Workplace bullying's impact on employee well-being and organizational performance

Impact of Workplace Bullying on Individual Performance and Well-being and How Effective Leadership Can Prevent It

Chapter 1: Introduction
Even under the best of circumstances, the modern workplace environment can be highly stressful and it is frequently fraught with instances of profound interpersonal differences that can adversely affect individuals’ daily routines. Further, when individuals experience actual bullying in the workplace, all of the other challenges can be severely exacerbated to the point where people quit their jobs and seek employment elsewhere. Moreover, bullying in the workplace can assume a number of different forms, some of which are difficult to identify and even more difficult to resolve.
Regardless of what form it assumes, workplace bullying by definition involves some type of repetitious physical or psychological harm to victims’ health and the organizations for which they work. For instance, according to the definition provided by the Workplace Bullying Institute (2019), “Workplace bullying is repeated, health-harming mistreatment of one or more persons by one or more perpetrators [which] undermines legitimate business interests when bullies' personal agendas take precedence over work itself” (para. 2). This definition underscores the harsh reality that workplace bullying has harmful effects on its victims as well as their organization, and some research to date indicates that workplace bullying is even harmful for the perpetrators. In addition, the Workplace Bullying Institute (2019) also notes that the practice is characterized by a number of features, including those set forth below:
· Is driven by perpetrators' need to control the targeted individual(s);
· Is initiated by bullies who choose their targets, timing, location, and methods;
· Is a set of acts of commission (doing things to others) or omission (withholding resources from others);
· Requires consequences for the targeted individual;
· Escalates to involve others who side with the bully, either voluntarily or through coercion;
· Undermines legitimate business interests when bullies' personal agendas take precedence over work itself; and,
· Is akin to domestic violence at work, where the abuser is on the payroll.
Because many types of workplace bullying are difficult to detect, far too many victims continue to suffer in silence and many feel compelled to leave their organizations rather than become involved in a confrontational dispute, most especially when the perpetrators are in a position of organizational power or authority over them. This is an especially salient issue since the majority of workplace bullies are in supervisory positions (Workplace bullying survey, 2014).
The culture of fear that bullying in the workplace creates has made accurate estimates of its prevalence difficult to come by, but current estimates indicate that more than one-quarter of all Americans workers have experienced working bullying of some type at some point in their professional careers (Carden & Boyd, 2013). As noted above, because workplace bullying can assume a number of forms, the practice can be especially problematic to identify. In this regard, Carden and Boyd (2013) emphasize that, “Examples of bullying behaviors include: unsolicited criticism, unfair treatment, isolation, humiliation, excessive monitoring and receiver of targeted jokes” (p. 9). In some cases, these types of treatments are simply part and parcel of having an ineffective and narcissistic supervisor, but it is clear that when these types of practices continue over time, they will invariably have an adverse effect on individual employee and organizational performance.
Against this backdrop and given the demonstrated severity of the outcomes, it would be reasonable to suggest that employers are simply unaware of the extent of the problem of workplace bullying otherwise they would take aggressive steps to end it. To the contrary, though, nearly three-quarters of the American public is aware of bullying in the workplace but the same percentage of American employers continue to “deny, discount, encourage, rationalize or defend it” (Workplace bullying suvey, 2014, para. 3). More troubling still, perhaps, fully 58% of Americans workers report that they are currently being bullied in their workplaces (Carden & Boyd, 2013).
Certainly, every instance of interpersonal exchanges that involves one or more of the practices does not rise to satisfy the definition of workplace bullying. Indeed, some employees may regard legitimate constructive criticism or counseling as bullying behaviors, but the salient characteristics of workplace bullying are sufficiently operationalized to distinguish these types of isolated instances from true bullying. The lack of definitional clarity, though, has made it difficult to formulate federal and state laws that specifically prohibit bullying in the workplace. Notwithstanding these constraints, however, Kimball (2016) emphasizes that, “Workplace bullying may fall within the scope of laws prohibiting discrimination, harassment, and retaliation” (para. 3).
