Workplace bullying is the tendency of groups or individuals to use aggressive actions or unreasonable behavior against a subordinate or a co-worker. Most of the workplace bullies use the institutional traditions and norms to back up their acts thus making the act difficult to manage. Workplace bullying has several other terms that depict the same act depending on the institutions like harassment, workplace aggression, and mobbing or workplace abuse. Much research has been done to define workplace bullying with some viewing bullying from a legal perspective while others view it from a harassment perspective. Namie (2009) defines bullying as a persistent and inappropriate treatment expressed towards a group of people or individuals occurring …show more content…
The common behavior is the verbal mechanisms and rarely physical abuse or violence. The victims can be affected by the actual abuse but most of the time grapevine information provides more harm than good. Spreading of information across the workplace makes workplace bullying effective. The bosses also start the bullying process by allocating tasks that are not favorable to the employee (Gullander et al 2014). Other forms that can be seen include harassing, humiliation and physical abuse. There are common behaviors that are seen in workplace bullying. The first one is false accusations whenever a mistake happens. The other common features include staring, glaring, silent treatment and separation from the other employees. Others can be less destructive to include encouraging people to turn against the victims, sabotage, punishment through work and …show more content…
However, it has consequences that cut across the organization. The perpetrator and the victim are the ones that get affected most, but the co-workers and the organization can be caught up in a mess. The effects can be either financial or psychological (Olsen, 2010). Among the factors of production, human resource is the major factor and once affected, the organization cannot move forward. When the workplace bullying affects the activities of the employees, the performance of the firm goes down. The cost of bullying is therefore enormous, and it ranges from illness to replacement of the employees. Low productivity is the biggest loss in the organization when bullying becomes rampant. Other extra costs in the institutions include those of litigation and conflict resolution. Absenteeism is a major challenge that affects the firm when bullying is common. Missing work means that services are not provided well hence the organization falls. There are effects that can be observed in the individuals who are affected to include post-traumatic stress disorder. PTSD is a long-term effect that affects the performance of the employees or the victims if the bullying was physical. Other individual consequences are light and include shouting, defensive behaviors, anger and peer
It has various negative effects which are persistent in nature, and the individual victim realizes the behaviour as bullying (Wilson, 2016). Bullying is associated with physical and psychological problems among nurses leading to absenteeism, poor performance, low job satisfaction, and increased turnover (Ganz, et al., 2015). The issue of bullying among nurses further affects the entire health care team including patient outcomes and health care costs due to the declining level of nurses’ performance (Becher & Visovsky, 2012). Although bullying exists in the nursing work place, they are silent in nature, and goes undetected (Becher & Visovsky,2012). Hence, identifying and managing workplace bullying needs efforts of individual facing bullying and support of the
Workplace bullying is defined as any as any type of repetitive abuse in which the victim of the bullying behaviour suffers verbal abuse, threats, humiliating or intimidating behaviours, or behaviours that interfere with his or her job performance and are meant to place at risk the health and safety of the victim (Murray, 2009). Bullying can take many forms, some blatant, others more subtle. Researchers ha...
Workplace bullying is an issue at my current place of employment. It pertains specifically to my experiences and observations of a staff member who feels the need to demoralize and abuse her co-workers and patients. Her harsh mannerisms, including aggressiveness and manipulation had a negative impact on many staff
I chose the article Workplace Bullying: Considering the Interaction Between Individuals and Work Environment by Al-Karim Sammnani and Parbudyal Singh. In this article authors Sammnani and Singh, (2015) did a review of multiple studied on bully behaviors. Realizing that most research on bullying behavior is focused solely on the target, Sammnani and Singh propose a “more complex and integrated approach to workplace bullying” (p. 1). Sammnani and Singh, pitched the idea that “no comprehensive model of workplace bullying would be satisfactory without also including personality and other individual factors of both the perpetrator and victim” (p. 2). Rather than focusing solely on the bully the bullied, Samnani and Singh suggest that researchers employ what they call “an integrationist approach in empirical research” (p. 2). This approach they believe will better show the relationship between the bully (perpetrator) and the bullied (target).
Bullying can affect everyone in the world such as those who are bullied, those who bully, and those who are witnessing bullying. Bullying has been proved to be connected to a lot of negative outcomes such as, substance use, impact on mental health, and suicide (U.S Department of Health and Human Services). One obvious effect of teenage bullying would be the physical problems and injuries that the victim goes through. Examples of physical bullying are hitting, pushing, tripping, slapping, spitting, or stealing or destroying possessions. Effects of physical bullying are things such as: withdr...
