为本特刊的基础。除了主题之外,这些论文的共同点是,它们超越了当前对预测因素和后果的见解
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Work and Stress
Work and Stress PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED-
CiteScore
11.70
自引率
3.30%
发文量
21
期刊介绍: Work & Stress is an international, multidisciplinary quarterly presenting high-quality papers concerned with the psychological, social and organizational aspects of occupational health and well-being, and stress and safety management. It is published in association with the European Academy of Occupational Health Psychology. The journal publishes empirical reports, scholarly reviews and theoretical papers. It is directed at occupational health psychologists, work and organizational psychologists, those involved with organizational development, and all concerned with the interplay of work, health and organisations. Research published in Work & Stress relates psychologically salient features of the work environment to their psychological, behavioural and health consequences, focusing on the underlying psychological processes. The journal has become a natural home for research on the work-family interface, social relations at work (including topics such as bullying and conflict at work, leadership and organizational support), workplace interventions and reorganizations, and dimensions and outcomes of worker stress and well-being. Such dimensions and outcomes, both positive and negative, include stress, burnout, sickness absence, work motivation, work engagement and work performance. Of course, submissions addressing other topics in occupational health psychology are also welcomed.
期刊最新文献
Professor Karina Nielsen 1973–2024 A watched pot never boils: how appraisals of supervisor remote monitoring influence remote workers’ voice and silence Within-person increases in job autonomy linked to greater employee strain Always on? Development and validation of the Employee Digital Disconnection Scale (EDDS) What does the customer incivility tell me about my worth? A diary study on the short-term effects of customer incivility on self-esteem and job satisfaction
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1