Nevertheless, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and state laws generally prohibit behaviors that create a toxic work environment and employers can be sued by bullying victims in such cases (Kimball, 2016). Furthermore, although there are no federal or state laws that specifically prohibit workplace bullying such as continuous unjustified criticism from co-workers, the legal risks that are associated with workplace bullying include such behaviors on the part of superiors as well as practices such as “unfair treatment, isolation, humiliation, excessive monitoring and receiver of targeted jokes” (Carden & Boyd, 2013, p. 10).
Although there is a growing body of scholarship concerning the prevalence and implications of bullying in the workplace, there remains a relative paucity of timely and relevant studies that identify strategies that are designed to mitigate and eventually eliminate this practice from the workplace altogether (Tehrani, 2012). The antecedents of workplace bullying, however, remain understudied at present. Therefore, studies such as this one represent a valuable and important enterprise that can help raise awareness of the problem of workplace bullying and what can be done to stop it.
Statement of the Problem
The problem to be addressed by this study is bullying in the workplace and what strategies can be used to eliminate it. As noted above, although additional studies in this area are needed to determine the prevalence of workplace bullying with more precision, the research to date confirms that the practice is virtually ubiquitous in the U.S. workplace, and tens of millions of Americans continue to trudge off to work each day uncertain of what new terrors their workplace holds for them at the hands of their supervisors, co-workers and even their subordinates.
Besides the severe physical and psychological problems that the practice can cause, the problem is all the more significant because of its adverse impact on organizational performance and even the perpetrators of workplace bullying. In sum, bullying in the workplace represents a threat to employee productivity, morale, job satisfaction and the sense of well-being that are integral to achieving optimal organizational outcomes. Moreover, left unresolved, workplace bullying can even have deadly consequences when it is taken to the extreme, but even seemingly harmless bullying practices such as jokes at another’s expense can compel employees to quit their jobs. Because the costs of unplanned turnover are well documented, workplace bullying represents yet another issue that must be addressed in order to help companies of all sizes and types remain competitive in an increasingly globalized marketplace.
Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study mixed methods study is to determine the prevalence of workplace bullying in the United States at present and what strategies are available to help eliminate it. The overarching goal of the study is to develop timely and informed answers to the guiding research questions and to confirm or refute the guiding hypothesis. The mixed methods research design will include the use of quantitative statistics from governmental and private sector organizations concerning the prevalence of workplace bullying in the United States as well as an analysis of qualitative data drawn from peer-reviewed and scholarly sources. In addition, a custom survey will be used to evaluate current employed individuals’ experiences with workplace bullying, thereby providing a triangulated perspective of the problems of interest to this study as discussed further in the nature of the study section after the description of the proposed study’s conceptual framework which is provided below.
Conceptual Framework
Drawing on the approach that was used by Carden and Boyd (2013), a risk management conceptual framework will be used by the proposed study to achieve the above-stated overarching goal. For example, according to Carden and Boyd (2013), “A workplace bullying infraction can be classified as a risk. A risk is an uncertain event or condition that, if it occurs, has a positive or negative impact” (p. 9). As noted throughout, while the precise prevalence of workplace bullying remains unclear, the negative impacts that it can cause its victims and their organizations are well documented.
Although it is widely used in all types of organizational settings, in this context, risk management can be conceptualized as being the framework in which organizations of all sizes and types can determine the extent of the problem and take appropriate steps to address the issue of bullying in the workplace. In this regard, Carden and Boyd (2013) advise that in this context, risk management is a dynamic, continuous process “that is focused on thinking about the infractions that could occur and defining responses to avoid or minimize their impact to the employees and the organization” (p. 9).
The main objective of the application of this type of conceptual framework is also congruent with the proposed study’s overarching goal. For instance, Carden and Boyd (2013) add that, “The overall goal of a risk management framework [for] a workplace bullying environmental situation is to reduce the probability and impact of the occurrence” (p. 9). This overall goal is by necessity multifaceted since the risks that are known to be associated with workplace bullying are multiple, and include psychological, physical, social and economic harms (Carden & Boyd, 2013).
