Investigation of Aggression and Bullying - Literature review Example

Investigation of Aggression and Bullying The review of literature on this encompasses four major areas that are of interest to this research (a) definitions and theories of workplace bullying; (b) the relationship between personality and bulling behavior and personality and victimology; (c) characteristics of workplace bullying; and, (d) assessment and amelioration of workplace bullying. This literature review was undertaken because this is an important subject, not only because of the harm and suffering of individuals, but also because of economic factors involved. Bullying is believed to indirectly account for a loss of over 90 million dollars annually to U.S. companies, with other estimates being even higher. ( Harrison 2002) The literature reviewed is taken from the following EBSCO databases: Academic Search Premior, Master FILE Premier, Communication & Mass Media Complete, Psychology and Behavioral Sciences Collection, PsycINFO, and PsyARTICLES an dthe internet. The primary keywords used were workplace, bullying, mobbing, workplace problems, victims, hazing, organizations, public sector, and private sector. The aim was to examine the problem of workplace bullying, attempting to determine the current level of incidence of workplace bullying as well as ways in which this could be diminished. Definitions At present there is not a consensus among researchers as to what exactly defines bullying. (Agervold, 2007; Kelly, 2006; Khalil, 2009; Lally, 2009; Minton & Minton, 2004;) The study of bullying in the workplace came out of earlier studies of group-individual dynamics in the workplace. These older studies focused upon how cliques and power groups ostracized individuals who went against norms. (Agervold, 2007 defines work place bullying as :- A social interaction through which one individual …is attacked by one or more…individuals almost on a daily basis ……. bringing the person into an almost helpless position with potentially high risk of expulsion. Another definition by the same author is one listing four elements - frequency and duration, reaction of the target, the balance of power, and the intent of the perpetrator. This includes a variety of acts such as name calling, the use of threatening language, singling someone out for unfair treatment and overbearing supervision, but this list could be extended almost infinitely. ((Simon & Simon, 2006). 24% of workers reported being bullied when the definition of bullying was broken down into a list of specific negative acts (Kelly, 2006). This extends across both public and private sectors, (Strandmark & Hallberg ,2003). The relationship between personality and bullying behavior and personality and victimology Baron, Neuman & Geddes (1999) conducted a study seeking to link workplace aggression with theories of human aggression. Minton & Minton (2004) offered a phenomenological explanation for the bully-victim cycle, considering the repetitive nature of bullying repetitive in nature and the way a victim often fails to defend himself or herself. The writers refer to the way in which primates establish dominance hierarchies, because of pre-conscious biological understanding of the role of status and power in keeping order in society. They believe these ideas explain why bullies bully, and also why others remain silent about it. The dynamics involved explain why the bully is able to amass followers and why the victim feels powerless to act against a group to which they have no hope of belonging. The idea that certain kinds of persons become workplace bullies ultimately derives from research on the personality antecedents of other workplace problems (Furham & Bramwell, 2006; Kapuchinski, 2007; Palmer & Thakordas, 2005). Furham & Bramwell (2006) made use of the five-factor model of personality, ( Popkins 1998) coming to the conclusion that extroverts were more likely to absent themselves from work because they saw it as interfering with what they really wanted in life. “Personality should not be neglected as being a factor in understanding the bullying phenomenon” according to Glaso et al. ( 2007, p. 313) while other researchers state that “specific personality traits influence absence taking behavior” (Furham & Bramwell, 2006, p. 75). Bullies are often linked with aggressive behavior. Studies by, Palmer & Thakordas (2005) support this idea. Victims of bullying tended to be more neurotic, less agreeable, conscientious and extraverted according to Glaso, Matthiesen, Nielsen & Einarsen (2007). Characteristics of Workplace Bullying This can be either overt or covert, i.e. where the victim is forced to hide what is happening. Murray (2009) found that senior managers who tolerate these behaviors often enable bullies at work, and that it is their tacit approval of bullies which leads to silence around the issue. Hutchinson (2009) asserted that one of the problems with workplace bullying is that when employees work in an atmosphere of blame and injustice and the employees’ fear of retribution creates a culture of silence, resulting in the underreporting of bullying. Psychological violence was found to be more prevalent than physical violence,( Khalil (2009) He defines vertical violence as involving abuse due to rank. It was found by Murray (2009, page 175) that many institutions choose not to take steps to prevent such bullying, as it was found difficult to deal with senior managers. Horizontal violence, Khalil said, entails failure to respect privacy or sabotaging others on equal footing. In recent times either or both may include cyber bullying.