This is a summary of a journal article titled “Workplace Bullies: Why they are successful and what can be done about it?” published in the Organizational Development Journal. The authors of the article are Mr. Karl Olive, and Dr. Joseph Cangemi, (Karl, and Joseph). Karl and Joseph examined the aspect of workplace bullying that has currently reached an all-time high. Randall (1997) defines workplace bullying as “aggressive behaviors that are intended to inflict psychological angst or even physical harm to others in the workplace.”(Randall, P. 1997). The question answered in this article is why do
Downplaying bullying, saying things like “He was just joking around”, and “Don’t take things so seriously” can have serious repercussions. Some people are more fragile than others and react to this type of treatment with anger or violence. On the other hand, there are managers who rule with an iron hand and sometimes this pressure can cause an employee to crack.
The theory background is based on a research conducted by Djurkovic, McCormack, & Casimir (2005), which related workplace bullying and victims' reactions, divided in three possible categories: assertiveness, avoidance, and seeking formal help. According to the results of this research, the avoidance reaction was the most common revealed (p. 451). Also Ayoko, Callan & Härtel (2003) related bullying and conflict events in the workplace as well as interpersonal relationship problems, their intensity, frequency and duration in the organizational environment. The outcomes of this research were also analyzed by showing that bullying can promote counterproductive behaviors as consequence of “frustration, aggression and humiliation” (p. 285). Another study that supports that idea was written by Vega & Comer (2005) which suggests that “most frequently victims of bullying are unassertive, conflict avoidant, and make little effort to be part of the group” (p. 106).
Major antecedents of bullying at workplace as identified are Job demands, leadership and management styles of the supervisor, and interpersonal conflict. The new bullying behaviours explored are like taking ownership of other’s work, deliberately taking other’s demanding assignments
There have been several studies completed by researchers concerning the issue of supervisors who treat their employees abusively. For the sake of this article we will refer to these individuals as “bullying bosses”. A wide range of several forms of non-physical aggression, such as putting employees down in front of others, blaming them for things that are not their fault, accusing them of incompetence, ridiculing them, and not giving them credit for the work they have completed, are typical behaviors of bullying bosses. Some of the negative effects created by these behaviors include job dissatisfaction, emotional exhaustion, and psychological distress.
The purpose of this study is to determine the relationship between workplace bullying behavior and its effect on job satisfaction and performance. Definitions and literatures relevant to the study of workplace bullying and its effect on employee’s job satisfaction and performance are described in this chapter. Theoretical Framework There are number of studies that links bullying as a persistent and bring pervasive effect in the working environment. One particular theory that communes to the subject of workplace bullying is the Conflict Theory, which is propounded by Karl Marx. This theory suggests that harmony is maintained by domination and power, rather than harmony and obedience.
Workplace harassment is unwelcome actions that are based on a person’s race, religion, color, and sex, and gender, country of origin, age, ethnicity or disability. The targets of the harassment are people who are usually perceived as “weaker” or “inferior” by the person who is harassing them. Companies and employers can also be guilty of workplace harassment if they utilize discriminatory practices against persons based on ethnicity, country of origin, religion, race, color, age, disability, or sex. These discriminatory practices have been illegal since the passing of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Civil Rights Act of 1964), and have been amended to be more inclusive of other people who experience discrimination by the Civil Rights Act of 1991 (The Civil Rights Act of 1991), and most recently, President Obama’s signing of the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 (Stolberg, 2009).
It can incorporate such strategies as verbal, nonverbal, mental, physical misuse and mortification. This kind of work environment aggression is especially troublesome in light of the fact that, unlike the typical school bully , work environment spooks frequently work inside of the built up tenets and strategies of their association and their general public. Effect of Workplace Bullying: ON INDIVIDUALS: Individuals who are the objectives of harassing might encounter a scope of impacts. These responses include: • Shock.
In spite of the specific behavior, bullying can bring a very bad effect on workplace. It can lower employee’s morale and reduce the productivity because of absenteeism. (2014, Mar 15) Form the study by Korkmaz and Cemaloglu (2010), they indicates that absenteeism can be traced to bullying. Form the other study, the study of working bullying and sickness absence in hospital staff by Kivimaki, Elovainio & Vahtera (2000) which base on 647male and 4981 female hospital emoloyees, it also show that victims of bullying have 1.2 times higher sickness absence that the rest of the stuff, which mean workplace bulling relates to the increase in absenteeism. From the study by Devonish (2014), he collected the self-reported absence data from survey...
What is workplace bullying? According to the Workplace Bullying Institute “ 35 per cent of the U.S workforce repor...