Nature of the Study
The nature of this mixed methods research design study is exploratory since much remains unknown about the precise prevalence and various harms that bullying in the workplace can cause. The study will proceed in a step-wise fashion, beginning with a preliminary review of the relevant literature to develop basic statistical data concerning the prevalence of the problem followed by a systematic review of the literature to identify specific practices that can be regarded as bullying and what types of strategies organizations have used to address the problem in the past.
Based on the findings that emerge from these steps, a quantitative custom online survey will be developed using Zoomerang or SurveyMonkey with a sample of at least 50 individuals that are currently employed will be conducted to determine what percentage of respondents have experienced workplace bullying in the past and what percentage is currently experiencing workplace bullying. Prospective respondents will be recruited using the social media platform Reddit’s subreddit category of “Bullying Backfire” which includes ongoing discussions about this specific problem.
This mixed methods research design will therefore provide a triangulated perspective concerning the issues of interest to the proposed study, facilitating the identification of fresh insights that might otherwise go undiscerned (Neuman, 2008). In addition, a triangulated perspective of an issue of interest enhances the trustworthiness of the qualitative findings that result (Neuman, 2008). The results of the custom survey will be synthesized with the findings that emerge from the quantitative analysis of prevalence data and qualitative findings from the systematic review of the literature to develop answers to the study’s guiding research questions and the information needed to confirm or refute its hypothesis.
Research Questions
The proposed study will be guided by the following research questions:
RQ1. What is the prevalence of workplace bullying in the United States today?
RQ2. What are the various negative psychological, physical, social and economic effects that are caused by workplace bullying and how do these manifest in real-world workplace settings?
RQ3. What strategies have organizations used in the past to address the problem of workplace bullying and which strategies have proven most effective?
Hypotheses
Based on the preliminary research and above-stated research questions, the study’s hypotheses are set forth below.
H10. Organizations that tolerate workplace bullying will experience unplanned turnover rates far in excess of industry averages.
H1a. The performance and profitability of organizations that tolerate workplace bullying will be adversely affected by these practices by statistically significant levels.
H20. Organizations that take aggressive steps to address workplace bullying when it is identified will enjoy a measurable competitive advantage over those that do not.
H2a. Organizations that tolerate or otherwise allow workplace bullying will be the target of lawsuits brought by victims which will not only negatively affect their bottom lines but their brand reputation among the general public as well.
Significance of the Study
The proposed study is significant for a number of reasons. The first reason the study will be significant concerns the fact that workplace bullying is not only harmful to targeted victims but to the organizations for which they work as well. The second reason the study is significant is the estimated prevalence of workplace bullying which indicates the practice is not only ubiquitous, it is also overlooked or even encouraged in some workplace settings.
Finally, the proposed study is significant because achieving its overarching goal will provide organizations of all sizes and types with a number of positive social and economic outcomes by addressing this preventable problem head-on in a timely fashion. For example, the Workplace Bullying Institute points out that, ”[Workplace] bullying is a laser-focused, personalized economic crisis affecting the target and her or his family. When bullies have control over the targets' livelihood (as in 72% of situations), they have tremendous leverage to cause financial pain. Single parent workers are the most vulnerable” (Economic harm, 2019, para. 2). Here again, although additional research is needed, the studies to date have found that some of the economic costs that are associated with workplace bullying include the following: Lost opportunity to be left alone to do the once-"loved job"; Forced to transfer from loved job, often a punitive transfer (13%); Constructively discharged without reasonable cause (24%); and, Target quits to reverse decline in health and sanity (40%) (Economic harm, 2019, para. 3). Definitions of Key Terms
Term 1. Bullying: In general, bullying is defined by the U.S. government as being “unwanted, aggressive behavior that involves a real or perceived power imbalance. The behavior is repeated, or has the potential to be repeated, over time. Both victims and perpetrators may have serious, lasting problems” (What is bullying?, 2019, para. 2).