( Privitera & Campbell, 2009, p. 296). Although there is evidence that bully personality profiling remains strong, the literature on bullying is evolving toward favoring organizational explanations for workplace bullying, with factors such as company size, what sector the organization is located in, organizational style, type of leadership, and tolerance for bullying, all having been discovered to be factors contributing to or impeding workplace bullying (Boyle & Parry, 2007; Brown & Middaugh, 2009). Baillien, Neyens, De Witte & De Cuyper (2009) conducted a study of workplace bullying that pointed to other factors such as lack of social support among colleagues, a task-oriented and autocratic climate, and formal power relationships, as all seeming to incite bullying. It was also found that women are “more dependent on group dynamics at work than men” and “try to cause psychological rather than physical harm to their opponents” (Strandmark & Hallberg, p. 332). Coyne et al,( 2004, p. 302) claimed that “the group or team level perspective and the impact of bullying on the group appears to be have been neglected”. This refers to bullying by a group who zero in on a single scapegoat to blame him or her for the failure of the group. Other factors include “restricted participation, weak or indistinct leadership, betrayed expectations and unclear roles creating a poor psychosocial environment” (Strandmark & Hallberg, 2003, p. 336). “Bullying is likely to prevail in stressful working environments characterized by high levels of interpersonal friction and destructive leadership styles” (Hauge et al., p. 220). It was also found that bullying has a definite and directly negatively impacts the health of workers (Moayed et al., 2006). Assessment and Amelioration of Workplace Bullying The most common method used to investigate the presence and prevalence of bullying in an organization is the operational classification method based on the use of the Negative Acts Questionnaire as well as the Leymann Inventory of Psychological Terror. ( Niedhammer et al 2006) However, Notelaers, Einarsen, de Witte & Vermunt (2006) questioned the construct validity of this measure, as, for one thing, it persists in conceptualizing bullying solely as occurring between bully and victim. Many researchers examine the forces at work within organizations in terms of deficits in organizational management and leadership that lead to bullying. Khalil ( 2009) believes that teaching anger management strategies may reduce the level of bullying. Lally (2009) also believed that personnel need to be educated about appropriate behavior, how to participate in collaborative practice, and how to find a way to make reporting bullying easier. Cook (2006) argued that by and large most organizations are not doing enough to prevent bullying in the workplace. It is however possible that simply by altering the way bullying is viewed, a better approach to countering it can be developed (Cook, 2006; Daley, 2009; Hutchinson, 2009; Martin, 2008; Olender-Russo, 2009; Vickers, 2007; White, 2004). “Recognizing an inherent tendency towards conflict is a prerequisite in preventing workplace bullying.” (Randle & Stevenson, 2007, p. 49). Murray (2009) argued that, in addition to helping victims of bullies cope better with the problem, new codes and regulations, enforcing a zero tolerance policy, are what are really required to repair organizational support of bullying. Hutchinson (2009) argued that restorative approaches to workplace bullying would develop into best practice as they fully take into account the shared responsibility of all personnel in an organization. Conclusion This literature review examined the prevalence of bullying in workplaces from a number of perspectives. It produced three key findings. Firstly work place bullying, however defined, is common. Secondly, theories on the subject have changed in recent times from an explanation based upon personality factors to one based upon organization. The latter explanation describes how the norms within an organization, plus the complex dynamics of large groups, allow bullying to continue. It is apparent that the literature on workplace bullying has moved dramatically from a personality-profile to an organizational-based explanation for bullying, offering a strong new possibility that anti-bullying efforts may at last reduce the levels of this persistent workplace problem. This means thirdly that positive interventions therefore need to be organization based in order to lessen the possibility of workplace bullying. This approach goes along with the trend to focus on covert bullying. It also serves to uncover problems within organizations, such as hierarchies and role confusion, which result in the stress that is the base in which bullying develops. Bullying is not going to disappear from the workplace, but this study shows that much can be done, especially on an organizational scale, to diminish it and its negative effects upon both people , bullies and victims and upon the organizations where they work. . References Agervold, M. (2007). Bullying at work: a discussion of definitions and prevalence, based on an empirical study. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 48, 161-172. retrieved 12th November 2010 from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9450.2007.00585.x/abstract Baillien, E., Neyens, I., De Witte, H. & De Cuyper, N. (2009). A qualitative study on the development of workplace bullying: towards a three way model. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 19, 1-16. retrieved 12th November 2010 from DOI: 10.1002/casp.977 Baron, R.A., Neuman, J.H. & Geddes, D. (1999). Social and personal determinants of workplace aggression: evidence for the impact of perceived injustice and the type A behavior pattern. Aggressive Behavior, 25, 281-296. retrieved 12th November 2010 from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/(SICI)1098- 2337(1999)25:4%3C281::AID-AB4%3E3.0.CO;2-J/abstract Boyle, M. & Parry, K. (2007). Telling the whole story: the case for organizational and auto ethnography. Culture and Organization, 13, 185-190. Brown, L. & Middaugh, D. (2009). Nurse hazing: a costly reality. Medsurg Nursing, 18, 305-309. Cook, P. (2006). Handling bullying in your workplace. IET Engineering Management, October 9. Coyne, I., Craig, J. & Smith-Lee Chong, P. (2004). Workplace bullying in a group context. British Journal of Guidance & Counseling, 32, 301-320. Daley, H. (2009). I’ve been accused of bullying a colleague—but I’m just doing my job. Community Care, 1789, 1-2. Furnham, A. & Bramwell, M. (2006). Personality factors predict absenteeism in the workplace. Individual Differences Research, 4, Issue 2 pages 68-77 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, 48, 313-319.retrieved 12th November 2010 from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-9450.2007.00554.x/abstract Hauge, L.J., Skogstad, A. & Einarsen, S. (2007). Relationships between stressful work environments and bullying: results of a large representative study. Work & Stress, 21, 220-242. retrieved 12th November 2010 from DOI:10.1080/02678370701705810 Hutchinson, M. (2009). Restorative approaches to workplace bullying: educating nurses towards shared responsibility. Contemporary Nurse, 32, 147-155. Kapuchinski, S. (2007). Recognizing and taming personality disordered individuals in business. The Journal for Quality & Participation, Winter, , 35-40. Kelly, D. (2006). Workplace bullying, women and Work Choices. Hecate, 112-127. retrieved 12th November 2010 from http://ro.uow.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1024&context=artspapers Khalil, D. (2009). Levels of violence among nurses in Cape Town public hospitals. Nursing Forum, 44, 207-219. Lally, R.M. (2009). Bullies aren’t only on the playground: a look at nurse-on-nurse violence. ONS Connect, 17-18. Martin, W.F. (2008). Is your hospital safe? Disruptive behavior and workplace bullying. Hospital Topics: Research and Perspectives on Healthcare, 86, 21-30. Minton, S.J. & Minton, P. (2004). The application of certain phenomenological/existential perspectives in understanding the bully-victim cycle. Existential Analysis, 15, 230-244. Moayed, F.A., Daraiseh, N., Shell, R. & Salem, S. (2006). Workplace bullying: a systematic review of risk factors and outcomes. Theoretical Issues in Ergonomics Science, 7, 311-327.retreived 12th November 2010 from DOI:10.1080/146392205000090604 Murray, J.S. (2009). Workplace bulling in nursing: a problem that can’t be ignored. MEDSURG Nursing, 18, 273-278. Negative Acts Questionnaire, Bergen Bullying Research Group, http://www.uib.no/rg/bbrg/projects/naq Neidhammer, I, David,S., Degioanni, S.(2006), The Leymann Inventory of Psychological Terror, Revue d’épidiomologié et de Santé Publique June 54 ( 3) 245- 262 retrieved 12th November 2010 from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16902385 Notelaers, G., Einarsen, S., de Witte, H. & Vermunt, J.K. (2006). Measuring exposure to bullying at work: the validity and advantages of the latent class cluster approach. Work & Stress, 20, 289-302. retrieved 12th November 2010 from http://spitswww.uvt.nl/~vermunt/notelaers2006.pdf Olender-Russo, L. (2009). Creating a culture of regard: an antidote for workplace bullying. Creative Nursing, 15, 75-83. retrieved 12th November 2010 from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19507768 Palmer, E.J. & Thakordas, V. (2005). Relationship between bullying and scores on the Buss-Perry aggression questionnaire among imprisoned male offenders. Aggressive Behavior, 31, 56-66, retrieved 12th November 2010 from http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ab.20072/abstract Popkins,N.,( 1998) The Five-Factor Model: Emergence of a Taxonomic Model for Personality Psychology, retrieved 12th November 2010 from http://www.personalityresearch.org/papers/popkins.html Privitera, C. & Campbell, M.A. (2009). Cyber bullying: the new face of workplace bullying? Cyber Psychology & Behavior, 12, 395-402. Retrieved 12th November 2010 from DOI: 10.2089/cpb.2009.0025. Randle, J. & Stevenson, K.Grayling,I. (2007). Reducing workplace bullying in healthcare organizations. Nursing Standard, 21, 49-56. retrieved 12th November 2010 from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17319580 Strandmark, M. & Hallberg, L.R.M. (2007). The origin of workplace bullying: experiences from the perspective of bully victims in the public service sector. Journal of Nursing Management, 15, 332-341. Vickers, M.H. (2007). Auto ethnography as sense making: a story of bullying. Culture and Organization, 13, 223-337. retrieved 12th November 2010 http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/617199511- 54938578/content~db=all~content=a781233352~frm=titlelink White, S. (2004). A psychodynamic perspective of workplace bullying: containment, boundaries and a futile search for recognition. British Journal of Guidance & Counseling, 32, 269-284, Retrieved 12th November 2010 from DOI: 10.1080/03069880410001723512. Read More