Term 2. Workplace bullying: Although there is no universally agreed upon definition, the Workplace Bullying Institute defines the practice as being: “Workplace bullying is abusive conduct that is threatening, humiliating, or intimidating, or work interference (i.e., sabotage) which prevents work from getting done, or verbal abuse” (para. 2). Other authorities concur that workplace bullying is characterized by these types of behaviors, but note that such bullying practices are generally psychological in nature but may also include physical contacts as well (Bullying in the workplace, 2019).
Summary
Although many individuals were the victims of bullies during their school days, most have the reasonable expectation that such behaviors will stop after they reach adulthood and join the workforce. Unfortunately, the research made it clear that some people appear to be hard-wired to bully others, and they take advantage of their workplace relationships to continue these behaviors later in life. The research also showed that while further studies are needed in this area, the research to date indicate that a majority of American workers have been the victims of workplace bullying at some point in their careers and more than half are currently suffering at the hands of a bully in their own workplaces.
While additional research in this area continues, what is known for certain is that bullying in the workplace can have an enormously negative impact on victims and the organizations for which they work, as well as the perpetrators of such bullying behaviors themselves. Given the potential severe economic consequences of tolerating workplace bullying in terms of organizational performance and increased liability for litigation brought by victims, it would seem reasonable to suggest that the vast majority of American employers would remain vigilant to identify any instances of these types of behaviors. The research showed, however, that not only is workplace bullying tolerated by many organizations, it is actually encouraged in some organizations. Taken together, it is clear that there is sufficient evidence at present to warrant further, in-depth analyses of the antecedents of workplace bullying and what strategies have proven effective in addressing this serious problem in the past.

References
Azizi, S., Siddiqui, F., & Iqbal, I.(2017).Changing Healthcare Culture: A Prerequisite to Improving Patient Safety. Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management, 13, 623.
Bullying in the workplace. (2019). Canadian Centre for Occupational Health and Safety. Retrieved from https://www.ccohs.ca/oshanswers/psychosocial/bullying.html.
Carden, L. I. & Boyd, R. O. 92013, January 1). Workplace bullying: Utilizing a risk management framework to address bullying in the workplace. Southern Journal of Business and Ethics, 5, 8-11.
Catley, B., Catley, B., Blackwood, K., Blackwood, K., Forsyth, D., Forsyth, D., & Bentley, T.(2017).Workplace Bullying Complaints: Lessons for Good HR practice. Personnel Review, 46(1), 100-114.
Clarke, S., Probst, T.M., Guldenmund, F.W., & Passmore, J.(2015).The Wiley Blackwell handbook of the psychology of occupational safety and workplace health. John Wiley & Sons.
Economic harm. (2019). Workplace Bullying Institute. Retrieved from https://www.work placebullying.org/individuals/impact/economic-harm/.
Escartn, J.(2016).Insights into workplace bullying: psychosocial drivers and effective interventions. Psychology research and behavior management, 9, 157.
Gillen, P.A., Sinclair, M., Kernohan, W.G., Begley, C.M., & Luyben, A.G.(2017). Interventions for prevention of bullying in the workplace. The Cochrane Library.
Hodgins, M., MacCurtain, S., & Mannix-McNamara, P.(2014). Workplace bullying and incivility: a systematic review of interventions. International Journal of Workplace Health Management, 7(1), 54-72.
McDaniel, K.R., Ngala, F., & Leonard, K.M. (2015). Does competency matter? Competency as a factor in workplace bullying. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 30(5), 597-609.
Nielsen, M.B., & Knardahl, S.(2015).Is workplace bullying related to the personality traits of victims? A two-year prospective study. Work & Stress, 29(2), 128-149.
Ritzman, M.E.(2016).A phenomenon we can't ignore: Performance improvement interventions to address workplace bullying. Performance Improvement, 55(1), 14-22.
Valentine, S., Fleischman, G., & Godkin, L.(2015).Rogues in the ranks of selling organizations: Using corporate ethics to manage workplace bullying and job satisfaction. Journal of Personal Selling & Sales Management, 35(2), 143-163.
Berry, P, Gillespie, G, Gates, D, & Schafer, J2012, 'Novice Nurse Productivity Following Workplace Bullying', Journal Of Nursing Scholarship, 44, 1, pp.80-87
Caponecchia, C, Sun, A, & Wyatt, A2012, ''Psychopaths at Work? Implications of Lay Persons' Use of Labels and Behavioural Criteria for Psychopathy', Journal Of Business Ethics, 107, 4, pp.399-408
Carbo, J, & Hughes, A2010, 'Workplace Bullying: Developing a Human Rights Definition from the Perspective and Experiences of Targets', Working usa, 13, 3, pp.387-403
Hershcovis, M2011, ''Incivility, social undermining, bullying...oh my!': A call to reconcile constructs within workplace aggression research', Journal Of Organizational Behavior, 32, 3, pp.499-519
Johnson, SL2011, 'An Ecological Model of Workplace Bullying: A Guide for Intervention and Research', Nursing Forum, 46, 2, pp.55-63
Kimball, S. (2016, September 19). Can I sue for being bullied in the workplace? Sessions & Kimball. Retrieved from https://www.job-law.com/can-sue-bullied-workplace/.
Martin, C, & Martin, C2010, 'Bully for you: harassment and bullying in the workplace', British Journal Of Midwifery, 18, 1, pp.25-31
Martin, W, & LaVan, H2010, 'Workplace Bullying: A Review of Litigated Cases', Employee Responsibilities & Rights Journal, 22, 3, pp.175-194
Mathisen, G, Einarsen, S, & Mykletun, R2011, 'The Relationship Between Supervisor Personality, Supervisors' Perceived Stress and Workplace Bullying', Journal Of Business Ethics, 99, 4, pp.637-651
Menendez, C, & Whitaker, T2012, 'Social workers and Workplace Bullying: Perceptions, responses and implications', Work, 42, 1, pp.115-12
Menendez, C, Wagner, K, Yates, D, & Walcott, Q2012, 'Engaging men and women as allies: A workplace curriculum module to challenge gender norms about domestic violence, male bullying and workplace violence and encourage ally behavior', Work, 42, 1, pp.107-113
Munoz, A, Anja, & DeWitte, , 2011, 'Do demands and resources affect targets' and perpetrators' reports of Workplace Bullying? A two-wave cross-lagged study', Work & Stress, 25, 2, pp.128-146
Neuman, W. L. (2003). Social research methods: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. New York: Allyn & Bacon.
Privitera, C, & Campbell, M2009, 'Cyberbullying: The New Face of Workplace Bullying?', Cyber psychology & Behavior, 12, 4, pp.395-400
Simons, S, & Mawn, B2010, 'Bullyingin the workplace--a qualitative study of newly licensed registered nurses', AAOHNJournal, 58, 7, pp.305-311
Sims, R, & Sun, P2012, 'Witnessing Workplace Bullying and the Chinese manufacturing employee', Journal Of Managerial Psychology, 27, 1, pp.9-26
Stagg, S, & Sheridan, D2010, 'Effectiveness of bullying and violence prevention programs: a systematic review', AAOHN Journal, 58, 10, pp.419-424
Stagg, S, Sheridan, D, Jones, R, & Speroni, K2011, 'Evaluation of a Workplace Bullying Cognitive Rehearsal Program in a Hospital Setting', Journal Of Continuing EducationIn Nursing, 42, 9, pp.395-401.
Tehrani, N. (2012). Workplace bullying: Symptoms and solutions. London: Routledge.
Woodrow, C., & Guest, D.E.(2014). When good HR gets bad results: Exploring the challenge of HR implementation in the case of Workplace Bullying.Human Resource Management Journal, 24(1), 38-56.
What is bullying? (2019). U.S. government: Stop bullying. Retrieved from https://www.stopbullying.gov/what-is-bullying/index.html.
Workplace Bullying Institute. (2019). The WBI definition of workplace bullying. Retrieved from https://www.Workplace Bullying.org/individuals/problem/definition/.
Workplace bullying survey. (2014). Workplace Bullying Institute. Retrieved from https://www.Workplace Bullying.org/wbiresearch/wbi-2014-us-survey/.